Yes, I read the entire posts on the other thread and the persons "sources" are "in the know" about the A - sample and then they told him. The B - sample later came back negative because (this person was told and believes) that the said athlete had a say in the timing of when the B - sample was tested (later than earlier thereby allowing the sample to decay) all the while the US governing body was in the know to protect said athlete.
This is why I wanted to know about how often an A-sample is positive and a B-sample comes back negative - from the stats either by WADA or another body . I would like to post it on the site.
The person is going way out of his way to prove that this person is a cheat based on this hersey. His line of reasoning is basically - Oh an A-sample was positive, the B-sample came back negative, lets question the procedure and the timing of the B-sample, all based on the trust of some "insider to the process."
Interestingly this person threw around some of his sources and buddies as "Nike Athletes" or with Nike somehow. Go figure since the accussed is with Adidas. And of course since this "positive" the athlete has not tested "positive' again and yet this guy just babbles on about it.
Does WADA or the IAAF list such info on A and B samples?