# Another +ve



## rich p (16 Jul 2008)

another one

Bollix


----------



## Flying_Monkey (16 Jul 2008)

There's bound to be a few, however much cleaner the sport gets. It shows the testing is working.


----------



## Keith Oates (16 Jul 2008)

He's been caught and it has been reported to the press, that shows the testing is working but for all that I'm suprised after all of the talk about extra tests etc. that some are apparently still trying to gain a little from the syringe or whatever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## 4F (16 Jul 2008)

Non negative test, why not just say positive ? Honesty when are these riders going to learn.


----------



## rich p (16 Jul 2008)

What I don't understand is are these blokes just taking a chance that they won't be random tested or have they just screwed up on the timing of how long is safe.
If it's the former then they're incredibly naive or stupid but if it's the latter then doping could still be widespread but they know when to stop before the race.

It was depressing to read the other day that 4 or 5 of the Poruguese youth cycling to team were suspended for doping. I can't find the link to it on cyclingnews.


----------



## girofan (16 Jul 2008)

What I don't understand is why Prudhomme does not kick out the teams these riders belong to. If the teamates of the drug user were also stopped from riding in the race, surely there would be peer pressure on riders not to dope as it would hit their team colleagues in the pocket, where it hurts a rider most.
Or is that too much like common sense? Something which has been lacking in the sport for twenty years.


----------



## Smeggers (16 Jul 2008)

If riders are still doping in todays day and age, all it proves is it must still be possible to get away with it?


----------



## andy_wrx (16 Jul 2008)

Is he one of the 10-20 they were targetting, like Beltran ?


----------



## Noodley (16 Jul 2008)

Still, looks like he likes a drink eh?


----------



## rich p (16 Jul 2008)

andy_wrx said:


> Is he one of the 10-20 they were targetting, like Beltran ?



Yes


----------



## Chuffy (16 Jul 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> There's bound to be a few, however much cleaner the sport gets. *It shows the testing is working*.


Oh please, that line is so old it went to school with the Pelissier brothers...
We have to assume that the ones who get caught are just the tip of the iceberg. All that this test and the others prove is that the iceberg is still there.


----------



## rich p (16 Jul 2008)

Chuffy said:


> Oh please, that line is so old it went to school with the Pelissier brothers...
> We have to assume that the ones who get caught are just the tip of the iceberg. All that this test and the others prove is that the iceberg is still there.



That was my point earlier but I suppose the only hope is that 2 of the targetted 10 have been caught so maybe the pre-testing has worked.


----------



## rich p (16 Jul 2008)

Vandevelde is performing unusually well.
Didn't he used to be a teammate of LA?

Wonder if he's 1 in 10?


----------



## Chuffy (16 Jul 2008)

rich p said:


> That was my point earlier but I suppose the only hope is that 2 of the targetted 10 have been caught so maybe the pre-testing has worked.


Ah, yes. I just groan to myself when someone trots out that line about it proving that the testing is working as if it was something to be pleased about...


----------



## Chuffy (16 Jul 2008)

rich p said:


> if it's the latter then doping could still be widespread but they know when to stop before the race.


I've just been reading the Pantani biography (Rendell, not Ronchi). Very good, but very depressing. It was interesting to read that even with minimal notice of testing (a few tens of minutes) riders could re-hydrate and lower their haematocrit level to below 50%. As has been said many times, the cheats (plus their doctors and support staff) will always be one step ahead, so who knows what they're up to these days....


----------



## Chuffy (16 Jul 2008)

rich p said:


> Vandevelde is performing unusually well.
> Didn't he used to be a teammate of LA?
> 
> Wonder if he's 1 in 10?


God I hope not. Slipstream are one of the new-gen teams and *if *they're at it then we can all go home....

...and *if* it turns out that Millar knew then I'll be first in the queue with a length of lead pipe and billiard ball in a sock...


----------



## Tetedelacourse (16 Jul 2008)

Chuffy said:


> I've just been reading the Pantani biography (Rendell, not Ronchi). Very good, but very depressing. It was interesting to read that even with minimal notice of testing (a few tens of minutes) riders could re-hydrate and lower their haematocrit level to below 50%. As has been said many times, the cheats (plus their doctors and support staff) will always be one step ahead, so who knows what they're up to these days....



Yep it's an eye-opener that book. Worth reading for those of you who don't understand about non-negatives and the complexities involved in outing the cheats.


----------



## Noodley (16 Jul 2008)

rich p said:


> That was my point earlier but I suppose the only hope is that 2 of the targetted 10 have been caught so maybe the pre-testing has worked.



2 of the targetted 10-20...


----------



## mondobongo (16 Jul 2008)

Just how big of an iceberg is there?? Two positives in a week is not good even if you try to spin it that the testing is working. As far as the average joe reading the news is concerned its business as usual at the Tour. Its bad for Barloworld who had,had a lot of positive press since breaking into the big time with their inclusion in last years tour.

The scary question is have the big teams got this dialled in now and know how to beat the system??


----------



## andy_wrx (16 Jul 2008)

How many of the 10-20 are Boilermen from S-D I wonder...


----------



## Flying_Monkey (16 Jul 2008)

Interestingly 2 other Barloworld riders dropped out during today's stage. Could be coincidence, could be that they just felt extra demoralized after their teammate's departure, or it could be that they were avoiding the possibility of getting tested too...


----------



## andrew_s (16 Jul 2008)

Coincidence - a leg injury and a broken collarbone, according to bikeradar.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (16 Jul 2008)

andrew_s said:


> Coincidence - a leg injury and a broken collarbone, according to bikeradar.



That usually does it!


----------



## Renard (17 Jul 2008)

To be expected. Doping is rife in all professional sports IMO. Cycling is the leader in taking anti-doping measures.


----------



## Greenbank (17 Jul 2008)

Oh dear Ricco.

Slowly becoming a farce again, which is a shame.


----------



## Haitch (17 Jul 2008)

Are you saying Ricco has been caught doping? If so, why can't I find the news on the web?


----------



## Haitch (17 Jul 2008)

Answering own question:

Ricco the latest to fail EPO test 

Ricco's positive test is the third to hit this year's Tour de France 
Italian Ricardo Ricco is the latest cyclist to test positive for the banned blood booster erythropoietin (EPO).


----------



## Chris James (17 Jul 2008)

Another on the targetted list then. Dumb feckers.


----------



## 4F (17 Jul 2008)

Ffs


----------



## chris42 (17 Jul 2008)

Cycling news is reporting an un named team is complaning no French riders are being tested!


----------



## Tetedelacourse (17 Jul 2008)

Not surprised, but very very disappointed. Can't say he's one of the old guard.


----------



## bryce (17 Jul 2008)

Gutted with Ricco. He carries a photo of Pantani on him according to Liggett. His explosive breakaways also whiffed massively.

Just back to where we were last year now. Idiotic.


----------



## biking_fox (17 Jul 2008)

oh dear. He's a big name in one of the jerseys too - should/must have known better. And I was relying on him for my velogame league points.

Velonews has it as "Ricardo Ricco of Saunier Duval, who tested positive for a novel erythropoietic agent known as erythropoiesis receptor activator (CERA), a new agent, which medical professionals say is a promising treatment for anemia." rather than EPO.


----------



## Keith Oates (17 Jul 2008)

Ricco - that will not suprise some people on here but it's not good news for the whole tour!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## biking_fox (17 Jul 2008)

Letour has the following riders dropping out this morning:
"Riccardo Ricco, Juan Jose Cobo, David De La Fuente, Josep Jufre Pou, Leonardo Piepoli"

Just hope they're not all "non-negative" - none of them were struggling yesterday were they? LaFuente maybe?


----------



## Keith Oates (17 Jul 2008)

Saunier Duval have pulled out of the Tour, this is as bad a last year!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## 4F (17 Jul 2008)

These cheating bastards are really ruining a great event.


----------



## nilling (17 Jul 2008)

The most (and probably not the last) high profile rider!

Is it time for life-time bans?


----------



## andy_wrx (17 Jul 2008)

andy_wrx said:


> How many of the 10-20 are Boilermen from S-D I wonder...



I don't suppose I can claim that much credit for it, it was very obvious and lots of others saying it.

Leakygas next ?


----------



## Keith Oates (17 Jul 2008)

On a lighter note, who will Rudehomme blame for this mess because the UCI are not involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## mr_hippo (17 Jul 2008)

It's time for the 'tough love' approach - Positive A + B samples should result in a ban sine die and no excuses/appeals or retro-active medicals and the team should be banned as well. Riders achievements should be expunged from all record books and no further involvement with the professional peloton.
The sine die ban should be retro-active so anyone in the professional peloton who has had a previous ban - get another job.


----------



## Haitch (17 Jul 2008)

They're reporting on Dutch TV that the French anti-doping labs have developed a new system that detects the previously undetectable third generation of EPO. If so, expect more riders to get caught in the days ahead.


----------



## SheilaH (17 Jul 2008)

Reactions from other riders:

*Juan Cobo Acebo (Saunier Duval)* : «Il y a eu des jours meilleurs. Si le contrôle positif est confirmé par la contre-analyse, c'est une nouvelle terrible.»

*Romain Feillu (Agritubel)* : «J'ai entendu parler qu'un nouveau truc existait, qui était soi-disant indétectable. C'est donc une bonne nouvelle. Si les contrôles marchent et qu'on voit que c'est le seul à l'utiliser, c'est positif. De toute façon, Ricco c'était quelqu'un d'arrogant, qui n'était pas apprécié dans le peloton. Maintenant, cela va peut-être rouler moins vite.»

*Marc Madiot* *(directeur sportif de la Française des Jeux)* : «Dehors ! Toutes les années, il y a un discours, il y a des règles du jeu. On ne va pas s'appesantir sur un mec qui se fait attraper. Dehors les tricheurs !»

*Mark Cavendish* *(Team Columbia)* : «Je suis sous le choc. C'est difficile de repenser à la course désormais, même si aujourd'hui, c'était enfin une étape pour moi et les sprinteurs.»


----------



## Keith Oates (17 Jul 2008)

I don't believe that Cavendish said that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Haitch (17 Jul 2008)

SheilaH said:


> Reactions from other riders:



*Cadel Evans:* "I've got nothing nice to say about the situation."


----------



## SheilaH (17 Jul 2008)

Feillu is basically saying that Ricco was arrogant and disliked in the peloton.


----------



## andy_wrx (17 Jul 2008)

Keith Oates said:


> On a lighter note, who will Rudehomme blame for this mess because the UCI are not involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Funny how ASO and AFLD are catching them though, and UCI couldn't or didn't want to, isn't it Keith ?


----------



## SheilaH (17 Jul 2008)

Huh???
Who caught Vino, Landis, Sinkewitz etc etc etc


----------



## Keith Oates (17 Jul 2008)

andy_wrx said:


> Funny how ASO and AFLD are catching them though, and UCI couldn't or didn't want to, isn't it Keith ?



as I see it they weren't allowed to in this tour!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## andy_wrx (17 Jul 2008)

I mean, it's ASO/AFLD who are catching the dopers using this new form of EPO - they weren't caught before, even though Ricco managed to come second in the UCI-administered Giro


----------



## mondobongo (17 Jul 2008)

Its concerning that apparently Saunier Duvals Bus and Cars were searched by the Gendarmerie. It suggests that there were others than Ricco at it and will be the reason that the whole Team has gone. In the other two cases it was as we know only the rider concerned.


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

mr_hippo said:


> It's time for the 'tough love' approach - Positive A + B samples should result in a ban sine die and no excuses/appeals or retro-active medicals and the team should be banned as well. Riders achievements should be expunged from all record books and no further involvement with the professional peloton.
> The sine die ban should be retro-active so anyone in the professional peloton who has had a previous ban - get another job.




Ban teams? Might as well ban cycling in that case!

All this proves is that there is a war between those that dope to those trying to seeking to expose them and technology is the machine that both use to try and achieve their aim.

It is niave to expect that doping will ever be eliminated in the absence of an abosolute test which proves doping in every case in which there would be no incentive to dope.

It find it strange that people ask why people continue to do this because it seems obvious to me that the answer is because they think they can get away with it and fame or riding in a pro team is more important at that time than the chance that they may get caught.

We should at least be realistic about what can be achieved through an anti-doping strategy and this talk about eliminating is only setting unrealistic expectations from those within and from outside the sport about what can be achieved and when dopers are discovered at least a more reasoned understanding of it can derived.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (17 Jul 2008)

So is anyone NOT thinking about the past 11 stages and trying to recall riders who looked to be performing above expectation now? 

Has anyone considered Ca... never mind.


----------



## yello (17 Jul 2008)

Yep Rico. Oh shoot. He's a stupid kid... he has natural talent... why oh why.

http://www.lemonde.fr/sports/articl...ardo-ricco-controle-positif_1074525_3242.html


----------



## John the Monkey (17 Jul 2008)

Tete, I'm gutted about Ricco, because the sprint away on his second stage win was a real highlight of the tour for me. Still, catch the cheats, throw them out seems the best way to proceed.

As for the others, I'm not letting my opinions of them be clouded.


----------



## yello (17 Jul 2008)

I'm really pissed off/depressed now. Seriously. I was so optimistic about this new era. But Ricco.... it shows there are still lessons to be learned, the message isn't getting through. The way I feel now, I'd support a life ban. And I'm dead serious.


----------



## Chuffy (17 Jul 2008)

mondobongo said:


> Its concerning that apparently Saunier Duvals Bus and Cars were searched by the Gendarmerie. It suggests that there were others than Ricco at it and will be the reason that the whole Team has gone. In the other two cases it was as we know only the rider concerned.


Standard practice. Doping is a criminal offence in France, hence the police involvement. Remember Cofidis last year?
IIRC, of course.

If riders are still trying it then it must be because they know that there is a good chance of getting away with it (eg Ricco at the Giro). Hopefully, if the ASO are being more efficient than the UCI at pursuing the cheats and if testing processes are getting more sophisticated then we might be looking at more +tives and less cheating. 
Unless this is just a temporary blip until the cheats (plus teams, doctors etc) regroup and start to pull away again....


----------



## mr_hippo (17 Jul 2008)

doyler78 said:


> Ban teams? Might as well ban cycling in that case!


I was in management for many years and I knew what was going on so why are managers of cycling teams turning a blind eye? Can't they see and hear?


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

mr_hippo said:


> I was in management for many years and I knew what was going on so why are managers of cycling teams turning a blind eye? Can't they see and hear?




I don't doubt that but what you proposed was a blanket ban. That is plain silly. If there was any evidence of team involvement then of course they should be banned however there are clearly now teams that are trying to get on top of this problem and you want to make them responsible for the actions of a rogue person.

Also not sure what you mean by banning a team. Surely you must mean the personnel as you could just change the name.

You don't win a fight by blaming everyone for the actions of some. You need all the people on your side that you can get and that includes, very importantly, the team management. Your approach would actually be counter productive in my opinion. It could make some wonder why they bother when they are going to be treated like criminals anyway.


----------



## mondobongo (17 Jul 2008)

Chuffy said:


> Standard practice. Doping is a criminal offence in France, hence the police involvement. Remember Cofidis last year?
> IIRC, of course.



Yes I know what you are saying Chuffles but in the reports of the other 2 cheats they were nicked off down to the station whilst their Hotel room was searched,thrown out but Team left in. This time it seems a lot more action has taken place. Cars and Buses searched Team withdraws leading me to think its not just Ricco at Saunier Duval.


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

mondobongo said:


> Yes I know what you are saying Chuffles but in the reports of the other 2 cheats they were nicked off down to the station whilst their Hotel room was searched,thrown out but Team left in. This time it seems a lot more action has taken place. Cars and Buses searched Team withdraws leading me to think its not just Ricco at Saunier Duval.



That assumes we were given a full account in the other stories of what took place. As it is a criminal offence to dope in France it would be a really serious failing in the police investigation if the team buses and cars were not searched but who knows. Maybe that will come out later.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (17 Jul 2008)

Looks like Ricco was copying Pantani in more ways than one then eh? But seriously, if the whole team have pulled out, it can only mean that they are acknowledging that they knew - unlike Barloworld or Liquigas who are claiming they did not.


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Looks like Ricco was copying Pantani in more ways than one then eh? But seriously, if the whole team have pulled out, it can only mean that they are acknowledging that they knew - unlike Barloworld or Liquigas who are claiming they did not.




No what the team has said is that they pulled out because the rider in question was Ricco and Ricco isn't just any rider, he was a top rider and until they could investigate the extent of the problem and to protect cycling from further damage they would be withdrawing not just from the TdF but from all racing. That says to me that they may suspect that they may have a more widespread problem however they are going to make damn sure they get to the bottom of it and sort before they do anything else.

That's all that can be asked of them and until I see any evidence that there was management knowledge or help in his doping then I will take it at that.


----------



## Lardyboy (17 Jul 2008)

Heard about it on the radio earlier. What was he thinking? If he was under suspicion already, did he feel so insecure in his "ability" that he needed to dope again? The mind boggles!


----------



## Chuffy (17 Jul 2008)

mondobongo said:


> Yes I know what you are saying Chuffles but in the reports of the other 2 cheats they were nicked off down to the station whilst their Hotel room was searched,thrown out but Team left in. This time it seems a lot more action has taken place. Cars and Buses searched Team withdraws leading me to think its not just Ricco at Saunier Duval.


Yes, it occured to me a bit later that was what you actually meant. But as doyler78 says, it would be remiss of Le Fuzz not to at least search the other teams in full, rather than just focus on the one rider.
As for teams pulling out, or not, it seems to be down to the way that the team management (and presumably the sponsors too) feel. I guess that S-D felt that there was too much risk of other riders in the team (esp if Ricco had been involved in selection) being implicated, so pulled out. If more teams did that (like Cofidis and T-Mobile last year) would there be more peer pressure among the riders not to dope, if the risk was not just to yourself, but to your fellow riders? I can't imagine that the clean riders on S-D would give Ricco the steam off their piss right now, let alone do him any professional favours once he's served his ban.


----------



## andy_wrx (17 Jul 2008)

After the way Piepoli and Cobo shot up Hautacam the other day, I don't believe Ricco was the only bent S-D boilerman.

Schleck couldn't live with them and looked half-dead when he came-in 30secs down, shirt open and gasping.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (17 Jul 2008)

andy_wrx said:


> After the way Piepoli and Cobo shot up Hautacam the other day, I don't believe Ricco was the only bent S-D boilerman.
> 
> Schleck couldn't live with them and looked half-dead when he came-in 30secs down, shirt open and gasping.



That is starting to be my suspicion now too...


----------



## marinyork (17 Jul 2008)

I didn't watch the tour properly last year, it's first proper one this year but I had heard about Rasmussen and other things. Do people think this Ricco business is nearly as big as last year's problems?


----------



## Tetedelacourse (17 Jul 2008)

Hard to compare the Rasmussen case - he wasn't thrown out for doping, he was thrown out for lying to his employer and that was discovered/ dealt with when he was in yellow.

I for one was happy to see Cofidis and T: Mobile leaving en masse. Finally some acknowledgement on behalf of hte organisers that doping is institutionalised, not just the whim of the rider. I think that if the team were to get the boot each time it happened, then it would support the fight against cheating from team mgt and team members and backstaff. I thought it was getting somewhere.

Of course, the drugs have got more advanced too and unluckily for Ricco the testing has just about caught up.

This year isn't AS bad YET as last when you factor in Vino and Kasheshkin and Astana IMO. Ricco has come from nowhere in TDF terms. Vino was a seasoned pro and pretty outspoken against drugs. Ras getting the boot while in yellow added to the farce. This all in spite of the "charter" remember!

Certainly not as bad as 2006 - OP on the eve of the race and then the yellow jersey in Paris gets the boot too. Awful.

Let's see what crops up in the alps. Somehow I can't believe that's the end of the scandal for this year.


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

I think its bigger because everyone has talked this tour up as though it was going to be end word in clean competition and that all the young riders out there are not doping and it is only the old guard that has to be got rid off.

Well that's been blown apart today just like Ricco blew his rivals apart.

You only have to read this thread to see that every above average performance is now being questioned which is very bad for the sport because of the fans don't have confidence in the professional sport any more then how the hell can you expect non cycling fans to admire the extraordinary efforts of those riders who are clean.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (17 Jul 2008)

I disagree. We've been here before and the casualties were bigger in the past. As I say though, so far


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

I look at it from the other side. They came from an era where doping is known to have been widespread and institutionalised and as such to find stars amongst those that doped was not as shocking as it was predictable.

All I have heard this year from the cycling press is talk about everyone thought cycling had turned the corner in its battle against doping and that it was now a minority thing that had been banished to the old guard who brought up in that different era.

What Ricco and the other youngsters represented was a new breed of rider who fought cleanly and excelled because of his extraordinary talent. What this has done to shake the whole foundations own which that thinking is based.

This view has been sold to the public and when it falls apart it actually perpetuates a view that cycling has as much of a problem now as it ever did and that causes a major problem because unless it is pereceived to have got better then each year cycling loses more credibility and that's why this year is a bigger disaster. As you say Ricco's main problem is that he got caught because technology caught up with him.

What this shows me is that doping is not something that we are going to eliminate any time soon, if ever.


----------



## HLaB (17 Jul 2008)

Just my theory but could this be one of the reasons why David Millar left Saunier Duval:?:


----------



## Chuffy (17 Jul 2008)

HLaB said:


> Just my theory but could this be one of the reasons why David Millar left Saunier Duval:?:


It's a depressing thought that someone like Millar would leave a team for that reason _and say nothing_. If it were true it suggests that clean cyclists are too frightened to blow the whistle and the old code of silence is as strong as ever.


----------



## Noodley (17 Jul 2008)

Chuffy said:


> It's a depressing thought that someone like Millar would leave a team for that reason _and say nothing_. If it were true it suggests that clean cyclists are too frightened to blow the whistle and the old code of silence is as strong as ever.



IIRC he did alert UCI to the less than clean practices at Saunier. UCI did as UCI do best - fack all. 

There's a good article in ProCycling this month about Festina.

I have now reached the stage where I no longer require 'evidence' to the degree which is required to 'convict' a rider.

My list is long....


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

Jim said:


> Doping expert stunned by Riccò news
> 
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2008/tour08/?id=/features/2008/tour08_micera_st12



Now that's an interesting read. Ricco should never had started perhaps - sort of throws a curved ball a those that think ASO and the French Anti Doping Agency walk on water.

However I guess he would say that given his position so perhaps caution should be attached but still I think what says interesting from the point of view of the validity of the test itself.

I guess Ricco will be the phone to the lawyers already.


----------



## yello (17 Jul 2008)

"doping expert" said:


> We can tell when someone's used it but we can't declare them positive.



What exactly does that mean? How can there be one without the other? 

There's mention of this Micera being a 3rd generation EPO, maybe SD thought they could get away with it because, after all, ....



> We know that Micera was being used on the Giro


----------



## Noodley (17 Jul 2008)

Jim said:


> Doping expert stunned by Riccò news
> 
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2008/tour08/?id=/features/2008/tour08_micera_st12



I'm sure much will be made of the validity of the test.

And we're more likely to find the truth in a French courtroom than under any cycling 'law'


----------



## yello (17 Jul 2008)

> sort of throws a curved ball a those that think ASO and the French Anti Doping Agency walk on water



I beg to differ! It shows they are prepared to call the bluff of doping teams. So what if there is "no validated test', maybe they are prepared to accept the legal challenge. I mean, Professor Michel Audran ("one of the world's leading experts on blood doping") is prepared to say they tell it's being used. Time to get tough.

Sorry, I'm just hugely p*ssed off with it today. Ricco, because of his youth and stupidity, has shaken my foundations too.


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

I don't think either of you appreciate just what a judgement against the ASO/French Anti Doping Agency for using a non validated test would be. They would undoubtably have to pay Ricco a huge sum of money plus his name would then be cleared when it seems he is a doper. How does that help anything. Much as we might like to try and rush things and bring forward new technologies to catch the cheats they must stand up to scrutiny otherwise we have achieved nothing. Indeed we could undermine the validity of all tests in some peoples minds.


----------



## Noodley (17 Jul 2008)

doyler78 said:


> I don't think either of you appreciate just what a judgement against the ASO/French Anti Doping Agency for using a non validated test would be. They would undoubtably have to pay Ricco a huge sum of money plus his name would then be cleared when it seems he is a doper. How does that help anything. Much as we might like to try and rush things and bring forward new technologies to catch the cheats they must stand up to scrutiny otherwise we have achieved nothing. Indeed we could undermine the validity of all tests *in some peoples minds*.



Fair point. However, some people still think Tyler Hamilton is innocent. The time has come to take action. 

Validated tests are contested by lawyers as it is. There as been too much pissing about. Time to act.


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

Noodley said:


> Fair point. However, some people still think Tyler Hamilton is innocent. The time has come to take action.
> 
> Validated tests are contested by lawyers as it is. There as been too much pissing about. Time to act.



Fair point also and yes that is a problem however hopefully they might bankrupt themselves in the process


----------



## SheilaH (17 Jul 2008)

David millar had this to say about his former boss in saunier Duval:

"However, Millar believes that Mauro Gianetti, Saunier Duval's team manager, has good intentions and Riccò was more likely misled by others.
"I think that Mauro Gianetti has been taken advantage of and he is someone I have a lot of respect for," said Millar. "He does not deserve this and he has a good heart. He has perhaps put a lot of trust in people that he shouldn't have and he will learn from this.
"I guarantee - you watch Mauro - he will have an independent anti-doping programme within the team by the end of the year. He was close to doing it last year, and now he is going to have to extend his budget and get that programme in place. It is by doing that the sport will change."


----------



## Noodley (17 Jul 2008)

doyler78 said:


> Fair point also and yes that is a problem however hopefully they might bankrupt themselves in the process



I can see riders and the the fans losing. And those who run the sport and the lawyers winning.

The article about the Festina doping 'scandal' in this month's ProCycling which I mentioned earlier reckons cycling could clean up in 6 months if there was any degree of effort put into it. Not sure if this is realistic but it gives some hope I suppose...

I look forward to Kimmage's next article. I don't like his 'holier than thou' condemnation of everyone who has ever been suspected/been found guilty of doping as I can appreciate the pressure (I blame the teams/managers/doctors more than the riders, but still get pissed off with the riders) invloved, and I find it rather strange given he admitted to it. But I have always believed him, and others who have spoken out, 100%.


----------



## yello (17 Jul 2008)

doyler78 said:


> hopefully they might bankrupt themselves in the process :?:



Sorry, who is "they" here? ASO? Or teams/riders.

I'm agreeing with Noodley here. Let's have none of this Hamilton/Landis pissing about. Contest as much as you like in courts of law but you'll not ride in our tour, ASO have shown they will say that (with Astana) - right or wrong. 

doyler78, I think you under estimate ASO's will (and the sponsors, let's not forget the TdF is a business!) to rid the Tour of dopers. If it costs them in legal fees then that will be a business decision. Either way, teams are "invited" to the tour; suspected/tainted teams/riders will simply not get an invite. End of story. 

Supportive and positive words from Millar there SheilaH. I personally don't think Millar would have pulled any punches had he had reason to believe there was a doping culture at SD.


----------



## Rob S (17 Jul 2008)

Liked Gary Imlach's completely unbiased statement at the end of today's ITV4 coverage...after saying Ricco's wins were too good to be true he stated that Cav's won three stages completely clean....drug tests results must be announced pretty promptly for him to say that...he'd only won his 3rd stage about 3 hours earlier.


----------



## yello (17 Jul 2008)

Jim said:


> I guess it's the riders you're nobbed off with (so to speak) not The Tour per se. Whoever is running The Tour is doing their best to ensure it's drug free and for that they should be commended.



Oh absolutely I'm nobbed off with the riders dopers! I'm fully supportive of the TdF and it's efforts to get rid of the cheats. 

As a related aside, I'm wondering how effective the 'rider's passport' has been. I wouldn't be surprised if it's played a big role in producing these positives. Certainly, and I'm going out on a limb here, if this 3g EPO is so difficult to validate.


----------



## Noodley (17 Jul 2008)

yello said:


> I'm wondering how effective the 'rider's passport' has been...



..not very, I would venture.


----------



## yello (17 Jul 2008)

Rob S said:


> .drug tests results must be announced pretty promptly.



I doubt they are. Ricco's test was after Stage 4 wasn't it?? I suspect the labs are 24/7 with testing at the moment! I reckon results take a while. 

Please don't even suggest Cav is doping! I have this somewhat naive belief that British riders (or those having come up through the new auspices of the BCF training regimes) are clean clean clean. If someone pisses on that belief then I really will be depressed!


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

yello said:


> Sorry, who is "they" here? ASO? Or teams/riders.
> 
> I'm agreeing with Noodley here. Let's have none of this Hamilton/Landis pissing about. Contest as much as you like in courts of law but you'll not ride in our tour, ASO have shown they will say that (with Astana) - right or wrong.
> 
> ...



I was of course talking about any rider challenging a doping ban from a validated test.

How exactly did anyone piss about with Landis, et al. They were removed, sacked by their teams and the riders appealed their expulsions. That's exactly the same process that will happen now so your point is what?

Its no only legal fees that they will get hit with they are proved to acted illegally. They will have to compensate Ricco for loss of reputation, loss of earnings and pay his legal fees. That will be substantial. Any business that operates along the line of taking risky decisions is one doomed to failure. You see tough I see foolish. If they spent their money on ensuring that the test which is nearly ready (if you believe the professor) then that would be money better spent.

I think ASO should take a tough stance on cheats but they must not act outside the law because that discredits them and cycling.

As for all these teams getting banned not invited where the hell is the evidence for that. Astana. What about the rest? What about Liquigas and Barloworld where is the ban there. Its seems to me that you see something much more robust than I do.


----------



## Rob S (17 Jul 2008)

yello said:


> I doubt they are. Ricco's test was after Stage 4 wasn't it?? I suspect the labs are 24/7 with testing at the moment! I reckon results take a while.



Exactly...which is why I'm so suprised he was stood there telling us we could all rest assured that Cav had won all three clean.


----------



## yello (17 Jul 2008)

Noodley said:


> ..not very, I would venture.



Care to share your thinking? I'm interested. You're usually pretty rational in your analysis - which is more than I can be at the moment!


----------



## Noodley (17 Jul 2008)

doyler78 said:


> I think ASO should take a tough stance on cheats but they must not act outside the law because that discredits them and cycling.



They are not operating outside the law, those who dope are. There is no law about using non-validated tests.


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

Noodley said:


> They are not operating outside the law, those who dope are. There is no law about using non-validated tests.



Yes I can see that is right :?:  however then that leaves the team in a very difficult position and ASO can just walk away from it as they will be banned from any race run by ASO if Ricco remains in their team however they will not be able to sack him unless they have grounds to do so and a non validated test is unlikely to constitute grounds so where now?

It's all well and good to have this tough stance but what other teams could get caught like this? I don't think it is impossible to see one rider from a lot of teams getting caught in which case we won't have any races at all.


----------



## yello (17 Jul 2008)

doyler78 said:


> I was of course talking about any rider challenging a doping ban from a validated test.



Why "of course"? I wasn't sure who you were referring to. That's why I asked. There was no 'edge' to my question.



> How exactly did anyone piss about with Landis, et al.



Landis and his legal team pissed about, and will probably continue you to do so. It's that that I refer to.

I think you mistake me. I'm not having a go at you. I'm just fed up with dopers. I think ASO are and I think the cycling public are. I think ASO can use their own authority to invite who they damn well like, and to hell with courts of law (within reason). I'm fed up with people employing legal teams to find technicalities. If a UCI "leading expert" can say 'we know but we can't prove it' then I suspect there's some pretty solid background for suspecting doping.

Yes, it's a kind of 'big brother' scenario I'm suggesting but right now, in the mood I'm in, it's what appeases me. I can't tell you how generally sickened I am with Ricco - because I wanted to believe advances were being made... and I've been kicked in the guts.


----------



## doyler78 (17 Jul 2008)

yello said:


> Why "of course"? I wasn't sure who you were referring to. That's why I asked. There was no 'edge' to my question.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sorry I took the question about they as a direct challenge to my anti-doping credentials. I accept that isn't what you intended.

I agree. I believe he has doped and I now understand ASO's right to ban him is legal however this is now very messy because the UCI and the team are now left in an impossible position unless they can validate the French Anti-Doping Agency results and that looks unlikely from what we hear.

I hope that isn't the case and he is banned. It's his right to challenge the bans should he so wish and I have no problem with that. I don't see the legal process as a farce as many do. I just hope in the process they do bankrupt themselves because they know that have acted totally without regard for their own health and greatly to the detriment of the sport they purport to love.


----------



## Noodley (17 Jul 2008)

doyler78 said:


> Yes I can see that is right   however then that leaves the team in a very difficult position and ASO can just walk away from it as they will be banned from any race run by ASO if Ricco remains in their team however they will not be able to sack him unless they have grounds to do so and a non validated test is unlikely to constitute grounds so where now?
> 
> It's all well and good to have this tough stance but what other teams could get caught like this? I don't think it is impossible to see one rider from a lot of teams getting caught *in which case we won't have any races at all*.



Indeed.

As I said before, I hold the team/doctors/management etc more repsonsible than the riders; perhaps it is time to get rid of anyone with a sullied and non-repenting approach? There are those who have doped and who are now riding clean or in coaching positions with a clean approach - but there continues to be an involvement of those who accept doping as okay; managers, drivers, riders, hangers-on, etc.. and fans! 

I have been to 2 Tours - 2005 in Paris and 2006 in the Alps (yes, the Floyd breakaway stage  when I stood with my daughter at what I thought at the time was showing her a stunning sporting event which she could look back on - stop me if you have heard this story before :?: - for the rest of her life. Men battling against all the elements and all that stuff). I feel cheated; I love cycling. It cut me to the core (and this is truthful, not just a made up sound bite) for her to turn to me and say 'they're just druggies'


----------



## yenrod (17 Jul 2008)

mondobongo said:


> Its concerning that apparently Saunier Duvals Bus and Cars were searched by the Gendarmerie. It suggests that there were others than Ricco at it and will be the reason that the whole Team has gone. In the other two cases it was as we know only the rider concerned.



Makes me wonder if the DS said to everybody 'right here, right now, has anyone else ****ed around with shoot'...

Just like Mondo said...

they've all gone - how / why else would they ALL go...

The italians are too competitive, 'at all costs' - believe me ive lived there... Yet the cultures great though :?:


----------



## Noodley (17 Jul 2008)

Moreau. Sore back? :?:


----------



## mondobongo (18 Jul 2008)

I hate the fact that there are still plenty of bad boys involved in the sport. Look at the quality of CSC some great riders in there but I can never get fully behind them because of the Riis connection. 

Its time they went and time the ban was increased from 2 years to something significant.


----------



## yello (18 Jul 2008)

Noodley said:


> IMen battling against all the elements and all that stuff). I feel cheated; I love cycling. It cut me to the core (and this is truthful, not just a made up sound bite) for her to turn to me and say 'they're just druggies' :?:



That is how I feel - personally hurt. The radio and TV are full of it over here so I'm not alone. I wanted to believe Landis was the last one. I dismissed Beltran as 'old school'; Nevado was a stupid, one-off no-one... but Ricco? I can't ignore that. He's young and talented, he'd get results clean. I now feel (again) that cycling still has a problem and my optimism has been crushed.

Sorry all if I was being irrational and emotional last evening. I've calmed down a little now but I'm still not happy. I've had my enjoyment of the last 3 tours ruined by dopers and where I was once philosophical about it, I'm now heartily sick of it. Selfish, I know. I want them gone.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (18 Jul 2008)

We've been here before. This one is raw because it's happening now, but how many false dawns have we had? Ricco came from nowhere, he's not an established name like the past few seasons have thrown up. 

OK there may have been a lot of anti-doping cycling press this year, but only within the cycling world. It hasn't seeped out into mainstream media so I can see that folk who read a lot of cycling press might see this as catastrophic, but peripheral fans and spectators from outside the sport wont see it as AS damaging as previous years.

I suppose ultimately it's a pointless discussion to try to convince each other that this scandal is bigger than the last or vice versa though.

It's really worrying to hear that doping expert (thanks for link) say there is no validated test and yet that's what Ricco was kicked out for. Really worrying.


----------



## yello (18 Jul 2008)

Yeah, I know what you're saying tete. Maybe you're right; false dawns, raw now, etc... I can't be objective right now.

Maybe it is _exactly_ because Ricco is new that I feel so disillusioned. A new kid being lured into old ways...


----------



## Tetedelacourse (18 Jul 2008)

It might also be because he has been the most exciting rider this year, and the genuine buzz it gave you/ me admiring his precociousness has now been rubbished.

I remember feeling exactly the same watching Rasmussen and Contador zipping up the Pyrenees last year, then being embarrassed at my excitement later on.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (18 Jul 2008)

Basically the feeling of being duped.


----------



## beanzontoast (18 Jul 2008)

Tetedelacourse said:


> It might also be because he has been the most exciting rider this year, and the genuine buzz it gave you/ me admiring his precociousness has now been rubbished.
> 
> *I remember feeling exactly the same watching Rasmussen and Contador zipping up the Pyrenees last year, then being embarrassed at my excitement later on*.



Exactly how I feel. When I see exceptional performances now, the question is in my mind as to whether or not I'm watching the result of talent and training alone, and that takes some of the enjoyment out of it.


----------



## Disgruntled Goat (18 Jul 2008)

Couldn't have happen to a nicer fella.

So why did he have to dope if he had a 'natural' hemocrit of 50%.

How many types of stupid do you have to be?


----------



## yello (18 Jul 2008)

Tetedelacourse said:


> It might also be because he has been the most exciting rider this year, and the genuine buzz it gave you/ me admiring his precociousness has now been rubbished.



That's definitely part of it but it's not Ricco per se, I think it was what he represented. Mark Cavendish represents the same thing for me; the new breed of cyclist - train hard and ride clean. Ricco pissed on that image. So, yes, I feel duped, and foolish for believing...

...but maybe I have been here before. Maybe I'm forgetting that the love of cycling takes over again and I dismiss the dopers as cheats not worthy of my respect. I dunno, I find myself using language far more vitriolic than I would normally, so I've not calmed down yet.


----------



## John the Monkey (18 Jul 2008)

*WADA ahead of the curve with Micera*



> He (WADA's spokesman, Frédéric Donzé) was able to confirm that co-operation in the case of Micera has enabled its detection by WADA-accredited laboratories. "Thanks to the co-operation of the manufacturer of this substance (Roche) and of WADA-accredited laboratories, WADA received the molecule well in advance (of release onto the market) and was able to develop ways to detect it."


(Micera is the substance Ricco tested positive for).


----------



## mondobongo (18 Jul 2008)

I'm sure something along those lines was knocking about.


----------



## Haitch (18 Jul 2008)

Saunier Duval have just fired both Ricco and Piepoli.


----------



## doyler78 (18 Jul 2008)

Alan H said:


> Saunier Duval have just fired both Ricco and Piepoli.



Great news. Cobo looked pretty fresh too though it looks like his was down to talent.


----------



## Haitch (18 Jul 2008)

Am I the only one to think Vandevelde's form is a bit suspicious? Basically comes from nowhere and at the age of 32 has a blinder.


----------



## Noodley (18 Jul 2008)

Jim said:


> Scratches chin.... thinks.... I wonder if this now, perviously undetectable substance was available, oooooh, say seven years ago ?



It's a fairly new product.


----------



## Nick1979 (18 Jul 2008)

Noodley said:


> It's a fairly new product.



Not quite, apparently CERA is used by cyclists since 2004, way before it was made commercially available by Roche.
Roche was made aware of this fraudulent use of their (then experimental) molecule and alerted the anti-doping laboratories, which developed new tests to find it.

source: (Le Monde, in French sorry) http://www.lemonde.fr/sports/articl...-depuis-2004_1074696_3242.html#ens_id=1066184


----------



## John the Monkey (18 Jul 2008)

According to the BR live TdeF commentary feed, rumours are surfacing of Piepoli testing positive now.



> 16:06 CEST
> 
> French television commentators are talking about a fourth positive on the Tour, namely Piepoli. It's unclear if this is speculation or if a fourth has indeed been officially confirmed.
> 
> ...


----------



## Noodley (18 Jul 2008)

Nick1979 said:


> Not quite...



Thanks fro the link, I was aware it was available prior to 2007 but did not think it was available 7 years ago. I've no idea what is particularly significant about 7 years ago BTW...


----------



## marinyork (18 Jul 2008)

The beeb are saying Piepoli has been fired by the team an hour ago as AlanH says. !

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/cycling/7514224.stm


----------



## SheilaH (18 Jul 2008)

...fired by his team, despite no apparent failing of dope test (yet). Bet Ricco grassed him up. What a pair of turds.


----------



## Chuffy (18 Jul 2008)

Funny, I've just been reading about Piepoli in the Pantani biography. Never heard of him before and had been thinking to myself 'is that the same chap who just won a stage? However old must he be?'
No wonder Ricco knew that Piepoli was going to take the stage...


----------



## andy_wrx (18 Jul 2008)

Conspiracy theory : I wonder if this new test has actually been around for a little while but just been unveiled now ? 

WADA is of course an Olympics sub-division, not part of UCI. 

Either it's just before the Olympics but perhaps so close to them that anyone who's been on the juice will be caught because they'll still have this stuff detectable in their system and hence we'll have a clean Olympics with all the dopers either staying at home or being caught 

Or it's far enough away from the Olympics that anyone on the stuff will promptly stop it and arrive in Beijing and be tested and be clear, hence we'll have a clean Olympics because no-one will test positive.


So I'm not sure if it's Christian Prudhomme/ASO + AFLD, so much as WADA/IOC + AFLD...but it certainly ain't our old friends Verbruggen and McQuaid who are digging-out the dopers. 

Where Prodhomme/ASO have gone right is to be able to invite who they want and chuck-out who they want without having to wait for B-samples, long drawn-out court cases, etc. 

It's the who-won-the-2006-Tour-? dragging-on until 2008 and all the *rsing-about with Rasmussen last year which damaged the Tour's reputation. 
This year's they-test-positive-we-kick-em-out-no-questions-no-appeal approach is very positive. 
I think if the Rasmussen case came-up this year, they'd chuck him out - last year they felt they'd been given a poisoned chalice because UCI/Danish Federation knew all about it before the Tour, but leaving the Tour and ASO to take the damage when it came out into the press.


----------



## doyler78 (18 Jul 2008)

I may have this wrong however I think andy you have this issue confused. ASO removing the rider from the TdF and the appeals against a riders sacking are two completely different issues as is the issue of appeals against a doping ban. Nothing that ASO has done will prevent a legal challenge to a doping ban should Ricardo Ricco be banned by his federation.

Rasmussen's Raboband team paid heavily for not folllowing the correct procedures in their dismissal of the rider and again that has nothing to do with ASO. That is a matter for the team.


----------



## wafflycat (18 Jul 2008)

John the Monkey said:


> According to the BR live TdeF commentary feed, rumours are surfacing of Piepoli testing positive now.



Apparently Piepoli has been sacked from Saunier Duval along with Ricco

_edit: oops... didn't see earlier post.._

_edit again... remind me... which was the team the now utterly clean David Millar rode for when he came back from his drugs ban. What a coincidence! Just fancy that!_


----------



## doyler78 (18 Jul 2008)

Ricco has been on italian tv and he will definitely be fighting any ban so any hope that this would be end of the matter are as I suspected are far of the mark.

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/Ricco_speaks_on_Italian_television_article_263788.html


----------



## Chuffy (18 Jul 2008)

doyler78 said:


> Ricco has been on italian tv and he will definitely be fighting any ban so any hope that this would be end of the matter are as I suspected are far of the mark.
> 
> http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/Ricco_speaks_on_Italian_television_article_263788.html


It's the end so far as his involvement in the Tour goes. Bet that ASO will let him play again next year, or ever? 
Go Monsieur Rudehomme!


----------



## Chuffy (18 Jul 2008)

"Asked if he had ever used EPO, Ricco said: “You'll find out in the next few days. I'm going to see my lawyer tomorrow and we'll start my defence."
The word 'no' was clearly too much for the Worm....


----------



## fossyant (18 Jul 2008)

Well hopefully this sh1t may stop.............

The drugs are developed for 'medical patients' then abused... the detection is obviously there now, as the developers know of the 'mis-use' !........ thank goodness they know what's going on...

I've watched Le Tour for 25 years, and it's been a massive catch up exercise to catch these cheats - finally are we able to stop them.........


----------



## doyler78 (18 Jul 2008)

Chuffy said:


> It's the end so far as his involvement in the Tour goes. Bet that ASO will let him play again next year, or ever?
> Go Monsieur Rudehomme!



Yeah but it was the end for Rassmussen and Landis as well yet the point was made that somehow ASO handling of the situation this year had changed things so that the whole wrangling over their dismissal/ban would somehow stop. It doesn't change that end of things one little bit.

I would indeed be very surprised if he ever rode the TdF again and with ASO starting to take control of professional cycle racing it is unlikely he will find a team to take him as they would leave themselves without any invite to any races run by ASO so I guess a result from that point of view.

Still don't like ASO ever increasing dominance in the sport but I suppose they can do things that the UCI and national federations struggle to do because they (UCI et al) have to be much more careful as they have a legal relationship with the rider as they issue/withdraw licenses whereas the relationship that exists on the ASO side is with the Team as they can place contract terms which could be described at best as draconian upon them using their unique position as the organisers of the worlds most famous cycle race but that's another debate.


----------



## Noodley (18 Jul 2008)

I reckon WADA and ASO will be a better partnership than UCI and 'anybody else' cos we're UCI and you do what we say and we think we are kings and will continue to support structures which do not tackle doping


----------



## Noodley (19 Jul 2008)

Have a read of this:

http://sittingin.bicycling.com/


----------



## mondobongo (19 Jul 2008)

Has he got a point? Do we watch and wait for the positive? Are we some sort of Ambulance chasers?

Just maybe we are and the question must be asked:

Just how would we respond to the Tour if 1 year there were no positives not a cover up simply no one doped? Relief, proud or would we be a little disapointed.


----------



## doyler78 (19 Jul 2008)

Noodley said:


> Have a read of this:
> 
> http://sittingin.bicycling.com/



At last another view which doesn't merely parrot the party line.

To answer mondobongo last point I think we will probably say it was the most boring race we have ever watched. Why? Because to do 21 days hard competition and to expect huge attacks in the mountains without someone in there who has been on the juice then it is perhaps too much to expect. The teams managers have too much control over races in today's modern race that you are not going to see the favourites ride of the front away from the riders unless they are on an exceptionally good day or they are doped to the eyeballs or have a juiced up team to drag them up the mountains high enough that they can launch an attack on their meagre energy reserves.

He sees the reality that doping is now and always will be a part of the sport. Many will find that depressing and I suspect that is because they have been fed this notion for the last 10 years that doping will be eliminated from the sport and when it's not they bawl their eyes like some child who can't think for themselves. A bit of reality please. Expect a tough and well structured anti-doping strategy by all means and then even with that expect positives that way you won't feel the need to languish and beat yourself up over how your sport is being destroyed. What is destroying it is unrealistic expectations.


----------



## yello (19 Jul 2008)

It's a perspective, and an interesting one. But, for me, it doesn't translate into reality because it excludes the other 'players'. Cycling _isn't_ a theatre event were all the players are working _together_ solely for the audiences amusement. They're competing against _each other_ to win. That's the spectacle and the 'contract'. 

Moreover, I watch the tour to watch these guys compete, and complete on near-as-dammit equal terms. 

Dopers cheat their fellow riders, cheat me and cheat themselves. They sh*t all over that 'contract'.



> I like listening to Amy Winehouse more because she actually did go to rehab



Yes, agreed. But it's not a valid comparison. A more relevant comparison is to ask how many people Winehouse pisses about, lets down and generally f*cks around with because she is a smack head.


----------



## Proto (19 Jul 2008)

Did anyone listen to Matt DeCanio on the BBC Radio 4 programme 'Saturday Live' this morning? Pretty damning stuff and very sad.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/saturdaylive/topical_stories.shtml


----------



## doyler78 (19 Jul 2008)

yello said:


> It's a perspective, and an interesting one. But, for me, it doesn't translate into reality because it excludes the other 'players'. Cycling _isn't_ a theatre event were all the players are working _together_ solely for the audiences amusement. They're competing against _each other_ to win. That's the spectacle and the 'contract'.
> 
> Moreover, I watch the tour to watch these guys compete, and complete on near-as-dammit equal terms.
> 
> ...



And you think actors aren't competing against each other on the stage. Of course they are. They act as a collective and as an individual as do the riders in the TdF.

If you ever expect that you will watch a clean TdF then you are living in a fantasy world and are doomed to much hand wringing over the however many years cycling lasts as a sport if it doesn't outlast you.

Just because we have a year where maybe nobody gets caught during the race doesn't mean that it was a clean race. That is just sticking your head in the sand and that is what has got us in the mess in the first place and is just as reprehensible because it says "if you are going to do it make sure you don't get caught". That is the philosophy of old I hope.

I think anyone that denies that they find the whole sorry episode at least entertaining is perhaps scared to think for themselves as they believe that somehow because you were entertained that somehow that you agree with the dopers. Entertainment comes in any many forms, the good, the bad and the ugly however it is entertaining nonetheless and because we accept the honesty in Winehouse's songs because of her battles in life doesn't mean to say that we enjoy seeing her destroy her life. We accept her music for what it is yet we can see the damage that is being done to her from the excesses of her life. You can hold both positions because you can't put the genie back in the bottle ie deny her music just because it was born out of abject misery. Should we deny ourselves the pleasure of ever enjoying anything unless the circumstances of by which it was created were perfect.


----------



## yello (19 Jul 2008)

Yes, actors are competitive. But they all accept, first and foremost, there is a show to put on. The priority of the athlete is the reverse; win first - that's even if they are about a show!



doyler78 said:


> I think anyone that denies that they find the whole sorry episode at least entertaining is perhaps scared to think for themselves as they believe that somehow because you were entertained that somehow that you agree with the dopers.



Not so. I know drugs exist. I know athletes take them. I'd simply prefer they didn't. It ruins my enjoyment of an event if the athletes are not competing equally. Personally, I don't know how an athlete could dope. They'll know, in their heart of hearts, that they didn't win fairly. It defeats the purpose of competing. So, yes, let them all take dope... but let everyone know about it!

I didn't say I don't find doping sagas 'entertainment' (in a different sense of the word) but as something separate, not as a part of the actual competition. 

As for Amy WInehouse (musical merits aside); you talk her battles, her excesses, her life. This is all to do with the individual, and 'enjoyed' it that context; that's fine. A sporting event has many individuals and, yes, you can 'enjoy' the battles of the individual amongst all of that (and those battles may be personal too) but the context is different. The event, for me at least, is to the sum total of the individuals. 

But it's a moot point doyler78. I can accept we enjoy things differently. I seem to recall that you said you want the dopers out too, and that's the more important bigger picture.


----------



## doyler78 (19 Jul 2008)

YES I WANT DOPERS OUT.

You have totally missed the point.

Last year I got myself so wound up over all the doping that it ruined the TdF for me. This year I took a different perspective. It was to say that there are dopers out there. I don't know who they are though I could guess at a few however all I can do as a fan is to watch the sport and accept the race for what is. If someone is found to have doped then you throw them out and I continue to watch. It disappoints me when it happens but it doesn't surprise me.

I enjoyed watching Ricco just march of the front of main rivals. That was fantastic entertainment. He was found to have doped he was thrown out and the race still continues and I will continue to watch and take each days racing as it comes.

That isn't an approach which supports doping it is just one which accept that shoot happens. What I am not going to let happen this year is that those that are juiced up to their eyeballs ruin my enjoyment of the race.

If you get so het up about the doping and do so to the extent that you aren't enjoying the cycling or questioning every result then cycling may as well be dead for you. You can choose to take yourself down that path if you want but I'm not.


----------



## MichaelM (19 Jul 2008)

The only thing that surprises me, is that people are surprised when a rider tests positive.

I enjoy watching the tour, but do so on the assumption that most, if not all riders are at the very least pushing the limits of what is clean/legal. 



Noodley said:


> Have a read of this:
> 
> http://sittingin.bicycling.com/




I got as far as:

_I mean, Ricco was, literally, unbelievable, the way he was riding those mountains, his hands down in the drops, sprinting away from the best climbers in the world, up out of the saddle and pouncing on the steepness of the grade whenever his pace slacked, and the way he threw his arms in the air at the line each time, as if presenting himself to us rather than celebrating._

As I read that, in my mind was the voice of the commentator (Sherwen?) saying something along the lines of _ this young man is unbelievable, the way he leaves the best sprinters in the world behind. They just can't live with him_ -as Cavendish took his fourth stage. 

But one of the gifted new generation wouldn't stoop to such depths would he. How many of you thought that of Rico?

Enjoy the Circus, I will.


----------



## yello (19 Jul 2008)

doyler78 said:


> You have totally missed the point.



No I haven't. I just see the subject differently.

I am not being naive. I know there are dopers. They annoy me. All I have ever done is attempt to explain why they annoy me. That has nothing to do with how you see things, but that's not the point. We have different perspectives. Equally, I don't share the perspective of that article. 



> If you get so het up about the doping and do so to the extent that you aren't enjoying the cycling or questioning every result then cycling may as well be dead for you. You can choose to take yourself down that path if you want but I'm not.



Now you're just reading something into my view point! I've not said that I'm not enjoying the cycling, nor do I question every result. When Ricco burst out of the bunch, not for one moment did I think 'dope'. Maybe I'm an innocent, but I just thought it was incredible. There you have it in a nutshell; he duped me.

But I don't understand why you're getting angry? I don't think you're supporting the dopers in any way. Moreover, I'm not disagreeing with anyone's view. I'm quite happy for everyone to enjoy the tour any way they like.

As MichealM has just said...



> I enjoy watching the tour, but do so on the assumption that most, if not all riders are at the very least pushing the limits of what is clean/legal.



That's my take on it too. It's like an unwritten contract. Dopers break that contract. That's why I get upset. End of.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (19 Jul 2008)

> As I read that, in my mind was the voice of the commentator (Sherwen?) saying something along the lines of this young man is unbelievable, the way he leaves the best sprinters in the world behind. They just can't live with him -as Cavendish took his fourth stage.



Yeah but sprinting is a whole different thing - you get protected by your team all day, sheltered from the wind, helped back back if you drop behind, and as long as the peleton stays together, you have a good chance in the final 500 metres. It's about teams and one single explosive burst. Riding away from the entire field over the mountains is a whole different kettle of fish. I would find it unbelievable if Cavendish made a breakaway and got 15 minutes on the peleton, or did anything except finish in the autobus on a mountain stage, or even won a time trial...


----------



## MichaelM (19 Jul 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Yeah but sprinting is a whole different thing - you get protected by your team all day, sheltered from the wind, helped back back if you drop behind, and as long as the peleton stays together, you have a good chance in the final 500 metres. It's about teams and one single explosive burst. Riding away from the entire field over the mountains is a whole different kettle of fish. I would find it unbelievable if Cavendish made a breakaway and got 15 minutes on the peleton, or did anything except finish in the autobus on a mountain stage, or even won a time trial...




Abdujaparov and Zabel spring to mind - but they were Eastern block weren't they.

Where's Tom Boonen this year? 

Sprinters take drugs too.


----------



## doyler78 (19 Jul 2008)

yello said:


> But it's a moot point doyler78. I can accept we enjoy things differently. I seem to recall that you said you want the dopers out too, and that's the more important bigger picture.



That sounded to me like you were suggesting that I had changed my opinion on wanting dopers out so I just made it plain that anti-doping was my view.

That was comment was intended as a general comment about not enjoying the cycling however I must admit you did give me that impression however I'm glad that isn't the case.

As regards MichaelM's comment which you quoted well let's hope its this side of legal that we are talking about otherwise you might have the equality already that we all seek ie if most are doping then we have a pretty equal field then


----------



## doyler78 (19 Jul 2008)

Tom Boonen was barred not for using performance enhancing drugs but because he used a drug which in the current climate couldn't be tolerated by the ASO. It was cocaine.

I'm sure that there must be performance enhancing drugs out there that can benefit the sprinter also however I don't really know much about the pharmacology of certain drugs and their potential to enhance performance.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (19 Jul 2008)

MichaelM said:


> Abdujaparov and Zabel spring to mind - but they were Eastern block weren't they.



There was systematic doping in the Eastern bloc sports system - it has been admitted. 



> Where's Tom Boonen this year?



I don't think it's ever been suggested that Tom Boonen has taken anything more than coke - but if you have some evidence we don't, feel free... 

We are talking about performance enhancement here, not recreation. 

And, of course sprinters take drugs, but you can't really see a great deal of evidence of that in Cavendish's performances. What you can see is youth, self-belief and peak fitness, none of which will last more than a few years.


----------



## MichaelM (19 Jul 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> There was systematic doping in the Eastern bloc sports system - it has been admitted.



I pretty much predicted that as a come back.



Flying_Monkey said:


> I don't think it's ever been suggested that Tom Boonen has taken anything more than coke - but if you have some evidence we don't, feel free...



I know why he's not at the tour. Only cocaine? That's ok then.



Flying_Monkey said:


> And, of course sprinters take drugs, but you can't really see a great deal of evidence of that in Cavendish's performances.



What did Millar say on his blog... If it looks too good....



Flying_Monkey said:


> What you can see is youth, self-belief and peak fitness, none of which will last more than a few years.



Something similar was being said of Rico the other day. Young, new generation, talented....

Like I said, I enjoy watching the tour. But it seems that the press/commentators will praise British cyclists to the high heavens. An unbelievable ride by a Brit is down to talent and hard work, an unbelievable ride by an anyone else is too good to be true. 

Nearly time for the afternoon circus. 

Enjoy.


----------



## Keith Oates (19 Jul 2008)

If I was so convinced, as some people seem to be, that all top cyclists are on performance enhancing drugs and that is upsets me to know this, I would go away and join a tiddleywink club!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Flying_Monkey (19 Jul 2008)

MichaelM said:


> I pretty much predicted that as a come back.



Well, aren't you the prophet... seriously, though, it's predictable because it is true. If you have anything more to say about from some less than informative comments, then feel free...



> I know why he's not at the tour. Only cocaine? That's ok then.



You can think what you like about recreational drugs, you can be a puritan or a party monster, but whatever you think, it has nothing to do with performance enhancement and no-one with any credibility is suggesting it is. Now, I am not going to tell you that Boonen doesn't dope, but you have nothing apart from insinuations. 



> What did Millar say on his blog... If it looks too good....



I've already explained why its very different for a sprinter. Now, again I am not telling you absolutely he doesn't dope, but again, you have nothing at all. Quite a lot of people around the professional scene have been voicing suspicions of Ricco before, but again, I haven't heard anyone with any credibility suggesting anything about Cavendish. And what's more, High Road were one of the first teams to introduce blood passports. So, what's your inside scoop?


----------



## MichaelM (19 Jul 2008)

There is no inside scoop. Nor do I need any inside scoop to believe it to be possible that any rider could use an illegal substance. I wouldn't be surprised if there were more positive tests this year, I certainly wouldn't be upset.




Flying_Monkey said:


> And what's more, High Road were one of the first teams to introduce blood passports. So, what's your inside scoop?



Now Team Columbia. And then they go and appoint Rolf Aldag as team manager. That wouldn't be the same Rolf Aldag who didn't test positive but later apologised for using EPO following accusations of a former team Telecom member would it?

Obviously not evidence against current Columbia riders, but then there's Riis at CSC, Astana doing whatever it is they are doing these days....

I'd love to be able to believe that cycling is clean, but I just can't.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (20 Jul 2008)

MichaelM said:


> Now Team Columbia. And then they go and appoint Rolf Aldag as team manager. That wouldn't be the same Rolf Aldag who didn't test positive but later apologised for using EPO following accusations of a former team Telecom member would it?



I know it is now Columbia, but they introduced the system when they were High Road... 

Now, almost every manager and coach is from the era of almost universal drug taking. It hardly tells us anything. Basically your argument is that no-one ever changes for any reason. If nothing else, the financial interests of the sport can make people take a different approach, but people do change their ideas and approaches for all sorts of reasons. I know this from my own life. No-one is suggesting David Millar is still on EPO. And even Mr Sixty Percent himself is backing blood passports at CSC... 


> > I'd love to be able to believe that cycling is clean, but I just can't.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## MichaelM (20 Jul 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> I know it is now Columbia, but they introduced the system when they were High Road...
> 
> Now, almost every manager and coach is from the era of almost universal drug taking. It hardly tells us anything.



Aldag was there when it was Highroad. Admitted to doping when it was High Road. He didn't do it out of remorse, he did it as he was unable to deny it. Columbia took over, and kept Aldag on. It tells us there's a team manager who at best will hide the truth for as long he can get away with it, and an employer that doesn't seem to care about that. 

And as for Peiper - " I tried to race clean most of the time".



Flying_Monkey said:


> Basically your argument is that no-one ever changes for any reason.



I didn't say anything of the sort. I'm saying that cyclists have a proven track record blatantly lying, cheating, and of being evasive. 




Flying_Monkey said:


> And even Mr Sixty Percent himself is backing blood passports at CSC...



Another one who wouldn't admit to doping until he couldn't deny it any longer.



Flying_Monkey said:


> Who is arguing that cycling is clean - and what does that mean anyway? .




I'll put it another way. When a group of people are training, racing, eating, sleeping, and spending so much time together - I'd expect at least one of them to pick up on any "abnormal" behaviour.


I'll quote you from another thread:

_It is actually not good enough for Saunier-Duval's management to say that they didn't know. _

That should apply to the management of all teams.



Flying_Monkey said:


> I am just arguing that some people are making an effort. You seem to be arguing that any effort is pointless, or not to be believed, or that anyone who wins is s a suspect. It's as cynical and unhelpful as the reverse is naive and blind. We should support the efforts of teams to adopt continuous monitoring and schemes like the blood passport, and oppose those who don't.



There's not enough effort being made. You mentioned yourself that some of Rico's previous results were raising questions. Why, if there was no evidence against him at the time? It's because pretty much anyone who wins IS a suspect. 



Flying_Monkey said:


> As for Cavendish, read Prudhomme's comments in the Observer today. Prudhomme is never slow to condemn those he suspects (to the point of rudeness) and he is no particular friend of Britain, but he is utterly convinced of Cavendish's natural talent. Not only is there no reason at all to suspect that he is taking anything illegal, there is almost every reason to believe that he is not.



I don't genuinely believe Cavendish is doping, but there's a possibility, no matter how small that he could be.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (20 Jul 2008)

Michael - I am beginning to wonder why exactly you arguing against in what I have said. You now seem to be generally agreeing with me. And your whole series of posts on Cavendish now seems to havs been because there is a 'small' possibility that 'he could be' doping. Let's concentrate on the teams who are genuinely doing nothing (like Saunier Duval) rather than speculate wildly about teams who are making a serious effort (like Columbia and Garmin-Chipotle). 

However I still don't get what your point is about Aldag - like most of his generation he doped. Like most he didn't say anything until be had to. These days he is involved with a team that is committed to a clean and open system. Good for him. Some of the old guard know which way the wind is blowing. With your logic you would never believe anything good of anyone who had ever done things of which we disapprove. Gerry Adams really did give up violence and help develop the peace process in Northern Ireland - if that's possible, I am sure it is possible for Aldag to manage a cycle team that tries to stamp out doping...


----------



## MichaelM (20 Jul 2008)

I picked up on Aldag/ Columbia as I don't like the attitude of the likes of Gary Imlach, the press, the commentators...

T mobile became became High Road which became Columbia. Following the 2006 Tour out went the old and in came the new. A statement against doping. Aldag. Who then had to own up for the past in May 07. For the 2007 Tour,T Mobile were supposed to be the new standard bearers of clean cycling. Didn't go too well. T Mobile withdrew sponsorship, in came High Road. 

Despite Aldag now having (been forced to) come clean, and the events at the 07 Tour, he was kept on. Doesn't really make much of an anti doping statement (to me anyway). So High Road are now Columbia. Who seem to be praised as the standard bearers for clean cycling.

I simply do not believe it. Call me negative, call me cynical (or anything else), realistic is probably the word I'd use. I'm not the only one - Barloworld comes to mind.

CSC kept Riis at the helm through the Basso affair. Liberty Seguros became Astana. 

Each day there's Ligget/Sherwen pronouncing the latest unbelievable/heroic ride by someone or another (Andy Schleck today), when things go wrong (+ve tests) they'll claim it was too good to be true anyway.....

I'm at the point where when they say "this is unbelievable" (think Voight) I think yes it probably is.

Enough of my ramblings. I enjoy it for what it is, and suspect that most of the riders are competing on an even field anyway.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (21 Jul 2008)

Your history is correct apart from one key point: 'High Road' were not sponsors - it was (and remains) the name of the company that operates what is now Team Columbia and the name was specifically chosen to indicate a new direction - the 'high road' of clean sport as opposed to the 'low road' of doping. The testing programme they operate is independently administered (i.e.: not done in house) and approved by WADA as exemplary. So whoever is at the top and whatever they have done in the past, they can't subvert the system even if they wanted to. 

BTW, Barloworld never had a coherent anti-doping scheme - some British fans just seemed to assume they were okay because they had a British connection, some British riders, and came up from below. 

In the end, I still enjoy the sport regardless too...


----------



## doyler78 (21 Jul 2008)

Here is a interesting article from a bbc investigation into potential collusion between athletes and testing facilities and also the general quality of the testing in WADA approved facilities.

It doesn't make for good read

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7516484.stm


----------



## Tetedelacourse (21 Jul 2008)

Sprinters don't dope? Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Question: Why would a rider take CERA?
Answer: To enhance endurance performance. 

The effects of CERA (or any EPO strain) are on endurance ability through increasing the body's ability to transport oxygen to the muscles. Correct? There might be no benefit to a sprinter whatsoever in taking EPO if a stage was 200m long.

Stages are not 200m long. Sprinters have less natural ability than others to get to the end of a stage (fast twitch vs slow twitch) so to say that there's no advantage to a sprinter in taking EPO is very very wrong indeed!

Cavendish has been the sprint version of Ricco this year. It's completely valid to be suspicious of his performances.


----------



## mondobongo (21 Jul 2008)

Tetedelacourse said:


> Cavendish has been the sprint version of Ricco this year. It's completely valid to be suspicious of his performances.



Typical British mentality build someone up put them on a pedestal and then kick it over!!

Yes there is a possibility that Cav has been naughty but I and plenty of others don't think he has because of where he has come from and who he has been nurtured by for a start and thats before you even look at the man himself. Cavendish is a real talent enjoy it.


----------



## MichaelM (21 Jul 2008)

mondobongo said:


> Typical British mentality build someone up put them on a pedestal and then kick it over!!



I'd argue it's the likes of Imlach who are putting him on a pedastal.




mondobongo said:


> Yes there is a possibility that Cav has been naughty but I and plenty of others don't think he has because of where he has come from and who he has been nurtured by for a start and thats before you even look at the man himself. Cavendish is a real talent enjoy it.



From Cycling Weekly _Cavendish decided to retire after speaking at length with Columbia directeur sportif *Brian Holm* and his personal coach and mentor Rod Ellingworth of British Cycling. _

Another one who admitted to using EPO in 2007 (though he admitted to doping in his book in 02).


----------



## Flying_Monkey (21 Jul 2008)

MichaelM said:


> Another one who admitted to using EPO in 2007 (though he admitted to doping in his book in 02).



And I will repeat, Team Columbia and Garmin-Chipotle have an independently administered intensive testing programme run by http://www.agencyforcyclingethics.com/. If you know of any evidence that Holm or Aldag or anyone else has found a way of subverting these tests (which include a full blood passport and 26 tests a year minimum for each rider) then please let us know how. Just saying 'he used to dope' is no evidence at all because just about everyone of that generation used to dope. 

So Michael and Tete, why not attack the people who are doing nothing, not the people who are doing about as much as they could?


----------



## MichaelM (21 Jul 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Your history is correct apart from one key point: 'High Road' were not sponsors - it was (and remains) the name of the company that operates what is now Team Columbia and the name was specifically chosen to indicate a new direction - the 'high road' of clean sport as opposed to the 'low road' of doping.



If I was in charge at a company with such stated aims, I would not employ Aldag, Holm or Peiper. 

Udo Bolts was another who was forced into admitting to using EPO in 07, he is reported to have resigned from Gerolsteiner as a result. 

I say reported to have resigned, as either he felt an element of shame and did so of his own will, or he was forced in to it by the team. Aldag , Holm and Peiper obviously feel no such shame and High Road do not seem to aspire to achieve their own aims.




Flying_Monkey said:


> And I will repeat, Team Columbia and Garmin-Chipotle have an independently administered intensive testing programme run by http://www.agencyforcyclingethics.com/. If you know of any evidence that Holm or Aldag or anyone else has found a way of subverting these tests (which include a full blood passport and 26 tests a year minimum for each rider) then please let us know how. Just saying 'he used to dope' is no evidence at all because just about everyone of that generation used to dope.
> 
> So Michael and Tete, why not attack the people who are doing nothing, not the people who are doing about as much as they could?



The BBC report doesn't read too good depending on how much weight you want to give it.

I'm not only saying _ he used to dope_. I'm saying not only did he dope, but he tried his best to deny/hide/muddy the issue. Set yourself out on the High Road and you need to be whiter than white.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (21 Jul 2008)

So basically you have nothing at all, you just don't like the fact that the teams in question employ ex-pros who used to dope back when there was a culture of doping. Who would you suggest they employed as coaches and managers instead, given that practically riding in that generation (and before) doped in some way (and probably lied about it too)? The only alternative is people who have never cycled and a lot of good that will do a cycling team... 

The fact is that you have to look at what the teams are doing, and what they are doing now - that's the only way you can start to make any judgement as to whether their riders are riding clean.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (21 Jul 2008)

And that's it from me, because this is just starting to go round in circles.


----------



## Chuffy (21 Jul 2008)

It sticks in the throat somewhat to see the likes of Riis at a high level in team management but if everyone with a dodgy past was stripped out then there would be almost no-one left.


----------



## Noodley (21 Jul 2008)

How about if they repent and evidence they have changed? And only then are they permitted to work for a team...loads of people who work on teams still approve of it. 

IIRC Riis was recently quoted as saying nobody cares anymore if he doped when he won. (don't ask for a reference as I can't remember where I read it)... Wrong!


----------



## Chuffy (21 Jul 2008)

Noodley said:


> How about if they repent and evidence they have changed? And only then are they permitted to work for a team...loads of people who work on teams still approve of it.
> 
> IIRC Riis was recently quoted as saying nobody cares anymore if he doped when he won. (don't ask for a reference as I can't remember where I read it)... Wrong!


Riis' attitude, so far as I can tell, seems to be 'so what, I don't give a toss' Maybe he's just arrogant but I can see why MichaelM would be uneasy about the likes of him running teams. However, if the tide really is turning towards teams having to put independent testing in place then people like him will have no choice but to play it straight.


----------



## yello (21 Jul 2008)

Oddly, I read that link from the beeb with a positive take.... from a purely cycling perspective. I mean, cycling is getting to grips with the problem when clearly it's not just a problem in cycling. The fact that athletes are doping, and there is purportedly collusion with testing agencies, is not good news but maybe we could say that cycling is ahead of any other sport in dealing with it by more regular testing and clear action on positives. 

It crossed my mind that some men's tennis matches are pretty impressive feats of endurance. Can anyone remember who's name was mentioned during Operation Puerto? I wonder what, say, the LTA's testing policy is like?


----------



## doyler78 (21 Jul 2008)

yello said:


> Oddly, I read that link from the beeb with a positive take.... from a purely cycling perspective. I mean, cycling is getting to grips with the problem when clearly it's not just a problem in cycling. The fact that athletes are doping, and there is purportedly collusion with testing agencies, is not good news but maybe we could say that cycling is ahead of any other sport in dealing with it by more regular testing and clear action on positives.
> 
> It crossed my mind that some men's tennis matches are pretty impressive feats of endurance. Can anyone remember who's name was mentioned during Operation Puerto? I wonder what, say, the LTA's testing policy is like?




I see what you mean in so far as it helps to lift the lid on the other sports which are not taking action however with the possible failings in the testing facilities and the alleged collusion between personnel in these facilities and the dopers then it really is bad news for all sports, including cycling. There is no point in having more regular testing, etc if the samples are not properly analysed or are tampered with by personnel in these facilities 

I think cycling has been forced to take the iniative because it could no longer allow its image to be damaged more and more each year and that will bring benefits later on as we will hopefully show other sports the way but until people see tangible signs that the tide is turning then we will always remain the bad guys.


----------



## yello (21 Jul 2008)

doyler78 said:


> There is no point in having more regular testing, etc if the samples are not properly analysed or are tampered with by personnel in these facilities



Agreed. I'm thinking the percentage game. A doping athlete is tested more often by a number of labs then _hopefully_ there's a chance they'll get caught at some point! Oh, I live in an optimistic and naive world!!


----------



## Tetedelacourse (22 Jul 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> And I will repeat, Team Columbia and Garmin-Chipotle have an independently administered intensive testing programme run by http://www.agencyforcyclingethics.com/. If you know of any evidence that Holm or Aldag or anyone else has found a way of subverting these tests (which include a full blood passport and 26 tests a year minimum for each rider) then please let us know how. Just saying 'he used to dope' is no evidence at all because just about everyone of that generation used to dope.
> 
> So Michael and Tete, why not attack the people who are doing nothing, not the people who are doing about as much as they could?



FM you seem to be of the opinion that there is no benefit to sprinters in doping. That is patently not the case as I tried to outline above. You also seem to think that it is not valid to be suspicious of a rider who in his 2nd tdf picks up 4 stage wins, despite the current climate of unbelievable rides turning out to be just that. Here we disagree. 

I don't hold the same opinion as Michael as far as DS with tainted histories goes - I think that was then, this is now and I think the same of Millar - but I absolutely agree with him that it sounded ridiculous of Imlach to state that Cavendish was categorically clean when he simply did not know that to be a fact (lag in test results being released).

Also if you've read any of my other posts on the subject of doping, you'd see that I believe it to be a team responsibility as well as a rider responsibility, and I have attacked those who are doing nothing, frequently.


----------



## Tetedelacourse (22 Jul 2008)

Flying_Monkey said:


> And that's it from me, because this is just starting to go round in circles.



Right-o


----------

