I'm a fairly serious fan of cycling, but I gotta say I'm getting really fed up with these jokers. I've been trying to stay optimistic, have been thinking/hoping the authorities got a handle on it, and the riders want to ride clean, but then down goes another. And this is a guy, Beltran, that I've really admired through the years. He was Armstrong's chief domestique in the mountain stages a few years ago.
I've long since simply assumed (I know, I know) that the World-Elite cyclists were all doing "something" as they'd get left in the dust if they weren't. Maybe I'm off-base, but I just believe that's where we're at right now.
richxx87 wrote:I'm a fairly serious fan of cycling, but I gotta say I'm getting really fed up with these jokers. I've been trying to stay optimistic, thinking the authorities have a handle on it and the riders wants to ride clean, but then down goes another. ...
But isn't this a good thing? It shows testing is still working and all the extra efforts that cycling is putting in lead to cheats being caught. Plus it happens before the mountains and the race is still wide open. Last years Rasmus... and Vinako... ejections made the tour feel very empty and underappreciated. Does Contador get any respect for winning it last year?
Although I don't like that Cycling is trying to circumvent the rules.
He can ask for a "B" sample, although these rarely clear riders. If he does ask for it and he fails that test, too, he will be fired by the team, its directors said.
The administrations or organizers should show no bias and following their own rules to the letter, if they expect everyone else to follow them. No ambiguity is a good thing for sports. Since the definition of a positive test is both "A" and "B" samples being positive. Sorry, but in no way are testers perfect, if the system doesn't have checks to it how can you be sure of any positive test? Remember Legat? So, the "B" sample should automaticly be done, not just if the athlete requests it.
So in Europe, a positive EPO test in the Tour de France led to the immediate arrest of an Manuel "Tricky" Beltran. When will track and field get that serious?
jazzcyclist wrote:So in Europe, a positive EPO test in the Tour de France led to the immediate arrest of an Manuel "Tricky" Beltran. When will track and field get that serious?
Do I understand correctly that you like an idea of somebody getting arrested for increasing his hematocrit?
jazzcyclist wrote:So in Europe, a positive EPO test in the Tour de France led to the immediate arrest of an Manuel "Tricky" Beltran. When will track and field get that serious?
Do I understand correctly that you like an idea of somebody getting arrested for increasing his hematocrit?
I like the idea of someone getting arrested for professional sporting fraud. It doesn't matter to me whether it's a businessman bribing a government official for preferential treatment in a bidding process, a basketball player shaving points in a basketball game, a couple of crooks cheating at black jack in a Las Vegas casino or a cyclist taking illegal PED's in the Tour de France; cheating is cheating is cheating.
jazzcyclist wrote:So in Europe, a positive EPO test in the Tour de France led to the immediate arrest of an Manuel "Tricky" Beltran. When will track and field get that serious?
Do I understand correctly that you like an idea of somebody getting arrested for increasing his hematocrit?
I like the idea of someone getting arrested for professional sporting fraud. It doesn't matter to me whether it's a businessman bribing a government official for preferential treatment in a bidding process, a basketball player shaving points in a basketball game, a couple of crooks cheating at black jack in a Las Vegas casino or a cyclist taking illegal PED's in the Tour de France; cheating is cheating is cheating.
I usually agree with most things jazzcyclist says but I think this is over the top. They're playing games. I think law enforcement has more important things they can focus on.
bambam wrote: I think law enforcement has more important things they can focus on.
Generally speaking, I agree with you. But I also believe that law enforcement agencies spend their time frivolously in a lot of other ways, also. And my primary concern on this message board is the purity of the sports that I follow. However, if I were king of the world, not only would I outlaw arrests like these, I would also outlaw speed traps in rural areas on open highways, decriminalize marijuana and other light recreational drugs, decriminalize prostitution for consenting adults, outlaw seat belt laws for adults and outlaw blue laws to start with. I'm sure you can add some other things to this list.
bambam wrote: I think law enforcement has more important things they can focus on.
Generally speaking, I agree with you. But I also believe that law enforcement agencies spend their time frivolously in a lot of other ways, also. And my primary concern on this message board is the purity of the sports that I follow. However, if I were king of the world, not only would I outlaw arrests like these, I would also outlaw speed traps in rural areas on open highways, decriminalize marijuana and other light recreational drugs, decriminalize prostitution for consenting adults, outlaw seat belt laws for adults and outlaw blue laws to start with. I'm sure you can add some other things to this list.
I agree with your list. How can you support all of this and still demand criminalization of something as trivial as EPO? Rather inconsistent, wouldn't you say?
Beltran should get his ass kicked off the Tour, but a criminal procedure? Jeez!
bambam wrote: I think law enforcement has more important things they can focus on.
Generally speaking, I agree with you. But I also believe that law enforcement agencies spend their time frivolously in a lot of other ways, also. And my primary concern on this message board is the purity of the sports that I follow. However, if I were king of the world, not only would I outlaw arrests like these, I would also outlaw speed traps in rural areas on open highways, decriminalize marijuana and other light recreational drugs, decriminalize prostitution for consenting adults, outlaw seat belt laws for adults and outlaw blue laws to start with. I'm sure you can add some other things to this list.
Gotta agree with most of those - except seat belts. They save a lot of lives, at minimal inconvenience. Take it from somebody who has frequently seen the consequences of not wearing one.
bambam wrote: I think law enforcement has more important things they can focus on.
Generally speaking, I agree with you. But I also believe that law enforcement agencies spend their time frivolously in a lot of other ways, also. And my primary concern on this message board is the purity of the sports that I follow. However, if I were king of the world, not only would I outlaw arrests like these, I would also outlaw speed traps in rural areas on open highways, decriminalize marijuana and other light recreational drugs, decriminalize prostitution for consenting adults, outlaw seat belt laws for adults and outlaw blue laws to start with. I'm sure you can add some other things to this list.
I agree with your list. How can you support all of this and still demand criminalization of something as trivial as EPO? Rather inconsistent, wouldn't you say? Beltran should get his ass kicked off the Tour, but a criminal procedure? Jeez!
In an ideal world, where NO frivolous offenses were criminalized, I wouldn't support the arrest of Beltran, but we don't live in an ideal world. Furthermore, unlike the other things I listed, which are victimless crimes, Beltran's crime does have victims, namely all the clean professional cyclists in the pro peleton, however few they may be. For us, sports is just entertainment, but for pro athletes, it's the way they pay their bills and feed their children. Assuming they're clean, how much more money might Christine Arron or Debbie Ferguson have earned in their careers, if they hadn't had to compete against known and unknown drug cheats.
Pego wrote:I maintain that such PED activities have no place in criminal proceedings. Sport authorities should deal with them, not courts of law.
Exactly. Bambam and Pego have it exactly right.
What about civil courts? Do you agree with athletes suing other athletes who've been proven dirty, for lost income?
I would not mind it in principle, but I think it is too convoluted to actually prove damages. I am not aware of a precedent.
Bambam, as an MD, what are your thoughts on the medical professionals who obtain these prescription drugs for the athletes?
If they are doing it only as a way to circumvent the system, and the drugs are not indicated in anyway for a true TUE (Therapeutic Use Exemption), then I think it is reprehensible. And I know MDs who have lost their license for fooling around with drug prescribing and those MDs should probably lose their licenses.
But my feelings about the current state of doping and drug use in sports are very complex. I've expressed some of this on this board previously, but I think it has become a bit of a witch-hunt in which many individual liberties are sacrificed at the altar of political correctness.
I have a lot of background on this topic in various ways, which makes my feelings so complex in part. And I will admit here finally that for 6 months in 1970-71, while a sophomore at Duke, I took Dianabol - an early anabolic steroid. I was trying to become a pro golfer and was not a very long hitter. I had tried lifting weights my freshman year with little success. My weightlifting/bodybuilding consultant got me those at the beginning of my sophomore year and I took them. I did not take them to recover from any injury or any of the crap I hear from athletes. I took them to get bigger and hit the ball longer and try to get on the PGA Tour, and eventually it worked although there was a lot of other work involved in it as well.
So there - I finally admitted that to more than just a few isolated people.
Yes, then there was that whole episode where (I don't remember the name of the cyclist at this point) that Lance Armstrong went and deliberately made sure one of those cyclists in a break away on a "rest" day at the tour de France was not allowed in the break away. The sole reason was that cyclist had become a key witness in the case against Ferrari and risked his neck and reputation to go against the grain by testifying against Armstrong's good buddy. Then, when he has a chance for a little personal glory at the TDF, Armstrong personally sees to it that he was not allowed in the break away. The cyclist ended up leaving the breakaway with Armstrong.
Double stage winner Riccardo Ricco has sent the Tour de France into another major doping scandal after testing positive for the blood booster EPO.
Ricco's Saunier Duval team immediately announced their withdrawal from this year's race and their riders, who had gathered at the stage 12 start line at Lavelanet, left the peloton in a surreal display.
Wow, that makes at least 4 key members of Lances' teams now busted dope cheats. Guilt by association?
1. Manuel Beltran 2. Roberto Heras 3. Tyler Hamilton 4. Floyd Landis
And when you best man at your wedding [i.e. Frankie Andreu] comes out and says you doped that certainly does not help the image.
Even if Armstrong didn't dope (and I have no particular reason to believe that he did--I think he revolutionized bike training by introducing training methods that have been used in running for more than 2 decades), he certainly benefited from doping. Most of his victories relied on the support of his teammates, and they were only able to contribute apparently by using PEDs. Heras was particularly instrumental in the climbing stages that Armstrong was noted for.
Pego wrote:I maintain that such PED activities have no place in criminal proceedings. Sport authorities should deal with them, not courts of law.
The issue is whether the drugs are being issued illegally without prescription, at least in the US. If we believe that controlling prescription drugs is important to society in general, regardless of the "cheating" issue, then these should be criminal proceedings.
Wow, that makes at least 4 key members of Lances' teams now busted dope cheats. Guilt by association?
1. Manuel Beltran 2. Roberto Heras 3. Tyler Hamilton 4. Floyd Landis
And when you best man at your wedding [i.e. Frankie Andreu] comes out and says you doped that certainly does not help the image.
Even if Armstrong didn't dope (and I have no particular reason to believe that he did--I think he revolutionized bike training by introducing training methods that have been used in running for more than 2 decades), he certainly benefited from doping. Most of his victories relied on the support of his teammates, and they were only able to contribute apparently by using PEDs. Heras was particularly instrumental in the climbing stages that Armstrong was noted for.
The circumstantial evidence implicating Armstrong is a lot stronger than the evidence implicating Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens in my opinion, not the least of which is the Frankie Andreu testimony.
jazzcyclist wrote:The circumstantial evidence implicating Armstrong is a lot stronger than the evidence implicating Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens in my opinion, not the least of which is the Frankie Andreu testimony.
jazzcyclist wrote:The circumstantial evidence implicating Armstrong is a lot stronger than the evidence implicating Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens in my opinion, not the least of which is the Frankie Andreu testimony.
I think that's accurate
I think that it is an over statement. There is no one willing to go to jail for an extended period of time to avoid testifying under oath about Armstrong. Who else touch Balco so substantially and was not involved in doping? There are tests that show steroid use.
Conversely, there are several factors to consider with Armstrong. While a number of his former teammates tested positive, they all did so afterward when they were trying to step up a level. The exception is Heras, who won the second time with Postal (after having won before Postal) and the Vuelta is the weakest of the Tours (Spain), and he only won because Postal was so good at riding Grand Tours and picking up small advantages and Postal improved his time trialing so much. No one has ever tested positive while at Postal/Discovery (and you can add a year of AstanaII). Maybe this is just because they are SO good at it, which might be the case, but that takes a lot of continued organizational silence. The Andreu case is the biggest thing against Armstrong, but even there there are some countering factors: Andreu had been dropped from the team and then dropped from the management/assistance position that he had and the others at the meeting provide no collaboration.
The likelihood that Armstrong used PEDs is not insignificant, but saying it is greater than something that is known, with either one or two drug tests to back it up is too strong a statement. Note that I respect the opinion of both posters here: jazz and bambam, each of whom has experience relevant to forming a assessment.
Pego wrote:I maintain that such PED activities have no place in criminal proceedings. Sport authorities should deal with them, not courts of law.
The issue is whether the drugs are being issued illegally without prescription, at least in the US. If we believe that controlling prescription drugs is important to society in general, regardless of the "cheating" issue, then these should be criminal proceedings.
You are right, the laws on the books are such at the moment. Not everybody agrees that those are good laws .
26mi235 wrote:The Andreu case is the biggest thing against Armstrong, but even there there are some countering factors: Andreu had been dropped from the team and then dropped from the management/assistance position that he had and the others at the meeting provide no collaboration.
Here are some things to remember about Andreu:
1) Not only was he a friend and colleague of Armstrong, he was the best man at his wedding. And even after Andreu was released from US Postal, he continued to defend Armstrong vehemently as an Outdoor Life TV commentator, whenever doping charges would be leveled at him. It was only after he was put under oath that he changed his tune.
2) Andreu readily admits that his release from US Postal was a business decision based on his decline in performance, and neither Armstrong nor Andreu has ever spoken of anomosity between them. Furthermore, Armstrong has never tried to portray Andreu as a disgruntled ex-employee and he was at a loss for words when asked what motive Andreu would have for falsely accusing him of doping, the same way Clemens was at a loss for words to come up with a motive for Pettite.
3) There was corroboration of the things Armstrong said at the hospital meeting, namely Frankie's wife Betsy.
RMc wrote:Seems EPO testing has gotten much better recently. We haven't seen this in T&F yet. I wonder if this will show up in Beijing?
this is so called "third generation EPO" still not easy to be detected but seems that the testing are indeed improved
CERA or Continuous Erythropoiesis Receptor Activator is a new form of EPO, created by the Swiss company Roche, that has been created to help dialysis patients or people with kidney problems.
CERA is on the WADA list of banned products but it seems that riders thought that the test was unable to find CERA. WADA is known to be working on a test but it seems the testers have caught up with the dopers far quicker than anyone expected.
“In the case of Mircera ─ CERA ─ thanks to the cooperation of the manufacturer of this substance (Roche) and of WADA-accredited laboratories, WADA received the molecule well in advance and was able to develop ways to detect it,” he said. “This case shows the significant work that WADA conducts in anticipating doping trends, including by closely cooperating with pharmaceutical companies at very early stages of the development of molecules or substances for therapeutic purposes to develop detection methods for anti-doping purposes.”
I hate to go all Schadenfreude here, but from the point of view of an oppressed (and depressed) track guy, allow me to say, "Go Cycling!" (as in, keep stealing those doping headlines)
26mi235 wrote:The likelihood that Armstrong used PEDs is not insignificant
I agree with that.
I would agree as well--I just made the point that there's a strong counterpoint to explain his extraordinary success which in my mind balances that probability.
.