My biggest problem with the whole thing? His excuse (that he drank a whole bunch of alcohol the night before the stage and the test). What kind of athlete does that??? It makes everything else he says incredible. If I have one beer it noticeably affects my performance the next day. (Or it would be more accurate to say, that if I go without alcohol for a week, I notice the improvement , and after that, the first drink is noticeable.)

To me - and I hate to open up a whole 'nother can of worms - it has a lot in common with the O.J. Simpson case. You take a guy that's probably guilty, and instead of working for an honest conviction, the authorities try to frame him, and it ruins the whole case. The only difference here is that they don't have the burden of proof "beyond a reasonable doubt."

I want to believe Floyd, but I just can't.