except that Armstrong tested positive in '99

and he wasn't found guilty because of retrospective testing, those old samples were only tested retrospectively in order to develop and test a test for EPO

his old sample were correctly kept, as are all samples.

the re-testing was only traced back to him testing positive due to investigative journalism, not because the anti-doping authorities thought he might be guilty

other than that, spot on

Posted By: Ralf Scrampton on August 11th 2013 at 20:38:15

Message Thread

9.78 in the rain. (Other Sports) - Garry Brooke, Aug 11, 19:07:07
- Usain Bolt....... drug cheat or not? (Other Sports) - usacanary, Aug 11, 19:51:44
  - USA...??? Seriously? Have some respect and praise a phenomenal athlete. (n/m) (Other Sports) - admckechnie, Aug 11, 20:17:45
    - so you think there is zero chance and we shouldn't even....... (Other Sports) - usacanary, Aug 11, 20:33:36
  - Not! (Other Sports) - Garry Brooke, Aug 11, 19:55:54
    - Lance Armstrong came back negative on far more tests...... (Other Sports) - usacanary, Aug 11, 20:02:33
      - except that Armstrong tested positive in '99 (Other Sports) - Ralf Scrampton, Aug 11, 20:38:15
- It was actually rounded down to 9.77. (n/m) (Other Sports) - Garry Brooke, Aug 11, 19:13:37
- what does this mean? (n/m) (Other Sports) - Jumbo1, Aug 11, 19:10:28
  - That's how fast Usain Bolt just ran... (Other Sports) - Garry Brooke, Aug 11, 19:13:04
    - pfft I could do better than that! (n/m) (Other Sports) - Jumbo1, Aug 11, 19:16:26
      - I know. (Other Sports) - Garry Brooke, Aug 11, 19:30:53

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.