Vinokourov caught Doping!!!

You people can hate me and call me names. I don't care. That doesn't change the facts.

What two sports do you see getting busted for performance enhancing drug use? Track and Cycling. What two sports have the best testing procedures? Track and Cycling. I don't get made or suprised any more when I see an athlete test positive. Hell, I wouldn't even be suprised if Alan Webb tested positive. I'd shrug it off. A top athlete testing positive isn't an anomaly. What if the US government mandated performance enhancing drug testing tommorrow? Every month, every athlete playing a professional sport in the US would be tested. What do you think would happen? Would you be more shocked at the golfers testing positive or the 3rd string linemen? The NBA benchwarmers or the also ran runner?

Everytime I hear about an athlete testing positive I think back to an SI article printed around 1996 (I think). In a random survey Olympic athletes were asked two questions. One was would they take a PED if they were guaranteed to win every major contest in the next 5 years and never test positive. I don't remember the exact % that responded yes, but it was high (70-80% at least, maybe even closer to 90%). Second question was the same as the above but they would die within 5 years due to side effects. Even more alarming a rather high percentage said yes to that as well (something like 20-30%, maybe higher).

People still come see Bonds hit homers even though it's clear he's on something. MILLIONS of people still line the course of the Tour de France even though it's clear that everyone is on something. If the fans don't care then why should I? Until someone put some serious money into testing the fight will never be won.

Alan

boredman wrote:

Another lame rationalization Alan?

That wasn't Alan, it was a parody.

Look at the poster's name closely now.

sjc wrote:

i hope you start doping then and get cancer or have a heart attack as a result.

people like you are exactly what is wrong with sports because you are basically encouraging drug use. please don't ever post again.

Oh no, he doesn't agree with you...don't let him post here.

Doping is the Red Scare of today.

you're my hero. give yourself a big hug for me.

Look, I agree, and if you read my original post, particularly the excerpt you lifted here, my primary point was NOT that Lance's doping caused his cancer, and, therefore, should have given him plenty of reason not to do it again. I merely threw that in as an aside, because I believe it to be true in his case. My point, if you read what I was actually saying, was that why on earth would anyone who had barely survived a close call with cancer want to risk putting any performance-enhancing drugs into their body whatsoever that might jeopardize their health yet again? And, therefore, because of that overwhelming compulsion, I like every other cycling fan (and cancer survivor for that matter), wanted to believe that Armstrong was doing it cleanly and purely.

But yes, plenty of young males get testicular cancer at a young age with seemingly no apparent cause. On the other hand, a statistically inordinate amount of admitted steroid users also get testicular cancer, so a correlation, while hardly provable, is also not to be completely disregarded either.

Runningart2004 wrote:

Everytime I hear about an athlete testing positive I think back to an SI article printed around 1996 (I think). In a random survey Olympic athletes were asked two questions. One was would they take a PED if they were guaranteed to win every major contest in the next 5 years and never test positive. I don't remember the exact % that responded yes, but it was high (70-80% at least, maybe even closer to 90%). Second question was the same as the above but they would die within 5 years due to side effects. Even more alarming a rather high percentage said yes to that as well (something like 20-30%, maybe higher).

I'm pretty sure I first heard of this when at school, well before 1996. Until you can find an exact reference to it I will believe it's an urban myth that the survey ever existed. And even if it did, it's doesn't mean anything.

The rest of your post was equally vacuous. In summary you say that people take drugs, and the more we test the more we will find. So we should allow it. Like, the more effort we put into detecting financial fraud the more we will find. So let's allow it.

Oh I'm wasting my time, you'll just repeat this garbage word for word on another thread next week anyway.

hypnotoad wrote:

Also today, a German newspaper has brought a story about Contador being involved in Operacion Puerto, but under what resembles a plea bargain, "Document #31" which implicates him was sealed in exchange for his testimony against Dr. Fuentes and other clients. It was a dosage chart which said "A.C. nothing or same dosage as J.J."

Contador is one of the riders Jorg Jaksche (the likely "J.J.") ratted out last month - they both rode on Liberty Seguros who was excluded from the Tour last year. Contador was among the riders later "cleared" and I guess we now know why. If the report is true.

Great. Basically jailhouse snitches are going to clean up doping in the sport.

Did Tyler Hamilton ever locate his twin brother?

Jefe in the CO wrote:

Wait everybody! We mave have jumped the gun on this thing. This just in from Vino's camp...

"Alexandre denies having manipulated his blood," Biver said, adding that the rider believes that "blood anomalies in his body" may have resulted from a crash he was involved in last week." ESPN.com news services

It sounds like it was just one big misunderstanding...

Uh oh, I smell a vanishing twin defense coming.

factpointerouter wrote:

I'm pretty sure I first heard of this when at school, well before 1996. Until you can find an exact reference to it I will believe it's an urban myth that the survey ever existed. And even if it did, it's doesn't mean anything.

It was a study by Dr. Robert Goldman in 1995. Of 198 athletes surveyed, 195 said they would take an undetectable drug.

For the record, I don't agree with Alan's argument. I'm just pointing out that a simple Google search turns up a lot of articles referring to the study.

Jefe in the CO wrote:

Wait everybody! We mave have jumped the gun on this thing. This just in from Vino's camp...

"Alexandre denies having manipulated his blood," Biver said, adding that the rider believes that "blood anomalies in his body" may have resulted from a crash he was involved in last week." ESPN.com news services

It sounds like it was just one big misunderstanding...

Looks like they've learned the lessons from the Landis case. Study the medical evidence in an objective and rational manner over a number of days before making a measured statement on the situation? F*** that, just blurt out the first thing that comes into your head in time for tomorrow's newspapers.

Runningart2004 wrote:

That doesn't change the facts.

it's clear that everyone is on something. If the fans don't care then why should I?

Until someone put some serious money into testing the fight will never be won.

Alan

What facts? You really didn't list any. One survey?

That survey said basically that people would rather go to the STORE and buy a TROPHY than work for, and earn, a TROPHY.

That's what people wish, but that's not what our society works and what it accepts (outside of the inner circles of some sports).

It's CLEAR everyone is on something?

So it's you are guilty until proven innocent. You're backwards.

The fans do care, that's why this thread is so long already, and why it is a top story at ESPN. You should care. Would you tell your kids it's OK to cheat? No.

The UCI and ASO are putting serious money into it that's why they are catching so many riders. After anymore of this they'll probably go crazy and make the Pro riders basically go under house arrest.

But you're probably going throw up the same nonsense all over again.

The poster who said that the subject of doping is not considered a moral issue in cycling made a very good point. Doping is as much a fabric of the culture of the sport as the idea of training at altitude is in running. The best way to understand what's going on is as a culture clash between WADA-type groups that are "outsiders" to cycling and the cycling community itself. Just as an example, as a semi-decent club rider, I've riden with other riders who have openly spoken about how they had doped in the past. Its simply not a point of shame, which is really difficult to understand unless you're a part of the sport. Particularly when as a runner you'd command more respect if you turned out to be a pedophile than if you dope, regardless of the fact that there's a good chance that your competitors are doing the same thing (doping, not pedophilia) but just not getting caught.

Now, with stricter testing the sport of cycling is WORSE off from a "fairness" standpoint. Now being smart about doping is a bigger competitive advantage than talent. I'd much rather see the authorities back off the testing, but keep in place a hematocrit test (where, say, riders with a crit level over 50% wouldn't be able to participate for "health" reasons) to ensure safety and a certain level playing field. That would be a much more fair situation than now, when a few guys are the scapegoats for the entire profession. Not to mention that it would stop the flight of money from the sport.

I honestly don't see any benefit from testing. They're never going to be able to keep up with the doping, as the latest drugs have been in use for a long time before a test is developed. Anyone saying it's a "good thing for the long run" that Vino (or Hamilton or Ullrich or Basso or Landis or..) was caught doesn't understand the sport. From a logical perspective, the Festina affair should have cleaned up the sport. But, nearly 10 years later, and with a lot of big names being taken down in between, here we are, still in the same place. At least for another generation (until the riders who grew up with it have all retired) there will always be doping, regardless of the testing process. Some will get caught, and some won't. To me, that's not fair and detracts from the sport.

this isnt in direct response to kohlberg, but I would like to know what with rasmussen citing the fact he has passed x number of tests during the tour, did vino pass any doping tests during the tour?did he just get desperate to win a stage and 'give in' to the dark side...? I actually thought this years tour was relatively clean- no one was performing amazingly on a daily basis - certainly no back to back days of guys making huge moves like other blatant dopers were capable of in the past.

I tend to agree with kohlberg's post on the emotional level but the truth is, we don't really have an answer yet. Doping is very much a part of the cycling culture and I fear that it is becoming that way with most other sports. But to limit the efforts to 10 years is a little premature. The culture developed over a hundred years and several generations and it will take a lot longer than ten to wipe it out. It will take an easier method of detection. I like the concept of DNA markers or routine measurements over time. Make the physiology of athletes public knowledge the same way we make the financial statement of public companies open to scrutiny. Sure there will still be cheaters but if we maintain the data there should never be a statute of limitations on their accomplishments...The only reason we are feeling stupid for falling in love with the sport again is because this sport is the only one trying to clean itself up. We shouldn't abandon it just because they refuse to turn a blind eye the way the MLB/NFL/PGA/NHL/NBA, (hell I might even throw Nascar in there) does. If anything they need more of our support so that we can expose the other sports as frauds also and take some of the heat off of T&F and cycling...

I remember when I started triathlon after my running eligibility ran out there were many accounts that the Big 5 (Tinley, Allen, Scott, Molina, Pigg) were all doped up. I asked my training partners if they would dope if it made them better and we all replied, without hesitation, that we would. The only thing preventing us was the cost involved with getting into a doctor supervised program (some didn't care about doctors - they just couldn't afford it) and our own ignorance of how to make steroids work in an endurance event.There is no doubt in my mind that this is not a recent failing by cyclist. Many runners, throwers, triathletes in the 70's, 80's and 90's were blood doping and using steroids. I just wish more people would start coming forward like Bejarne Riis and Team Telekom.

Ol Grumpus wrote:

factpointerouter wrote:

I'm pretty sure I first heard of this when at school, well before 1996. Until you can find an exact reference to it I will believe it's an urban myth that the survey ever existed. And even if it did, it's doesn't mean anything.

It was a study by Dr. Robert Goldman in 1995. Of 198 athletes surveyed, 195 said they would take an undetectable drug.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/08/02/1091432108050.html

For the record, I don't agree with Alan's argument. I'm just pointing out that a simple Google search turns up a lot of articles referring to the study.

HAHA i love it...on the front page Wejo says that Vinos ride reminds him of Floyd Landis ride last year...oh yeah, and what about Lances epic ride??

Get real people, Armstrong was as dirty as any of these guys.

Rassmussen had already put a bit of unease into the tour for missing several tests before the tour even started. He also failed to let his Federation know his whereabouts so they could give him a test. So his cries of passed tests ring a bit hollow.

On a side note, there was a youngster from nearby who went to Italy to ride in a junior division. When he came back, he said he couldn't really compete because even at that level doping was going on. It's like Alan said, it's all about the money. Think about what percentage of athletes grow up poor or at least not wealthy. Do you think they care whether they cheated to get the money. Hell no, it's a better life, that's all they care about. I'm not saying that justifies it, but do you think they care?

Once I would like to hear a busted athlete just flat out admit that they just got caught instead of coming up with lame excuses. Vino's excuse is even worse than Landis' from last year.