• Documents weren't leaked, they were released to the L'Equipe journalist investigating the story by the then head of the UCI medical commission. Recently the current head of the UCI medical commission said in an interview on German TV that the science behind the tests was sound and they should have therefore been considered a positive.

    Armstrong got away with it because of collusion between him and the then President of the UCI, Hein Verbruggen.

    Apologies, it wasn't a leak, that's bad semantics on my part

    The thing is that it doesn't matter if the tests were sound or not, and that has never been in dispute. They were unofficial and investigative, and that is why nothing came of them: "The investigations had an experimental character," LNDD scientific Jacques De Ceaurriz told ANP. "Since there is no possibility of a counter-evaluation, a rider can not be sanctioned on the basis of our findings."

    Also, these tests were done on 'B' samples, as the 'A' samples had been used in the official testing, meaning that there is no legal way under current legislation to take it further (do have any chance of a ban in practice, both sets of samples have to test positive)

    Now, I fully believe that Lance took EPO, but the simple fact is, he hasn't officially tested positive, and there was no cover up in 1999 (as the 'positive' tests weren't done until 2004)

About