New York ? Floyd Landis addressed his fans in a letter on his Web site Tuesday, saying that having his 2006 Tour de France championship stripped by an arbitration panel served some good because “we have shown that the anti-doping system is corrupt.”

Last week, an arbitration panel voted 2-1 to uphold Landis’ positive doping tests from last year’s Tour de France.

It means he is stripped of the title and banned from cycling for two years, retroactive to Jan. 30.

Landis said he is considering his options, which include a possible appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport or legal action.

“If any good has come out of this, we have shown that the anti-doping system is corrupt, inefficient and unfair,” he wrote.

“The content of this decision unfortunately highlights this once again. The straightforward and clear dissent in support of my case contrasts sharply with the scientifically flawed and illogical majority decision against me.

“I still have hope that the system can, and will be, changed so that no other athlete has to suffer through this process only to be denied a clean chance at justice,” he continued.

He thanked the thousands of small donors who contributed to the Floyd Fairness Fund, helping raise part of the more than $2 million that his defense cost.

“I can sleep well at night knowing that I won the 2006 Tour de France fair and square,” he wrote.

“I hope that my campaign to clear my name still means something to all of you who have kindly donated to my legal defense fund.

“Every single contribution to the FFF made a real difference. For your constant support and generosity, I thank you.”

Landis did not have immediate plans for a news conference to discuss the case.

Last week, his attorney, Maurice Suh, also called the system corrupt and said the Landis legal team would take some time to weigh options. They have one month to appeal to CAS.

“In the end, you’re still going to lose – that’s the message that’s been sent,” Suh said. “It’s a terrible message.

“I can’t think of another situation in which we’ve had, in the U.S. justice system, a system like that that anyone would stand for.”