More F#@$ing Dopers

[craign]

Are coming out of the woodwork everywhere (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/may07/may24news2), looks like the house of cards might fall down?

[chie]

Disappointing, I really hope no Australian's that I have respect for have doped.

This time of the year is beginning to feel like the season for admitting to some form of doping.

[Dozer]

Does the pressure of professional cycling convince them to do something to enhance their performance? Do they tell themselves that doping is the way to go if you want to win? Geez, you'd be pretty hard pressed to want to give doping a go knowing that if / when you get caught or confess you will be hated bitterly.
I'm surprised about Zabel, he has had some pretty bloody good results in his time and a lot of people have a high admiration for him. He would now be frowned upon surely!
I don't understand why they would do it! Was that big win or that one big ride worth it after you got busted? Dumb arses...........

[Some Guy]

I don't understand why they would do it! Was that big win or that one big ride worth it after you got busted? Dumb arses...........

Because it's the culture of elite road cycling. If you know (or think you know) everyone beating you is on drugs, and the governing body seems powerless to stop it, it takes a very strong force of will to resist following suit. Especially when you have the pressure of needing results for your team and sponsors.

It's not right, but I can understand how it comes about.

[Oracle]

FFS, not another one. I've always loved watching TDF, but at the rate riders are being exposed there won't be many BIG names left. It's so dissapointing! :(

[McBain]

Disappointing, I really hope no Australian's that I have respect for have doped.They will have - it is too deeply ingrained in the pro peleton for them to have avoided at least trying them, much like Zabel did.

[Oracle]

Because it's the culture of elite road cycling. If you know (or think you know) everyone beating you is on drugs, and the governing body seems powerless to stop it, it takes a very strong force of will to resist following suit.

I'm not sure I agree. If proven guilty riders are banned for 2 years. Compare that with AFL where currently players are allowed a number of 'infractions' before suspensions are imposed.

[craign]

Thats only for recreational drugs. AFL players who test for performance enhancers don't get chances.

[Some Guy]

I'm not sure I agree. If proven guilty riders are banned for 2 years. Compare that with AFL where currently players are allowed a number of 'infractions' before suspensions are imposed.

So which part don't you agree with? The powerless to stop it part? The penalties may be harsh, but thier methods of catching riders aren't all that effective. And drugs don't seem to be less rife now than they have been.

[dunk]

Thats only for recreational drugs. AFL players who test for performance enhancers don't get chances.

It seems they can get a chance, you can have a warning for a first offence:rolleyes:



Presence of a prohibited substance
Two years first offence or life ban for a subsequent
offence.
Exceptional circumstances
At a minimum a warning for a first offence or one year
ineligibility, two years for a second offence and life ban
for a third offence.
Card

[Oracle]

So which part don't you agree with? The powerless to stop it part? The penalties may be harsh, but thier methods of catching riders aren't all that effective. And drugs don't seem to be less rife now than they have been.

Sorry, my previous post wasn't very clear. Yes I arguing that I don't agree that "governing body seems powerless to stop it". Compared to some sports I think pro cycling at least appears to ensure/enforce that cyclists are drug/doping free.

As for the drug testing, that's a whole new topic, as the theory in so far as the chemistry of the susbtances and human physiology relating to how each drug acts on the body etc is well beyond my knowledge to comment further.

Drugs/doping (in whatever form) will probably always exist at the pro level as everyone remembers those who place (so financial incentives are huge), not those that participate.

[liamo]

Thats only for recreational drugs. AFL players who test for performance enhancers don't get chances.

It seems they can get a chance, you can have a warning for a first offence:rolleyes:

And, at first glance, it appears that 'recreational drugs' in this instance overrides WADA's banned list. So speed and other amphetamines may not even warrant anything more than a match suspension, no matter how many offences? And a confidential one at that? :eek: Surely not...

From the AFLPA (http://www.aflpa.com.au/index.cfm?id=D0E34044-CBED-E222-264E9F39BA893C29)
The AFL's anti-doping policy expressly incorporates all banned substances and methods on the WADA list with some limited exceptions.
....
Under the AFL's Illicit Drugs Policy, positive tests for illicit drugs result in reprimands and formal medical counselling in the first two instances, and match suspensions for third and subsequent offences of up to 12 matches. This approach was agreed between the AFL and AFLPA in January 2005 in anticipation of WADA taking a tougher stance on illicit drugs notwithstanding their lack of performance enhancing effect. The AFL and AFLPA undertook detailed research and analysis when determining how it would deal with cannabinoid's, narcotics and stimulants under its Illicit Drugs Policy and sought the best possible information from around the sporting and medical world. We were consistently advised that the best way to deal with any illicit drug problem is confidential counsellingOf course I could be reading too much into this as I can't find exactly what the exeptions are...
Liam

[n plus one]

I know guys on 'roids so they're tougher for local footy.

I can't believe anyone could genuinely be suprised that people with as much need/financial incentive/desire/competitiveness /drive as professional sports people would use them.

Surely we are all being a bit naive' to think otherwise?

[McBain]

Surely we are all being a bit naive' to think otherwise?As has been said by wiser people than me: You can't stop people taking drugs for fun, so how can you stop them from taking drugs for money?

[liamo]

As has been said by wiser people than meFunniest post in ages :p

We probably are somewhat naive to expect professional sports to be dope free. But I'm still interested to see what changes, if any, a stronger public stance on doping will have on the peleton in the next few years/decades.

Liam

[Mattydv]

Disappointing, but at least Zabel admitted it. If he took EPO in 1996, he wasn't going to be caught anytime soon...

I still have absolute and total respect for Lance Armstrong though. Never turned down a drug test, and has actually INVITED the medical team to come and test him to shut the french media up. He won 7 TDF in a row. Who said you need to take drugs to win?

[craign]

And it keeps coming (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/may07/may26news).

[Mattydv]

Whilst he may now regret taking EPO, I wonder if he put any pressure on Floyd Landis to take testosterone while on tour?

[bg851]

Disappointing, but at least Zabel admitted it. If he took EPO in 1996, he wasn't going to be caught anytime soon...

I still have absolute and total respect for Lance Armstrong though. Never turned down a drug test, and has actually INVITED the medical team to come and test him to shut the french media up. He won 7 TDF in a row. Who said you need to take drugs to win?

Sorry mate, but if you think Lance was clean, your dreaming! If all his rivals were all on everything, and Lance could still beat them, clean?? something doesnt add up!! Yeah, Lance never failed a drug test, but either did any of the others who have fessed up lately, or Marco Pantani, David Millar etc etc. Just because they have never been caught doesnt mean they weren't on it champ!!! Lance, with all his money behind him probably has or had his own "doctor" at the BALCO labs, mixing him his own mix! If They dont know what he is on, how can they possible test for it?

As for the comment about AFL players.....DONT GET ME STARTED!!!!
When sports like AFL and Rugby League actually get serious about drugs being a problem, they may one day get a little bit of credibility. (oh, when more than one in AFL or perhaps 2 or 3 (LEAGUE)countries actually play that stupid sport, it may also help cred problems, but thats another story!) When they freely can take shit like cortisone injections, pain killers, there actually considered so brave for doing so! When was the last time a footy player went pos for steroids??? THey wouldnt even be testing for it! But amazingly, these young players, turn up at the start of the season with there necks twice the size they were last season....that dont happen without some assistance!
anyway, could go on for hours about shit like that.......

[Garrath]

Must be damn hard to fit in a decent drug schedule with all those random tests Armstrong had to go through.

Some idle thougts / speculation.......

If he did, then the systems they had in place had to be damn foolproof and also, whats the bet they doped the whole team. (lets face the blue train was damn impressive in them hills) Why is it the moment Hamilton, Heras, Landis etc all leave the team and then get caught - do you think they may have just learn't something from their time in Postal.

Why is it that LAconfidential is yet to be published in English? (I wish it was!!!) Maybe because its not true or more realistically - big lawsuit.

[Garrath]

Should he hand back the Yellow Jersey??? Why, who would you give it to? We already know about Ulrich (2nd) and Verenque (3rd) but what about the rest... I wonder how far down the list we have to go to find a honest / clean rider :D

[Mattydv]

I wonder how far down the list we have to go to find a honest / clean rider :D
Most likely to the domestiques for the lower ranking teams...

[alchemist]

Should he hand back the Yellow Jersey??? Why, who would you give it to? We already know about Ulrich (2nd) and Verenque (3rd) but what about the rest... I wonder how far down the list we have to go to find a honest / clean rider :D

Well 4th place Laurent Dufaux rode for Festina so he's out, maybe Peter Luttenberger? Don't know much about him but his performances seem ordinary enough.

[gustfront]

The fairest thing to do would be to have no winner for that year. If the top half dozen are suspect then the whole race is suspect.

[McBain]

The fairest thing to do would be to have no winner for that year. If the top half dozen are suspect then the whole race is suspect.Where do you stop? No results for the last 40 years?

Just let them dope away. It'll make no difference, except possibly making it safer, since they won't be resorting to dodgy stuff like animal EPO, other people's blood, and possibly unsafe injecting conditions.

[Dumbellina]

You fellas who think Lance (or anyone else) is clean just remember:
* the EPO tests only came about in 2000 - in 1996 they still relied on the grossly inaccurate haemocrit counts
* hetergenous blood doping (ie inject someelse's blood) tests came about in 2004 (hence Tyler Hamiliton's capture)
* homogenous blood doping (ie inject your own blood, whether chilled from the off season or the drug enhanced version from Fuentes' Lab) tests have just come onto the scene
* synthetic testosterone testing is also relative recent
* tests are still being developed for human growth hormones

Let alone any other new substances that BALCO and a myriad of other doping labs are putting out there.

So when someone "has never failed a drug test" is empty statement. They don't say "I have never ever taken a single performance enhance substance".

[liamo]

So when someone "has never failed a drug test" is empty statement. They don't say "I have never ever taken a single performance enhance substance".

Yes they do, or close enough to it. From ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=2140893)Armstrong wrote on his Web site. "I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs."
Liam
Not saying that an empty statement is any better or worse than a lie though ;)

[Dumbellina]

Yes they do, or close enough to it.

Armstrong wrote on his Web site. "I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs."

Not saying that an empty statement is any better or worse than a lie though ;)

Well that is a lie, you take paracetamol or other pain killer, its a drug that improves performance. You drink coffee and have a spoon of sugar, that's performance enhancing. You inject vitamins like so many pros seem to, thats performance enhancing. You inject horse hormones, that's silly.

What is doping and what is legitimate use of chemical substances to improve performance is a matter of opinion, WADA's opinion, or Dick Pound's opinion.

If you want a totally "clean" sport, let them dope because many only dope because they believe the others are doing it or because it gives them the edge over others who are in fact doping. If all riders are on the same juice, then it's a fair race... Also if everyone knows its harm is greater than the percieved advantage, they won't use it. Also if doctors are given the freedom to experiment with doping agents, they can perfect safe doping rather than cyclists alone or in the company of bad peers trusting their dodgy vet. Just playing devil's advocate...

[liamo]

you take paracetamol or other pain killer, its a drug that improves performance. You drink coffee and have a spoon of sugar, that's performance enhancing. You inject vitamins like so many pros seem to, thats performance enhancing. You inject horse hormones, that's silly. By that logic we should ban training as that increases performance too. :D
If you want a totally "clean" sport, let them dope because many only dope because they believe the others are doing it or because it gives them the edge over others who are in fact doping. If all riders are on the same juice, then it's a fair race... Also if everyone knows its harm is greater than the percieved advantage, they won't use it. Also if doctors are given the freedom to experiment with doping agents, they can perfect safe doping rather than cyclists alone or in the company of bad peers trusting their dodgy vet. Just playing devil's advocate...Some people might see that kind of culture as a bad thing. Just because it's hard (impossible?) to change that culture does not mean that we should give up and accept it.

Liam

[Turner_rider]

You fellas who think Lance (or anyone else) is clean just remember:
* the EPO tests only came about in 2000 - in 1996 they still relied on the grossly inaccurate haemocrit counts
* hetergenous blood doping (ie inject someelse's blood) tests came about in 2004 (hence Tyler Hamiliton's capture)
* homogenous blood doping (ie inject your own blood, whether chilled from the off season or the drug enhanced version from Fuentes' Lab) tests have just come onto the scene
* synthetic testosterone testing is also relative recent
* tests are still being developed for human growth hormones

Let alone any other new substances that BALCO and a myriad of other doping labs are putting out there.

So when someone "has never failed a drug test" is empty statement. They don't say "I have never ever taken a single performance enhance substance".

In addition EPO has been commercially available from the late 80s, and its use was reportably known about from around 91 (from old magazine articles I have). This then casts doubt over most race results throughout the whole of the 90s.

At some point you have to move on, in my mind the current results should stand and efforts should concentrate on fixing the current problems.

[Garrath]

At some point you have to move on, in my mind the current results should stand and efforts should concentrate on fixing the current problems.

Couldn't agree more with that comment.

I noted the recent collection of news items on cycling on the ABC news website, 9 of the 10 articles related to drugs in cycling. This is really f#@king around with the sport.

[Pete W]

Well that is a lie, you take paracetamol or other pain killer, its a drug that improves performance. You drink coffee and have a spoon of sugar, that's performance enhancing. You inject vitamins like so many pros seem to, thats performance enhancing. You inject horse hormones, that's silly.

What is doping and what is legitimate use of chemical substances to improve performance is a matter of opinion, WADA's opinion, or Dick Pound's opinion.

If you want a totally "clean" sport, let them dope because many only dope because they believe the others are doing it or because it gives them the edge over others who are in fact doping. If all riders are on the same juice, then it's a fair race... Also if everyone knows its harm is greater than the percieved advantage, they won't use it. Also if doctors are given the freedom to experiment with doping agents, they can perfect safe doping rather than cyclists alone or in the company of bad peers trusting their dodgy vet. Just playing devil's advocate...

Spot on......
I think its time that world sporting bodies should start to realise that prohibition isn't working and the imbalance between them is very hypocritical. like how is one drug bad for one but ok for another.
Control the sport and its athletes.... it may also take the black market/criminal element out of the industry and maybe just maybe the athletes will get better care and advice.
I just read a book about the top riders of the 50's and 60's they were on it then, in a huge way and you are dead set kidding yourself if you believe anyone at that level since hasn't USED!!!!!
Mcbain..... great quote...or loan there of