About once a week I take a look at the cycling websites, blad I did.
About once a week I take a look at the cycling websites, blad I did.
rojo wrote:
About once a week I take a look at the cycling websites, blad I did.
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/astana-serious-situation-doping-positives-says-uci-139200
Read them more often than once a week. Hwere are the headlines from the summer:
-Cycling's premier "clean" team which prides itself on scientific approach and marginal gains totally misses a new signee's outrageous biopassport in their internal testing; rider is suspended on APB.
-Same team has a rider violates 50% Hct rule, indicative of blood boosting. Team conducts internal study, governing body is okay with this, rider is still rider.
- Teammate of Contador, former team member of Astana is going through biopassport case. His federation says he's good to go, UCI says no.
-South African busted, former yellow Jersey wearer. South Africa buys his defense that a doctor who handled him handled drugs earlier. Contamination.
- Breakout star of Giro dItalia busted. Federation says he's fine, races a single race, UCI bans him for real.
- Former Giro winner, TDF podium who quietly retired was quietly busted: an obscure document listed his retroactive ban based on ABP. Looses his TDF results, but keeps his other races (including a grand tour win during the period in question.
- UCI is no longer making releasing doping positives. Instead, a single PDF is updated monthly. This change was not announced to anyone, luckily a fan stumbled upon the change.
All of this, and we now have a 2:02 marathoner.... At cycling know they have a problem, athletics is just like cycling was in the 90's happy to celebrate alien performances, without acknowledging that there is a problem.
A few more:
-Team Astana is (voluntarily ) part of the organization MPCC. This organization holds teams higher standard against doping violations. One of their standards is that a team with more than one incident in a given time must back out of racing. So, they time Iglinsky's admission to after a prestigious race (the last big event of the season), allowing them to ride, but before a notoriously poorly-run event in Beijing. Now they are "barred" from having to fly to China, race a dumpy race after the season. Win-Win
-Chris Horner was barred from defending his Veulta title after violating an MPCC standard. He tested positive for Croticosteroids within 8 days of the start. Legal by WADA (it is legal OOC), but illegal by MPCC.
-Froome's inhaler-gate...
rojo wrote:
About once a week I take a look at the cycling websites, blad I did.
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/astana-serious-situation-doping-positives-says-uci-139200
I have never heard of these two cyclists. Another proof that EPO doping only works with 2nd tier athletes.
one can only wonder what would be revealed if all endurance athletes were subject to the same testing protocol and standards as professional cyclists. As the old adage goes, if it looks too good to be true, it probably isn't.
Honestly, I don't think it's possible to win the TDF without some kind of doping.
I wonder if there are ever under the table negotiations when someone is busted. For example, say one of Nibali's tests comes back looking a little fishy. The team manages to negotiate the trade of a second tier athlete to take the fall with the UCI.
It reminds me of the Breaking Bad episode "Better Call Saul." Badger gets busted but Walt and Jesse are trying to negotiate to get him out without him snitching. Saul says flat out, "Someone's going to jail. It's just a matter of who." So they set up a sting for another guy to take the fall as Heisenberg and the crew is safe.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if things like that happen in cycling, running, curling, etc. Wasn't Verbruggen supposedly doing some crooked stuff for Lance?
Clerk wrote:
rojo wrote:About once a week I take a look at the cycling websites, blad I did.
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/astana-serious-situation-doping-positives-says-uci-139200Read them more often than once a week. Hwere are the headlines from the summer:
-Cycling's premier "clean" team which prides itself on scientific approach and marginal gains totally misses a new signee's outrageous biopassport in their internal testing; rider is suspended on APB.
-Same team has a rider violates 50% Hct rule, indicative of blood boosting. Team conducts internal study, governing body is okay with this, rider is still rider.
- Teammate of Contador, former team member of Astana is going through biopassport case. His federation says he's good to go, UCI says no.
-South African busted, former yellow Jersey wearer. South Africa buys his defense that a doctor who handled him handled drugs earlier. Contamination.
- Breakout star of Giro dItalia busted. Federation says he's fine, races a single race, UCI bans him for real.
- Former Giro winner, TDF podium who quietly retired was quietly busted: an obscure document listed his retroactive ban based on ABP. Looses his TDF results, but keeps his other races (including a grand tour win during the period in question.
- UCI is no longer making releasing doping positives. Instead, a single PDF is updated monthly. This change was not announced to anyone, luckily a fan stumbled upon the change.
All of this, and we now have a 2:02 marathoner.... At cycling know they have a problem, athletics is just like cycling was in the 90's happy to celebrate alien performances, without acknowledging that there is a problem.
You go back and forth wieh ABP and APB.
What does that mean?
I'm assuming it's supposed to be ABP and BP is biological passport but what does A stand for?
rojo wrote:
I'm assuming it's supposed to be ABP and BP is biological passport but what does A stand for?
Athlete.
Loved that Breaking Bad episode!
Yes, there were all sorts of allegations that Verbruggen covered up test results for Lance. Most pointed accusation was during LA's first tour win, where he tested positive for steroids and the UCI accepted his backdated prescription. The sequence of events sure makes it look like the UCI was involved. I don't think we have heard the whole story yet, but we may get more information once the Landis whistleblower case gets resolved and LA gets a little more freedom to talk.
Sorry, typo.
Athlete Biological Passport (ABP)
I suggest following these personalities on twitter for more:
@Digger_forum
@vayerism
two very skeptical personalities that do well to highlight inconsistencies. You need to give yourself time to catch up with their personalities, they're always mid-thought, and you need to get the context from other sources.
@spitinthesoup
another skeptical personality, but more articulate and thought out; explains his opinions more.
@SSbike
Shane Stokes. Hard-working journalist. Knows the right questions to ask riders and teams, and is one of the few to actually ask them.
@Dwouri
Journalist for velo magazine. Honesty and calculated conclusions.
Perhaps they should look to their directeur sportif for moral guidance?
And @ammattipyoraily
Clerk wrote:
All of this, and we now have a 2:02 marathoner.... At cycling know they have a problem, athletics is just like cycling was in the 90's happy to celebrate alien performances, without acknowledging that there is a problem.
Distance running has been seeing "alien performances" ever since serious prize $ came on the scene and the KEN and ETH runners started being recruited, and then participating, en masse. This has been going on for nearly about 20 years without a hint of a wide-spread doping conspiracy. In cycling, that rumors and signs were being heard and spotted for many, many years before they really came to light.
Of course there has been some doping by some athletes, but if the performances we've seen over the last 20 years are truly "alien" as you claim, then virtually ALL of these runners (and there are tons of them) would have to have been doped. To believe that is to be a.....dope.
Renatos biggest fan wrote:
rojo wrote:About once a week I take a look at the cycling websites, blad I did.
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/astana-serious-situation-doping-positives-says-uci-139200I have never heard of these two cyclists. Another proof that EPO doping only works with 2nd tier athletes.
Wait, if it works on 2nd tier doesn't that mean some 2nd tier can become 1st tier through doping?! Ahh my world is crumbling!
No hold on, I figured it out. EPO only works on 3rd tier. 2nd tier and 1st tier are immune and stuck in their tiers. And 3rd tier can only move up to 2nd tier. Never mind.
Clerk wrote:
A few more:
-Team Astana is (voluntarily ) part of the organization MPCC. This organization holds teams higher standard against doping violations. One of their standards is that a team with more than one incident in a given time must back out of racing. So, they time Iglinsky's admission to after a prestigious race (the last big event of the season), allowing them to ride, but before a notoriously poorly-run event in Beijing. Now they are "barred" from having to fly to China, race a dumpy race after the season. Win-Win
-Chris Horner was barred from defending his Veulta title after violating an MPCC standard. He tested positive for Croticosteroids within 8 days of the start. Legal by WADA (it is legal OOC), but illegal by MPCC.
-Froome's inhaler-gate...
The dopers were brothers.
Horner didn't test positive for anything, his cortisol levels were just extremely low.
Cycling has it's head in the ground thinking that they can clean up the sport. Very naive.
Clerk wrote:
-Chris Horner was barred from defending his Veulta title after violating an MPCC standard. He tested positive for Croticosteroids within 8 days of the start. Legal by WADA (it is legal OOC), but illegal by MPCC.
Chris Horner's cortisol was too low because he had bronchitis. He wanted to race but MPCC guidelines said that it would be hazardous for his health if he were to race with such low cortisol.
One difference between distance running and cycling. Cycling is catching dopers, running is not.
Chris Horner should have been as obvious as Lance, Pirate, Ulrich, any Spanish winner and or Italian or American or French or Australian and the guy Floyd Landis. He is is 41 years old! 40 years olds don't beat 20 years olds.
Regina Jacobs and Lagat being the exceptions Wink wink !
Is it a doping positive if it doesn't give performance improvement?It just happens that Renato is right. There is evidence that EPO does not work for elite athletes. This comes from science done on cyclists.
The authors report the results of their systematic literature review in an article published online December 6 in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. Their review uncovered a paucity of studies testing rHuEPO in elite athletes. A few studies involved subjects described as "endurance trained recreational athletes," "well-trained individuals," or "healthy subjects." In addition, study participants varied in terms of endurance performance and fitness level. None of the studies reported on competitive cyclists.
"'[T]he better the athlete is trained, a similar increase in VO2max leads to a proportionally smaller increase in performance," the authors explain. "This also demonstrates that in world-class athletes, an increase in VO2max will have only limited effect on performance."
The authors note that in elite endurance athletes, VO2max can be 50% to 100% greater than those in normal healthy young people, but that VO2max plateaus in elite athletes while performance continues to improve. They suggest that this may be because of other factors involved in endurance such as high muscle capillary density, muscle metabolic adaptations such as increased mitochondria and oxidative enzymes, or more efficient biomechanics. Although moderately trained athletes can improve a variety of factors to increase endurance performance, elite athletes mainly improve endurance performance by changes in lactate threshold, lactate turn point, and work economy or efficiency. None of these is directly altered by erythropoietin.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/775767
Clean up your spelling and cut back on all the initialization of the inside scoop . Perhaps , a coherent post may get you more responses .