| Author |
 Topic  |
|
mashjaja
National Champion
USA
902 Posts |
 Posted - 01/07/2008 : 17:28:56
|
I use the fact that Landis didn't admit as another justification for why I don't think he did it. Like you said--if he had just admitted to it, he would be riding within a few weeks! Instead, he's banned for another 6 months. Who would voluntarily put so much money into proving their innocence just to "clear their name" when so many people already doubt his name that even if he got off, most would think it's due to a legal technicality and not because he's clean?
To think it's not worth at least talking about is to accept with blind faith that the institutions are completely sound. But remember, if a rider is supposedly willing to go to no ends to cheat and get ahead, couldn't the same be said about any institution/group/etc.?
I'm just saying from my experience with him, he strikes me as a good guy.....and even my non-cycling friends view him as a pawn in a bigger game.
www.chaoscyclingclub.com/forum |
 |
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2008 : 18:59:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by grongl2
KD teammate, tell me, why would Landis admit something for what he wasnt responsible? Why would he take over the responsibility knowing how corrupt the whole system is?
I think many of us posses a true feeling, that Landis indeed was part of a big and organised doping system at Phonak in 2006. As we all recall, Phonak had many doping cases during 2004-2006, and moreover a total of 3 Operation Puerto riders plus a dirty Spanish sports director bought from the former Kelme team. Today we also know the truth, about how big the doping problem still was in 2006. If you go back a couple of pages in this topic, you will find my posts about "Operation Wienerblut", "The T-mobile affair" and the important report from the Lausanne Laboratorium, proving that more than 50% of the peleton was doped in the entire period from 1996-2006.
So we all agree, that Landis was not the only doped criminal in 2006. In spite of that, we have these 5 reasons to blame him now:
1) The Lausanne laboratorium indicated that 50% of the riders were clean in 2006. Landis cheated those riders, as well as the public!
2) He was caught by a doping test, where you couldnt really put any doubt about the reliability of the result. Yet he made a public fuss!
3) Landis "double cheated" the public, by claiming innosence after getting caught, and making private fund raising to proof his case!
4) Landis launched a misleading campaign against the French laboratorium, where he made false accusations about their operations.
5) Landis refused to take responsibility and admit his doping mistake. Just like Hamilton, he therby destroyed peoples trust in the riders.
Riders like Hamilton and Landis almost succeeded to kill the entire Cycling World, by their way of running a ridiculous defense in the press. In my opinion they both live in a fantasy world, and have not succeeded to take responsibility for their mistakes in the past! The fact that 50% of riders was doped in 2006, is absolutely no excuse! Finaly I have to mention, that in spite of being unimpressed with the partly admission from Basso, this rider in comparison at least chose to accept his suspension time, without making a big public fuss about it. Thats why its now possible to give Basso a new second chance in 2009, while riders like Hamilton/Landis will never be given a second chance again.
Today we know for sure, that doping was used by the majority of riders from 1947-2006. Several ex-riders have explained, that the environment regarded them as "a bad professional" in case they chose not to improve their performance by doping. Given the circumstances back then, I can therefore forgive riders who were using doping products in that time frame. My demand for forgiveness, will however always be, that they today are totaly honest about it.
At the same time, I now claim that 2006 was a turning point for Cycling, and thats why I tend to judge riders testing positive in 2007+2008 a bit harder. My claim is backed by the Lausanne Laboratorium, who published some test results indicating, that "only" 25% of the Tour riders was showing signs of being doped in 2007. Moreover the introduction of the biological passport in 2008, will also mean that the old doping rules of the game, now belong to the past. Riders who continue to dope today, are not doing it as a result of being "forced by the system", but instead are doing it by an individual attempt to cheat the rest of the peleton!
|
Edited by - KD teammate on 01/07/2008 19:44:55 |
|
|
|
grongl2
Elite Rider
Slovenia
183 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2008 : 13:37:24
|
KD teammate I respect your point of view but I clealy disagree with you.
I dont believe riders want to dope, I think only few % of riders are those bad agressive dopers who want to make advantage with strong medical support. The first condition to make riders feel save and clean is to have effective antidoping tests. But how can clean rider feel good if he knows its so simple to pass these tests? Only from human aspect can you imagine how hard would be for super talented rider to watch other average riders flying away from them on every little hill? For me it was hard to swallow to see same scenario on hard climbs every time- But I accepted it they were simply more gifted than me. I cannot image contra case( if I saw less talented riders going past me), I would just go crazy..
However the real problems are those who are behind the sport and above riders. Sponsors ttake (cycling) team as their firm; and the firm is much more productive if their members have medical support behind them, thats why they have invested big money in doping programms(at least in the past) And those who are above riders are mainly ex-racers(dopers) with mentality "you cannot follow doped riders".
Look just at Riis, this case is paradoxal- he told us he stopped racing because he had no chance against dope riders... and now he wants us to believe his team, best in the world, is completely clean, while others are running doping programms??! And you dont need Damsgaard to figure out who is clean and who is not. Internal test are more than enough for that. Skiing doc told me that changes in athletes samples are so obvious when someone takes doping and I dont believe its any different in cycling or any other sport.Damsgaard is just a good marketing thing. Dont get me wrong, Riis at least sticks with etical rules( not hiring riders from black lists), if filthy Bruyneels acted this way, maybe there would be a small chance for cycling to get rid of doping. I still love cycling, its such complex sport, I am only saying we should treat cyclist differently( showing more humanity for them) and concentrate on many fascinating things rather than
on "who is clean and who isnt".
"Riders who continue to dope today, are not doing it as a result of being "forced by the system", but instead are doing it by an individual attempt to cheat the rest of the peleton!"
No offence, but this kind of thinking I hate the most. |
Edited by - grongl2 on 02/07/2008 13:46:30 |
|
|
|
grongl2
Elite Rider
Slovenia
183 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2008 : 21:11:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by mashjaja
I use the fact that Landis didn't admit as another justification for why I don't think he did it. Like you said--if he had just admitted to it, he would be riding within a few weeks! Instead, he's banned for another 6 months. Who would voluntarily put so much money into proving their innocence just to "clear their name" when so many people already doubt his name that even if he got off, most would think it's due to a legal technicality and not because he's clean?
To think it's not worth at least talking about is to accept with blind faith that the institutions are completely sound. But remember, if a rider is supposedly willing to go to no ends to cheat and get ahead, couldn't the same be said about any institution/group/etc.?
I'm just saying from my experience with him, he strikes me as a good guy.....and even my non-cycling friends view him as a pawn in a bigger game.
www.chaoscyclingclub.com/forum
Good or not, that has nothing to do with doping. As one of ex members of US postal said: bad guys like Armstrong dope and good guys like Hamilton dope ,too. I agree with you about Landis, he is exacty kind of character I like- good guy, but a little *crazy*.
And because of his craziness he came up short in this doping case.
I think because of his wildness there have been only two ways in his case: he would run out of his skin to defend his TDF victory or he would tell everything about doping network in cycling. I believe ( beside trying to keep his well deserved money) he didnt want to destroy careers of his friends and remember he had hip injury, so he didnt know what was going to happen with his own career in future. That perhaps made his decision even easier. I regret he didnt go forward and reveal the truth about corrupted UCI, antidoping organization, sponsors... but I understand that unlike Basso, who calculated every detail( and will of course benefit from this), he couldnt just stay calm and quiet..
Also that KD teammate information about 50% doped riders in 2006 is not correct- there was at least 50% of riders on EPO or blood doping, but we dont know anything about testosteron, HGH for that year... for 2007 we know that at least 80% riders improved their performance with testosteron! |
Edited by - grongl2 on 02/07/2008 21:17:30 |
|
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 02/07/2008 : 22:09:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by grongl2
Also that KD teammate information about 50% doped riders in 2006 is not correct- there was at least 50% of riders on EPO or blood doping, but we dont know anything about testosteron, HGH for that year... for 2007 we know that at least 80% riders improved their performance with testosteron!
Okay. What I ment by writing 50% in 2006, was also to highlight the percentage of blood manipulated riders, which I regard as being the most seriously kind of doping. I perfectly remember the reports from Lausanne, that indicates doping with testosterone and in particulair Growth Hormones, being even more widespread in the recent years. In that sence, they also noted that most of those who made blood manipulations also had signs of testosterone (indicating this was being the "full package").
Still all these details doesnt change my oppinion above. I believe Cycling in 2008 has experienced a turning point in regards of doping. If you ask for my expectation of doped numbers in 2008, I expect the newly introduced biological passports to have minimized the numbers to: 10% being blood manipulated and 20% using testosterone/groth hormones. It has simply become more difficult to dope for ProTour riders, and the risk of getting caught is so high, that the doped number of riders in my opinion can be expected to be that low in 2008.
Moreover, in 1947-2006 it was common practise at many teams, that team staff was helping the riders to recieve and plan the use of doping. Now in 2008 most teams have realised, that they need to fight the use of doping. Thats why I claim, that a rider being caught in 2008 has not been "forced by the system" to dope, but has chosen to do so by himself. In example: Nobody forced Sinkewitz to dope in 2007!
We obviously dont agree on that part for the moment, and its okay with me if you have a different oppinion. Perhaps our different views, can even indicate a current difference, in how doping is currently being delt with in the different Europeen countries...  |
Edited by - KD teammate on 02/07/2008 22:38:59 |
|
|
|
grongl2
Elite Rider
Slovenia
183 Posts |
Posted - 03/07/2008 : 18:19:24
|
KD teammate, what has convinced you so much that you believe in clean(er) cycling now?
I agree that they have certainly realised how serious is a problem of doping.. its not too hard to recognize this when half of big sponsors walk away. However if you consider all circumstances, its extremely difficult to give doping and because of that they preffered to choose a theoretical fight against doping and now they are selling this new image more or less successfully to us. I mean everyone should have realised how much words ( about doping related themes) in cycling means and these big public antidoping programms are just a mask if you ask me..Its very difficult for me to understand that how the best antidoping programm cannot prove not a single doping case in two teams like Astana and CSC who are dominating the sport.. if i touch our team, the results should have gone down quite dramatically last year compared to 2006 season. But riders like Sastre, Schlecks rode at same level or even improved compared to 2006 and we know their biggest rivals didnt give up doping in 2007( 85-95% were doped in TDF at least with testo, in Giro all main rivals of A. Schleck used masking agent before Zoncolan stage and Andy beat most of them...) This simply doesnt go together..
But as much as these dirty games and connections among head organizations-sponsors-teams i consider another thing- doctor in slovenia, the one whom I mentioned before in connection with top slovenian riders, told me that the difference between EPO and clean rider can be easily more than 5 minutes in tough mountain stage at the end of three-week tour ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF DOPING. At the begging the benefit of doping is not so high, but when red cells and haemoglobin are starting to drop rapidly, clean rider starts to suffer big time..
Also I have found analysis on the net that for example EPO cross country skier make 2minutes advantage in 30 min long race on clean athlete... that is huge amount of time for such short distance
So my conclusions is that I will only believe in clean cycling when average pace drops dramatically and when top riders start to ride very inconsistent - if riders were completely clean they would not only ride much slower but also the race would like roller coaster
in last 10days. |
Edited by - grongl2 on 03/07/2008 18:48:43 |
|
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 06/08/2008 : 19:03:27
|
Number of doping cases in the ProTour teams from 2007-2008
In another topic, we have discussed how often riders from different nations are testing positive. For sure its a difficult area to make statistics about, since a lot of parameters influence the numbers. For instance the numbers are influenced by, how often the riders are tested, and how agressively the national authoraties are working to discover the doping cases. Finaly we also have to remember, that riders often are introduced to doping through a network in their current team, or through some of their training pals. So its not always just a "national" issue.
In spite of my reservations above, I still find it interesting to look at the numbers in a complete overall statistic. In order to make the statistic as usefull as possible, I decided it should only cover 2007 and 2008, in order to reflect the numbers from the time frame, who by many is considered to be the true turning point for the Cycling World. So riders who lately were suspended for implication in Operation Puerto (2006) and Operation Oil for Drugs (2004), have not been included since their violation took place in the "earlier years". Furthermore the statistic has been limited to only cover the ProTour teams, in order to reflect the number of caught riders only at the highest level in Cycling. The decision not to include Professional continental teams, were also made in order to elliminate the uncertainty, related to the fact that the teams in second division have been tested less often than ProTour teams. Here are the numbers:
Doping cases in 2007: 14 out of 569 ProTour riders (2.5%)
Doping cases in 2008: 13 out of 501 ProTour riders (2.6%)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Doping cases 2007-08: 27 out of 636 ProTour riders (4.2%)
In the statistical numbers above, only alleged violations made by a rider while having a ProTour status, have been counted. So if a ProTour rider from 2007 changed status to professional continental in 2008, and submits a positive test in that year, he is not counted. This way its possible to create a seperate statistic for respectively ProTour riders and Professional Continental riders. The 27 suspended/fired ProTour riders have in their respective nation, caused this percentage of ProTour riders being implicated in a doping case:
Ukraine......: 25% (2/8: S.Gonchar, V.Bileka)
Austria......: 25% (1/4: B.Kohl)
Kazakhstan: 21% (3/14: A.Vinokourov, A.Kashechkin, D.Fofonov)
Italy..........: 11% (10/90: L.Piepoli 2007, A.Petacchi, C.Moreni, L.Bernucci, M.Fertonani, A.Moletta, P.Bossoni, C.Murro, R.Ricco, L.Piepoli 2008)
Russia........: 7% (1/15: V.Gusev)
Germany....: 7% (3/46: P.Sinkewitz, M.Kessler, S.Schumacher)
Denmark....: 6% (1/18: M.Rasmussen)
Spain.........: 5% (5/93: I.Mayo, A.Pena, P.Vila, I.Astarloa, M.Beltran)
Belgium.....: 2% (1/59: B.Leukemans)
And the list of all the big cycling nations (with more than 10 PT riders), who didnt get any PT riders implicated in a doping case from 2007-2008:
France.........: 0% (0/118)
Netherlands.: 0% (0/34)
Australia.....: 0% (0/24)
Switcherland: 0% (0/19)
USA............: 0% (0/17)
Due to the statistical uncertainty it can not be concluded, that USA is a "cleaner" nation than Denmark. Since the average percentage of riders being implicated in new doping cases was 4.2% in 2007-2008, each nation will under an equal distribution only produce 1 doping case pr. 24th ProTour rider. So thats why we need a nation to have either 2 doping cases or more than 48 riders, in order to make it possible to conclude anything with statistical certainty. So only thing we can conclude for sure, is that France (0%) is a far more clean nation than Ukraine (25%), Kazhakstan (21%), Italy (11%), Germany (7%) and Spain (5%). A theory to explain why Spain has a lower number of doping cases than Italy, could perhaps be, that Italian authoraties are working seriously to combat the doping problem, while Spanish authoraties on the contrary try to protect their riders from any kind of doping cases.
*Update: Piepoli, Schumacher, Kohl and Bileka were all added to the list in the 4th quater of 2008.
Number of doping cases in the Professional Continental Teams from 2007-2008
As stated earlier, we have a smaller amount of testing, and normaly also less focus to target the riders, at the Professional Continental Teams. Thats why it didnt make sence to include those teams, in the statistic above with calculation of the caught riders pr nation.
Instead I have created this comparable statistic, for doping related cases at the Professional Continental Teams:
Doping cases in 2007: 4 out of 489 Professional Continental riders (0.8%)
Doping cases in 2008: 7 out of 472 Professional Continental riders (1.5%)
Giuseppe Muraglia (Acqua e Spone, ITA): positive for HCG in March 2007.
Sergio Ribeiro (Benfica, POR): positive for EPO in April 2007.
Jose Pecharroman (Benfica, ESP): positive for Finasteride in Aug.2007.
Nathan O'Neil (HealthNet, AUS): positive for Phentermine in Aug.2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximiliano Richeze (CSF Group Navigare, ARG): positive for Stanozolol (anabolic steroid) in April 2008.
Ondrej Sosenka (PSK Whirlpool, CZE): positive for Methamphetamine in June 2008.
Moises Duenas (Barloworld, ESP): positive for EPO in July 2008.
Emanuele Sella (CSF Group Navigare, ITA): positive for EPO in July 2008.
Matteo Priamo (CSF Group Navigare, ITA): suplied doping to Emanuele Sella, and doping products were found after searching his house.
Stefano Cavallari (Acqua e Sapone, ITA): positive for EPO in September 2008.
Iljo Keisse (Topsport Vlaanderen, BEL): positive for cathine and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) in November 2008.
*Update: Iljo Keisse and Matteo Priamo have been added to the list during the last month. |
Edited by - KD teammate on 17/01/2009 05:08:28 |
|
|
|
DK-IT
National Champion
Italy
403 Posts |
Posted - 08/08/2008 : 11:36:58
|
France holds a very nice position.
Considering only the bigger nations Italy seems to be biggest sinner.
Some italian media claimed the other day that they others are tageting the Italians on purpose!!!
It surprises me that Spain is so "well behaved", but its nice.
Question; how do we get from these numbers to create a realistic picture of doped riders in the peleton (taking into account the nations different willingness to catch national dopers)?
--- Voigt for president ! --- |
Edited by - DK-IT on 08/08/2008 11:38:19 |
|
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2008 : 00:44:38
|
How many riders in the peleton are still doping?
Before Tour de France, we had a discussion about how many doped riders we should still expect in the peleton. In my post above I wrote:
"I expect the newly introduced biological passports to have minimized the numbers of doped riders in Tour de France to: 10% being blood manipulated (with EPO/blood doping) and 20% using testosterone/growth hormones. It has simply become more difficult to dope for ProTour riders, and the risk of getting caught is now so high, that the doped number of riders in my opinion can be expected to be that kind of "low" in 2008."
I still stick with that statement. We have known for years, that the testing system only caught a very low percentage of the doped riders. This has been further confirmed by Damsgaard, who lately critisized the WADA criteria for testing positive in the EPO-test. In the past, a rider had to be unlucky or stupid to get caught by a doping control. Even in 2007 only 2.5% of the ProTour riders got suspended/fired, eventhough the UCI Lausanne laboratorium reported 80% to have suspectfull values indicating use of growth hormone and 25% having suspectfull values indicating use of blood manipulation.
However, I believe its fair to say, that in 2008 the biological passport has made it much more difficult to cheat than earlier. Still I agree, that some riders who are getting clever supervision about doping, will be able to continue staying undetected by the doping control (at least while being in competition). As earlier, the biggest problem with the doping tests, are the short detection time in the body. Some substances can only be detected few days after consumed, while the effect last for a month. Only solution to make it even more difficult for the cheaters to stay undetected, is to improve the current test methods (incl. more accurate biological passports), and heavily increase the number of tests (to a level where each ProTour/PCT rider is tested one time per week).
How to kill doping networks and remove doping interest among professional riders?
In this ongoing topic we have discussed different aspects and ideas to fight the doping problem. I think we have to accept that it will always be impossible to elliminate it 100%. No matter how much we do to fight the problem, some doping cheaters will still continue to try their luck. I would like to compare it with banks and bank robbers. In spite of a criminal law and a high risk to get caught, 1 out of a million are still trying it out. So the realistic goal is not a doping free world, but more to minimize the number of dopers to a very low figure.
Back in 2004, I have to admit that the new WADA suspensions for 2 years, was something I considered to be some absolute maximum. I argued, that it was human nature to sometime do a stupid mistake, and that we should all be able to forgive people and give them a second chance. Now in 2008 my sentiments have slightly changed. Not because of anger or frustration about the doping problem, but more because of several hours of reflection and thinking about the area. The simple thing I realised was "yes people make mistakes and deserves a second chance, but if the punishment for a mistake is high enough, those people will never think about it in the first place". For instance, how many riders have thought about robbing a bank?
So what I propose now, is actualy life time suspension for a first time doping offence, unless the athlete deliver proof about his doping source (in that case it should be minimized to 1+1 year). Such tough rules would force most athletes to kill the doping network that supplied them, since the alternative would be to quit their sports career. With the current rules, athletes can stay silent about their doping network, and just continue after 2 years suspension time (and perhaps even still use the same doping network).
When I first thought about "lifetime" suspensions, it sounded rather extreme. But after reflecting about it, we are just talking about forcing an athlete to change his profession to something else (just like banks are not willing to ever hire a person, who formerly served jail time for robbing a bank!). If a great athlete has to abandon the sport, due to not following the rules, its after all a gain for the sport and not a loss! Other athletes will in no time replace the old one who failed. The great thing about sport, is that new heroes are born from day to day, and that the sport will surrive even if old heroes suddenly are removed as cheaters. It sounds simple, but to be honest it took me many years to realise exactly that! Somehow I used to trick myself to believe on the emotional level, that sports heroes were kind of unreplaceable due to being born with some unique talented genes, and therefor they also pr. definition deserved a second chance in case they failed a doping control. Thats certainly not the case, and thats why we also can afford to implement a tough punishment system towards the athletes!
Finaly, I also think its important to criminalise doping users in all European countries! So far only France and Italy have taken this step. Other countries have civil laws against doping traffic, administration and sale of doping, but no civil law against the doping users. Some people argue, that athletes are punished within the sports system, and thats why there is no need to also put them into jail. If we take a moment to think about it, some athletes would however prefer to "take the chance" if they know they can only get punished with a sports suspension. For athletes who are doing their last year in the sport (Vinoukourov, Landis, etc.), or athletes who are not good enough to continue without doping use, the temptation is rather big if you know you only risk to loose a sports career, that anyway are facing a soon end. However, if those athletes are told by the civil law that doping is considered strictly illegal, with the punishment to get jailed, they will most likely not even consider wether or not to "take the chance". |
Edited by - KD teammate on 11/08/2008 13:49:38 |
|
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2008 : 22:09:27
|
Number of ProTour riders fired/suspended pr.team in 2007-2008
In my statstic before, I posted the 27 doping cases in the ProTour according to nationality. Looking back in the doping history, it was however more common that doping networks were centered around specific teams. In example we had lately almost the entire T-mobile team implicated with the Freiburg doctors (until 2006), the most prominent riders from Rabobank involved in Operation Wienerblut (2006), and the entire Liberty Seguros plus Kelme involved with Operation Puerto (2006).
One could speculate, that perhaps some teams are still operating on the dark side in the doping fight, and hence we should see a statistical overweight of cases in those teams. At the same time we should however also remember, that teams with an internal independant doping program and respect for ethical rules, will automaticly also be better to discover any possible riders who cheat with doping, compared to the teams who have no such program and prefer to close their eyes towards all suspectfull facts.
In spite of those reservations the number of doping cases can still be interesting to analyse pr. team (as long as we remember not to judge the teams on the numbers alone, but only use them as part of a further analysis). Below you therefore find the statistic of doping cases pr. ProTour team. To reflect the difference between cases caused by a normal doping test (X) and doping cases caused by some internal action (Y), the statistic has listed the cases as X+Y.
Number of doping cases pr. ProTour team in 2007-2008:
CSC-Saxobank.......: 0+0
AG2R....................: 0+0
Bouyges Telecom...: 0+0
Francaisse des Jeux: 0+0
Quickstep..............: 0+0
-----------------------------
Rabobank.............: 0+1
Cofidis..................: 1+0
Credit Agricole.......: 1+0
Euskatel...............: 1+0
Caisse d'Epargne...: 1+0
Liquigas................: 1+0
-----------------------------
Milram..................: 1+1
Silence-Lotto.........: 2+0
T-mobile/Columbia: 2+1
Gerolsteiner..........: 2+1
-----------------------------
Lampre.................: 3+0
Astana..................: 3+1
Saunier Duval........: 4+0
Total.....................: 27
As you can see from the list, the T-mobile/Columbia team has scored rather high. In my point of view this is mostly due to their strict independent internal antidoping program and a commitment to discover all cheaters. At the same time they most likely also failed in 2007 to implement a strong enough antidoping culture among the riders. The task was to transform the team from a doping Mecca in 2006 to a completely clean team in 2007, and I think they last year underestimated the work needed to be done with implementing a new culture among the riders. In comparison CSC-Saxobank already had a strong antidoping culture in place among the riders, before the Damsgaard program was launched in Nov.2006, and hence this team has been more succesfull to avoid any doping cases since then.
Finaly I also have to highlight, that teams like Caisse d'Epargne, Liquigas and Lampre have all acted disrespectfull towards the ethical rules and agreements. Hence I would not be surprised if those teams are still working to hide doping cases at their team, rather to expose them. When judging the numbers we should be aware about that. Its not likely those team, will ever launch an internal ethical suspension, even if they have good reason to do so, and hence the number of doping cases gets lower compared to some of the other teams. |
Edited by - KD teammate on 27/12/2008 19:27:45 |
|
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2008 : 16:42:23
|
Review of the doping case against Ruggero Marzoli (Operation Oil for Drugs):
Today I have updated the "Operation Oil for Drugs" post at page 8, with this additional story about Ruggero Marzoli. Since its a rather interesting story, it deserves to get highlighted also in this seperate post. First of all the CONI prosecutor evaluated back in Dec.2007 Marzolis case to be an "attempted use of doping", and therefor asked for life time suspension (since it was a second time offence committed by the rider). However this decision was succesfully appealed by the rider, since the final judgement by Tribunale Nazionale Antidoping (TNA) only resulted in a suspension for 6 months (for getting treatment by a doping suspended doctor). In the verdict it was outlined, that in spite of tapped telephone conversations and several visits by the rider at Dr.Santucciones office in 2004, there was not enough evidense to proof the assumption of "attempted doping use". The problem was, that the conversations only revealed evidense with certainty, that the rider was using the product called Pro HGH (also known as symbiotropin). This product was described, as working to increase concentrations of Growth Hormones in the body, but since the product had been under no official scientifical studies for this effect, the product was not illegal for the athlete to use (at least in 2004)!
To be honest, I got curious to know if this argument in the official verdict really could be true. So I looked up the product on the Internet, and actualy succeded to find a site selling the product: http://store.bodybuildingfactory.com/basic-research-endothil-cr-30t.html. The website gives a product desription, that it boost your level of Growth Hormones in the body, while still being fully legal to use within WADA and IOC rules! At the moment I dont know for sure, wether or not this product actualy works, or if its still possible to use within the WADA rules. Anyway, I think it gives a rather interesting picture, of how easy it is for athletes to buy such substances with an alleged strong doping effect. And eventhough the case against Marzoli actualy proofed he used this product, he easily got away with his intention to dope, since the product wasnt on WADAs illegal doping list back in 2004!  |
|
|
|
Maxxor
Stagiaire
3 Posts |
Posted - 28/09/2008 : 02:25:42
|
Earlier in the thread you discussed ITT results and concluded that teams dominating the top 10 would be unnatural and a sign of doping. Have you seen the results from the final ITT in this year's tour? It's pretty horrific...
1 Stefan Schumacher (Ger) Gerolsteiner 1.03.50 (49.817 km/h)
2 Fabian Cancellara (Swi) Team CSC - Saxo Bank 0.21
3 Kim Kirchen (Lux) Team Columbia 1.01
4 Christian Vande Velde (USA) Team Garmin-Chipotle p/b H30 1.05
5 David Millar (GBr) Team Garmin-Chipotle p/b H30 1.37
6 Denis Menchov (Rus) Rabobank 1.55
7 Cadel Evans (Aus) Silence - Lotto 2.05
8 Sebastian Lang (Ger) Gerolsteiner 2.19
9 Bernhard Kohl (Aut) Gerolsteiner 2.21
10 George Hincapie (USA) Team Columbia 2.28
11 Thomas Lövkvist (Swe) Team Columbia 2.29
12 Carlos Sastre Candil (Spa) Team CSC - Saxo Bank 2.34
13 Ryder Hesjedal (Can) Team Garmin-Chipotle p/b H30 2.36
14 Danny Pate (USA) Team Garmin-Chipotle p/b H30 2.54
15 Jens Voigt (Ger) Team CSC - Saxo Bank 2.58
Gerolsteiner, Garmin, CSC and Columbia take up 13 of the first 15 spots with 3 and 4 riders each in the top 15. |
|
|
|
Maxxor
Stagiaire
3 Posts |
|
|
KD teammate
Hors Categorie
Denmark
5683 Posts |
Posted - 28/09/2008 : 10:52:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by Maxxor
Have you heard this interesting podcast from the BBC?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/documentaries/2008/07/080716_secrets_blood_1.shtml
Among other things, Damsgaard discusses some tests he has made of the benefits of EPO doping - up to 50% improvement - and the risks of getting caught - extremely low.
I just listened to the entire BBC interview, and I have to be honest and say, that it didnt provide anything new. To be rough it was just a summary of what we already knew, and can be found reported earlier in this topic. A short recap of the interesting topics discussed was:
* Effective doping tests are too expensive to perform on a wide scale on all athletes.
* A cheap "inaccurate" screening test is being used for testosterone doping (only a positive screening enforce the more expensive "accurate" test)
* The T-mobile affair in Freiburg, proofed that high level scientist and labs are doing research to "dope athletes" and "cheat doping controls".
* Sottas from the Lausanne Lab once again reminded us about the number of blood manipulated riders being above 50% in 1996-2005.
* The problem of many doping tests, is that detection time is only a few days after taking the drug, while the bennefit lasts for months.
* B.Saltin, R.Damsgaard and W.Franke all agreed that the current WADA criteria for testing positive for EPO is too easy to cheat.
* To secure a cleaner competition, Sottas prefer tougher criteria for athletes to pass in the doping tests (where a failure just enforce a "no start"), instead of easy criteria for athletes to cheat (due to high demands of accuracy in test results to enforce a suspension).
* UCI has a critisized practise to always warn the riders in case they discover a suspectfull result (that was close to be a positive doping test). The purpose is to prevent drug use, but some riders might exploit it, to be more carefull to mask their intake of doping.
* Its a risk that UCI prefer to ignore all big doping problems/cases. This risk could be removed, if WADA was in charge of the testing.
In regards of the performance bennefit from EPO doping, the interview with Damsgaard briefly mention that one of his test persons in a recent study showed an improvement of allmost 50%. But please be carefull here, this is not equal to a riders speed increase on a mountain. If a person becomes 50% stronger, this will mean he will start racing 12.5% faster (due to the law of fysics). Moreover we have several international studies, that in case you dope with EPO until the UCI enforced health limit at 50% haematocrite, this will mean you become 28% stronger for endurance (7% faster), and at the same time 4% stronger for a sprint (1% faster). So this is more the numbers to look out for, when assesing the results of the riders.
PS: In order to evaluate suspicious time trial results from Tour de France, we have to be extremely carefull. First of all, its a known fact the only the 40 best riders on the time trial is going with maximum power, while the other riders are doing a "relaxed ride" (in order to save energy for the next stage in the race). In top of that we also have some teams in Cycling who with full intention prefered to hire many specialists in the ITT dicipline, and therefor its not suspectfull to have some teams being more dominant than others in the ITT. In this years Tour de France, I didnt find the ITT results suspectfull itself, since it was really all the well known specialists doing great. The suspicious part about the ITT results from T-mobile in TDF 2006, was related to having 4 riders in top10, where to my knowledge it was not normal to have all 4 of them showing such a superior performance. |
Edited by - KD teammate on 28/09/2008 11:23:31 |
|
|
|
sander
Hors Categorie
Belgium
2339 Posts |
Posted - 28/09/2008 : 11:01:38
|
About the new CERA test: the Sporza commentators said that there are rumours, that there are 13 persons who have used CERA in the Tour, some of them from the CSC team
Also, they said that among those 13, there where people who didn't go to the WC. Kirchen, Cancellara, Sastre, Evans, ... didn't go to the WC.
It's too early to start accusing people, but I'm worried about it.
Winner of the Vuelta Fantasy Game 2007 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Doping affairs in Cycling since 1980
