At least we have something to talk about on the rest day

In case you didn't already hear, Vinokourov tested positive for blood doping following his win in the time trial. The entire team Astana has withdrawn from the Tour. Naturally, Vinokourov denies that he cheated, and we're awaiting the B sample. Actually, I think he should not be expelled until after the B sample is tested, but the doping authorities don't do things my way. The testing procedure for this is something I'm familiar with, so I do have confidence in this sort of analysis.

Additionally, I must say that this is the dumbest form of doping. It's called homologus blood doping, but that's a misnomer. It's a blood transfusion from another person, and it's only homologus in the sense that the donor matches the recipient's ABO blood type. The problem is that there are lots of serotypes in addition to ABO, which is how the transfusion can be detected. It's the same sort of thing that Tyler Hamilton was caught doing a few years ago.

I say this is the dumbest form of doping because of the health risk. Blood transfusions are for vital medical procedures. Accepting another person's blood runs the risk of contracting infection and also of inducing illness due to immunological incompatibility. Athletes who do this are not only cheaters, they are stupid too.

Anyone else care to be dumb?
How about race director, Chris Prudhomme, quoted in an AP story?

Race director Christian Prudhomme said the case showed that cycling's drug-testing system doesn't work.

"It's an absolute failure of the system," he said. "It is a system which does not defend the biggest race in the world. This is a system which can't last."

Huh? If Prudhomme doesn't trust the lab tests, then this makes sense. If he does trust the results, then he should be extolling the testing system for catching a cheater. Maybe he is referring to the declaration not to cheat that the Tour forced all competitors to sign before the race. Well, if that's the "system" he means, then it is a failure, but everyone with half a brain knew that signing a paper would not end doping. It seems pretty clear to me: if your testing system accurately catches cheaters, it works and you defend the integrity of your event. If you fail to catch them, fail to act, or incorrectly condemn athletes, then you hurt the integrity of your event. Is Prudhomme every bit the clod that Jean Marie LeBlanc was? Maybe the AP writer wrongly attributed Prudhomme's comments to the testing system when, in fact he was referring to the UCI's pressure on riders not to cheat. So, maybe the AP writer is the moron here.

Oh, this helps Discovery immensely in the team competition. I feel bad for Kloden.

Tomorrow try to concentrate on Rasmussen vs. Contador.