Lance Armstrong and his supporters hang their hat on Armstrong never testing positive for performance enhancing drugs. This, of course, is debated with the controversial alleged cover up in '99 and a French newspaper reporting that a half dozen of urine samples from the '99 Tour tested positive for EPO, a banned blood booster. The same report claims that the embattled cyclist also tested positive for a banned corticosteroid.
But let's say you want to pass off news accounts, eye witness reports, and the sworn testimony of "at least ten" former teammates as scorned haters talking shit, you still have the words of Armstrong. We've always been perplexed by the cyclists constant claim of "never testing positive" opposed to saying he "never cheated." Semantics? Sure, but it's an important distinction.