Lance Armstrong will not agree to a retest of six urine samples from his first Tour de France victory to determine whether they contain traces of EPO.
Pierre Bordry, president of the French anti-doping agency (AFLD), had raised the possibility of asking the American to undergo a new analysis of the samples taken from the 1999 Tour.
With Armstrong set to make a comeback in 2009 after three years away from the peloton, Bordry felt such a move would give the seven-time Tour winner "a chance to confirm that he never cheated in his brilliant career".
But Armstrong will not agree to the AFLD's request, insisting the matter is in the past.
"He is not interested in discussing again results from samples taken in 1999," Mark Higgins, Armstrong's media spokesman, is quoted as saying in L'Equipe.
"I will refer the AFLD or whoever will ask the questions on this subject to the Vrijman report."
Higgins is referring to a report, published in 2006 by Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman, which cleared Armstrong of doping in the 1999 Tour and accused anti-doping authorities of misconduct in dealing with the American.
In an age of doping scandals that have rocked the sport over the past few years, many sceptics still doubt that Armstrong was clean when he won his seven successive Tours between 1999 and 2005.
The rider has never been caught cheating, however.
His urine samples from the 1999 Tour are frozen in a drug-testing laboratory just outside Paris.
More news from SportingLife.com
Comment 1 - 8 of 8
I would have to agree with the comments of both Cyclingfrogs & KellyFan which i find more than reasonable & intelligent in their points. I'm certainly not trying to take anything away from 7back-to-back tour wins, but i too feel that if the samples of '99 were re-tested, they would certainly finally answer any questions/suggestions of any wrong doing, if any, which could put the topic to rest once and for all. Cycling, in particular the tour after recent years, does need to move on. Why there has been no request for a totally independent body (e.g., WADA or IOC) to examine all samples including all the GC riders at the time, with representatives from both parties present at the time of testing so both can be happy with the procedure used, does surprise me. By simply refusing to re-test and dismiss any reason to re-test will just continue to increase speculation and further pour petrol on an already fiercely burning fire.
I'm a huge fan of cycling, having competed myself at a semi-professional level for 5yrs. I love to watch the riders race but as a fully qualified exercise physiologist & now cardiac physiologist, i am fully aware of what the body can do in all manners of extreme conditions and 12 years of studying & working with the body & specialising in human performance, does make me question some of what the passion as a fan, sees. It pains me to say this, but all of Armstrong's main rivals in the tour have either been implicated in a major doping investigation or have tested +ve.
Has anyone realised that in the Vuelta, every rider who has won the stage up the Angliru has at a leter date, tested +ve, apart from Contador? It's not just Armstrong, but the fact he was able to dominate the tour so much to the absolute disgust of the french, it would seem that doping has now become endemic & i sadly fear will continue to be the main topic of conversation. I hope to be proven wrong, one day ..............
If he has nothing to loose WHY doesnt he let them test the samples, and by the way I respect a true winner that has nothing to hide
He had cancer he then came back and won the Tour de france 7 times ,
It was a great achievement and I would be the first to congratulate him IF he was clean back then he does not have the confidence in the samples BECAUSE they are not ok - he said himself he didnt want them tested why why its guilt no other answer
I wish these problems in cycling could be solved - the sport is tarnished and it will take a long time IF ever to get the cleanliness back into it
so what your saying is that we cant trust french anti doping agency to be honest and that if you leave samples with them for 9 years thay are going to tamper with them. so in that case what stops them from messing with them if they have them for a couple of days. meaning there is no point to them testing becouse they are out to get forigners. is that it? i pesonaly think the reason he does not to open the can of worms is becouse the last investigation lasted years and he dosnt want the stress
Dont you guys see that the urine taken back in 1999 has been in france all that time, the french hate his guts they could have done anything to the samples. The guy has never tested positive in the past if they want to do re tests to make it fair they would have to re test all the samples taken from the rest of the peloton. Armstrong was/is just a top rider. Seems people always hate a winner!!!
Lance Armstrong can't and won't do the drug tests - an admission of guilt.If he had nothing to hide he would say go ahead !!
It's a pity but in my humble opinion I feel the professional cycling is ruined with drugs - its a sad fact money is a BIG factor and if you have you can get the good doctors to come up with the necessary goods IF you have the money
I hsve been a cyclist and followed cycling for a long time and hate seeing going dwn this road but its unfortunately true
PLEASE PLEASE any young talented riders (e.g Swift , Roche , Fleeman ) TRY and ride without drugs - its not worth it .. well morally its not .. performance wise of course is another story
I'm no Armstrong fan - though no-one can dispute that anyone who competes in 7 TdF is an exceptional cyclist, let alone win 7; but if he genuinely wants to try a comeback, let him do so & prove himself clean in 2009. Never mind about what he may or may not win. Three years is a long time out of this sport & everyone's talking as if it's ineveitable that if he does comeback he'll win the 2009 Tout. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Let's be honest - after all this time if the sample tested positve, there is always a chance of contamination, etc.
As Dean B says - move on, let's see him tested in 2009 and win clean.
BrianN
It's time to move on. You can only really operate in the world of today. Cheating by definition surely is taking an unfair advantage over the competition. Well most of Armstrong's cometitiors have been proven to have taken banned substances, so whether he was or wasnt, it can't be defined as an unfair advantage.
I'd rather remember the glory of his wins than listen to the witch hunt of people who on the main didn't have the talent or dedication of this superb athlete. You know I don't care if he took epo or not, I'm happy that he operated under the testing and enforcment regime of his day, and now he'll do the same of this day.
Stop the bleating, it's not doing cycling any good in any way.
Please login to post a comment
Not already a Yahoo! user ? Sign up to get a free Yahoo! Account