[RADUSA]

A question for Floyd, I was curious as to why, if you did not know why Sample A tested positive, you were so quick to say that Sample B would likely have the same result? Were you just playing an expectations game with the media?

We have seen cases where Sample b was different. Marion Jones for one.

[Aquarius]

A question for Floyd, I was curious as to why, if you did not know why Sample A tested positive, you were so quick to say that Sample B would likely have the same result? Were you just playing an expectations game with the media?

We have seen cases where Sample b was different. Marion Jones for one.

I'm not Floyd, but as A and B sample are coming from the same sample that is divided in two parts and bottles, there's no logical reason that B would be different from A.

Jones' case was very unlikely, I think that I read that in 2005, 5 tests on more than 4000 gave a different result for B than A.
I hope the moderators won't blame me for speculating, but some experts said that the EPO was getting destroyed by the acidity in urine, so the longer you wait after an A sample EPO-positive result, the more likely you are to get a different result. It's just a possibility though, it could as well be a human mistake that caused both results to be different.

[Jimmy]

I'm not Floyd, but as A and B sample are coming from the same sample that is divided in two parts and bottles, there's no logical reason that B would be different from A.

Jones' case was very unlikely, I think that I read that in 2005, 5 tests on more than 4000 gave a different result for B than A.
I hope the moderators won't blame me for speculating, but some experts said that the EPO was getting destroyed by the acidity in urine, so the longer you wait after an A sample EPO-positive result, the more likely you are to get a different result. It's just a possibility though, it could as well be a human mistake that caused both results to be different.

I've always been puzzled by why the B sample has to be requested - I realize that an athlete can concede the result after the A sample. But why not just test the B sample as soon as practical after the A results are in - basically as soon as the athlete is informed and can send a person to observe the B sample opening. You wouldn't have long periods where the athlete was out of competition and awkward questions start, and you reduce the time for a leak to appear before the test is confirmed and a proper inquiry started. The Marion Jones case is a good illustration of this - if the tests had been done close together that A sample result wouldn't have sat out there for quite so long with media comment treating it as though it was positive already.

[RADUSA]

I've always been puzzled by why the B sample has to be requested - I realize that an athlete can concede the result after the A sample. But why not just test the B sample as soon as practical after the A results are in - basically as soon as the athlete is informed and can send a person to observe the B sample opening. You wouldn't have long periods where the athlete was out of competition and awkward questions start, and you reduce the time for a leak to appear before the test is confirmed and a proper inquiry started. The Marion Jones case is a good illustration of this - if the tests had been done close together that A sample result wouldn't have sat out there for quite so long with media comment treating it as though it was positive already.

yes but I coming from thinking that if you know your innocent, you must think that there is a chance that lab screwed up (which perhaps it did) and the B sample will turn out ok. That would be my hope at least.