10-22-2012, 06:58 PM
OK, I don't want to discuss whether he doped or not. I want to understand why they tested him so many times and never detected anything. This doesn't make much sense to me. Let's not make this political or pro/anti Lance topic. Let's focus on the technical/legal details for the sake of the discussion. Thanks
as far as I uderstand, he was tested numerouns times and he came out clean each time.
-if the test is not accurate enough, they why do they even bother testing?
-if he used some substances that were not possible to detect at the time, so what. If you ban a certain drug, then there should be a test to prove whether the athlete used it or not.
-how is it possible that they let him win not once, but seven times? don't they feel embarassed now that they were not able to detect whether he doped or not?
-is there a time limit? how far back can they go?
as far as I uderstand, he was tested numerouns times and he came out clean each time.
-if the test is not accurate enough, they why do they even bother testing?
-if he used some substances that were not possible to detect at the time, so what. If you ban a certain drug, then there should be a test to prove whether the athlete used it or not.
-how is it possible that they let him win not once, but seven times? don't they feel embarassed now that they were not able to detect whether he doped or not?
-is there a time limit? how far back can they go?