Paris – The verdict said “guilty.” Like so much else in the confusing, contentious Floyd Landis doping case, though, none of the answers are really that simple.
Landis lost his expensive case Thursday when two of three arbitrators upheld the results of a test that showed the 2006 Tour de France champion used synthetic testosterone to fuel his spectacular comeback victory.
The decision means Landis, who repeatedly has denied using performance-enhancing drugs, must forfeit his Tour title and is subject to a two-year ban, retroactive to Jan. 30, 2007.
Not that it changes his opinion of who the rightful winner was.
“I am innocent,” Landis said, “and we proved I am innocent.”
The majority of the panel disagreed.
According to documents, lead arbitrator Patrice Brunet and Richard McLaren voted to uphold the positive test, with Christopher Campbell dissenting.
In its 84-page decision, the majority found the initial screening test to measure Landis’ testosterone levels – the testosterone-to-epitestosterone test – was not done according to World Anti-Doping Agency rules.
But the more precise and expensive carbon-isotope ratio analysis (IRMS), performed after a positive T-E test is recorded, was accurate, the arbitrators said, meaning “an anti-doping rule violation is established.”
Now, Landis is left with one final way to possibly salvage his title – an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
If Landis doesn’t appeal – or appeals and loses – he will be the first person in the 105-year history of the race to lose the title because of a doping offense.
Pat McQuaid, leader of cycling’s ruling body, said rules dictate that Landis can be stripped of his Tour de France title immediately. That makes Oscar Pereiro, who finished second last year, the official winner.
“You never want to win a competition like that, but after a year and a half of all of this I’m just glad it’s over,” Pereiro said. “It’s very liberating, because now I won’t have to answer any more questions about it all.”
Given the vigor with which Landis pursued the case, and the more than $2 million he raised to do it, this goes down as a devastating loss for the 31-year-old cyclist from Murietta, Calif.
“This ruling is a blow to athletes and cyclists everywhere,” Landis said. “For the panel to find in favor of USADA when, with respect to so many issues, USADA did not manage to prove even the most basic parts of their case, shows that this system is fundamentally flawed.”
He is weighing his legal options, according to a statement released by his legal team.
Breaking down the Landis decision
A glance at the key elements of the Floyd Landis case:
What: Three-man panel handed down a decision Thursday in which the majority upheld a positive doping test from Landis at the 2006 Tour de France. Landis receives a two-year ban from cycling, retroactive to Jan. 30 of this year. One of three panelists, Christopher Campbell, dissented from the majority.
Why: The majority found flaws in the testing protocols used at the French lab where Landis’ urine was examined, but none were deemed severe enough to invalidate the carbon-isotope ratio test that is considered the most accurate gauge of whether an athlete has used synthetic testosterone.
Mini-victory: The arbitrators said the screening test that led to Landis’ urine undergoing a second and more precise test was not valid because it was not performed under rules set up by the World Anti-Doping Agency. In theory, had that test been thrown out when it first was analyzed, Landis never would have faced the second test that resulted in his doping conviction. But arbitrators don’t have to consider that. They only must rule whether doping occurred, and they agreed it did from the results of the second independent test.
What’s next: Landis has a month to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, where much of the same evidence would be heard by a different set of arbiters. Under WADA rules, CAS also could just consider the carbon-isotope ratio test and not the testosterone-to-epitestosterone (T-E) test. Their decision would be final. Landis already has spent upward of $2 million for his defense and would have to come up with more to continue the case.
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
