I've been mulling over a post on Flandis for a few days now. I get asked by non-cyclists about it 10 times a day. I have a long post worked out in my head but not the time to write it or properly source it.
Bottom line is I hope Flandis is innocent, but as I've told everyone: never get to emotionally tied up in a professional athlete, they'll only break your heart.
I also tell people it's kinds nice to see a cycling star people really like. No one really asked about Lance or Tyler. But just because Flandis is likable doesn't mean he is innocent. The bottom line is I don't know.
The problem is I do understand science and I can already assure you that this test has problems by the way WADA and the UCI are leaking the info. The MO in cases were the test is shaky is to leak info, get equipe or another paper to draw sensational conclusions and then quietly and subtly release info that changes the meaning of the leaked info. Case in point, the presence of synthetic testosterone was leaked to the press and was implied to be significant. Note that the more recent reports use the word "some synthetic testosterone". "some" is a pretty meaningless term here because small quantities could be present for benign reasons. When asked I am sure WADA will simply say "we stand by our initial assertions (which may not be wrong, since it's most likely the reporters who hyped it. Tricky. (I won't go into the completely absurd argument by WADA's cronies that the reason the test hasn't been validated is because the other labs suck and their lab is so freakin' good).
So WADA is dirty. But, damnit that doesn't mean Flandis is innocent either. I think Operation Puerto is showing that Tyler is pretty guilty, even if WADA's little test is bogus.
So what to think? I will give Flandis the benefit of the doubt because the test is meaningless. But if it turns out that he is doping, I won't lose sleep over. And neither should you.