You be the judge

When a cyclist is asked to give a sample of his urine (or blood) for a drug test, 2 samples are taken, sample A and sample B. "A" is tested and if found negative, both "A" and "B" are destroyed. If the "A" is positive, the cyclist is informed of it and is asked to be present (or his representative) for the testing of the "B". If the "B" is confirmed to be positive, the result will be given out to the media and the cyclist automatically gets a 2-year ban whether he appeals the result of the test or not.

In Lance Armstrong's case, his "B" sample in 1999 turned out positive for the performance enhancing drug, EPO, in a test conducted in 2004. An enterprising journalist from L'Equipe was able to get hold of the test and wrote about it 2 weeks ago. Hence, all the trouble in cyclinglandia.

For a layman, Lance has simply been caught with his pants down. Or was he? But the "positive" test begs more questions than answers. The validity of the test, the stability of the EPO molecules in the urine after being frozen for 6 years, the freezing method, the jurisdiction of the UCI and the WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency), the ethics of the media and a million other things were put into question.

For me, the accusations really have no legal leg to stand on because it is impossible to convict Lance in the absence of a counter sample (in LA's case, the counter sample was the "A" sample, which was used in 1999). Simply put, a judge will throw out a complaint in the absence of evidence or tampered evidence. And the "B" is the no-evidence evidence.

ON the other hand, even if Lance can provide proof that he was clean in 1999; suspicion will always be there. Remember that accusations are front page items while apologies are buried between the obituaries and the classified ads.

But what bothered me was Lance's statement that he was shying away from pursuing legal action for the moment because of the $1.5 expected legal fees and the years that he anticipated will be wasted inside the French courts. While Tyler Hamilton (banned from cycling for 2 years for blood doping last year) was saying that he'd spend his last dollar to clear his name, Lance is skimping on his millions. Maybe he's just tired of it, after 7 years of fencing with the French legal system and media. But if I were Lance, I'd sue L'Equipe to kingdom come.

At the moment, it's a deadlock. Lance's adversaries can't do anything while Lance says he won't do anything. It's a case now of, "he said, she said". Maybe this will just go away quietly or maybe somebody from Lance's camp will spill the beans, I don't know. What I know is that you're innocent unless proven otherwise.

What about you?

Suarez Cup 2005

I'd like to invite all roadies to race against the best in the Visayas in the 2005 Suarez Cup. This will be on the 17th and 18th of September and will be held in one of the most scenic places in the Philippines- Leyte and Southern Leyte. The first day will be a 30k ITT followed by a 134km road race Sunday that goes south from Hilongos to Maasin and going back to Hilongos via Divisria and Bato. Three Cats will be raced: Local riders+selected cat C, cat B and the open cat. For more information, text or call 0927-258-4619.

I like to make a correction here regarding my column last week. Dan Wistihuff III is a furniture exporter while Dan Wistihuff senior, Dan's Dad, is the furniture designer. My apologies to all those concerned for any confusion it may have created.