|
News in August
|
| Selwink |
Posted on 01-08-2014 10:50
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8856
Joined: 17-05-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
Yeah, it's August now. Time to create my third news thread already. To follow a tradition, I have no news!
|
| |
|
|
| admirschleck |
Posted on 01-08-2014 10:56
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6690
Joined: 11-10-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Tinkoff - Saxo will change their name to Tinkoff Team in 2015, according to Oleg Tinkov.
|
| |
|
|
| sutty68 |
Posted on 01-08-2014 11:02
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 34654
Joined: 22-08-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Tinkoff Team doesn't seem to have the same ring about it, much prefer Saxo Tinkoff  |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 22-11-2024 17:17
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| deek12345 |
Posted on 02-08-2014 18:00
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 2761
Joined: 13-06-2009
PCM$: 360.00
|
Roman Kreuziger provisionally suspended
https://www.cyclin...-suspended |
| |
|
|
| Strydz |
Posted on 02-08-2014 18:03
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5894
Joined: 02-08-2011
PCM$: 1625.00
|
Roman Kreuziger provisionally suspended
https://www.cyclin...-suspended
Edit: Zabel'd 
Edited by Strydz on 02-08-2014 18:03
Hells 500 Crew and 6 x Everester
Don Rd Launching Place
Melbourne Hill Rd Warrandyte
Colby Drive Belgrave South
William Rd The Patch
David Hill Rd Monbulk
Lakeside Drive Emerald
https://www.everesting.cc/hall-of-fame/ |
| |
|
|
| Jacdk |
Posted on 02-08-2014 18:51
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 910
Joined: 20-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Finally UCI that also just took you a threat of having him race and since 2012 to get that done.
But goodbye Kreuziger see you in 2 years time. But it will be interesting to see when the ban begins. |
| |
|
|
| Strydz |
Posted on 02-08-2014 18:57
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5894
Joined: 02-08-2011
PCM$: 1625.00
|
Jacdk wrote:
Finally UCI that also just took you a threat of having him race and since 2012 to get that done.
But goodbye Kreuziger see you in 2 years time. But it will be interesting to see when the ban begins.
Must be a real "witch hunt" to be proceeding towards a ban 
Hells 500 Crew and 6 x Everester
Don Rd Launching Place
Melbourne Hill Rd Warrandyte
Colby Drive Belgrave South
William Rd The Patch
David Hill Rd Monbulk
Lakeside Drive Emerald
https://www.everesting.cc/hall-of-fame/ |
| |
|
|
| Jacdk |
Posted on 02-08-2014 19:23
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 910
Joined: 20-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Strydz wrote:
Must be a real "witch hunt" to be proceeding towards a ban
You do know right that exactly like UCI have their experts saying one thing and Kreuziger´s experts saying another, its possible that even with a ban that the rider is innocent?
This is not a positive sample, this is simply some data - which btw no one even knows how much outside the normal it is. that has shown to be irregular and because UCI see ghosts all over, they decided to run this sham of a legal system.
Where any rider is guilty until UCI either get paid enough to look the other way or paid to ban them. |
| |
|
|
| felix_29 |
Posted on 02-08-2014 19:54
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3054
Joined: 08-08-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Jacdk wrote:
Strydz wrote:
Must be a real "witch hunt" to be proceeding towards a ban
You do know right that exactly like UCI have their experts saying one thing and Kreuziger´s experts saying another, its possible that even with a ban that the rider is innocent?
This is not a positive sample, this is simply some data - which btw no one even knows how much outside the normal it is. that has shown to be irregular and because UCI see ghosts all over, they decided to run this sham of a legal system.
Where any rider is guilty until UCI either get paid enough to look the other way or paid to ban them.
Looking at the data Horner has released one can figure out how much out of the normal Kreuziger's must be. Only because you have no idea of haematology/physiology doesn't mean the biopassport only produces useless data. |
| |
|
|
| Guido Mukk |
Posted on 02-08-2014 19:58
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15830
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
and Tinkoff wondering again..why I can not ride Vuelta with that guy..ban him or whatever after that. |
| |
|
|
| ryant |
Posted on 02-08-2014 20:05
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2322
Joined: 15-08-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
UCI must be pretty confident of a ban preventing him from riding because of the changes of the results which would be needed after he would be banned 
 John St Ledger in Team Bunzl-Centrica and Team U25Red Bull Driver in RFactor
|
| |
|
|
| Dusen |
Posted on 02-08-2014 20:13
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1173
Joined: 30-07-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
UCI really went douche-mode on this one.
Doing nothing in about 1½ month, and then 1 day before he races Tour of Polen, they land a 2 year ban on him.
Perhaps it is just bad luck, but it is known, that UCI really dislikes Riis and always try too sabotage him so one could be lead to believe that they where pulling it a long as possible.
Dunno. But a shame anyway. |
| |
|
|
| CountArach |
Posted on 03-08-2014 00:33
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8290
Joined: 14-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
felix_29 wrote:
Jacdk wrote:
Strydz wrote:
Must be a real "witch hunt" to be proceeding towards a ban
You do know right that exactly like UCI have their experts saying one thing and Kreuziger´s experts saying another, its possible that even with a ban that the rider is innocent?
This is not a positive sample, this is simply some data - which btw no one even knows how much outside the normal it is. that has shown to be irregular and because UCI see ghosts all over, they decided to run this sham of a legal system.
Where any rider is guilty until UCI either get paid enough to look the other way or paid to ban them.
Looking at the data Horner has released one can figure out how much out of the normal Kreuziger's must be. Only because you have no idea of haematology/physiology doesn't mean the biopassport only produces useless data.
Thank you that couldn't have said it better.
Jacdk you clearly have no idea what you are talking about and hearing you banging on and on about this is frustrating. People including mysf tried to explain in the other thread what the bio passport is and you either didn't understand or you flat out ignored it. It is becoming tiresome.
|
| |
|
|
| Strydz |
Posted on 03-08-2014 04:14
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5894
Joined: 02-08-2011
PCM$: 1625.00
|
Dusen wrote:
UCI really went douche-mode on this one.
Doing nothing in about 1½ month, and then 1 day before he races Tour of Polen, they land a 2 year ban on him.
Perhaps it is just bad luck, but it is known, that UCI really dislikes Riis and always try too sabotage him so one could be lead to believe that they where pulling it a long as possible.
Dunno. But a shame anyway.
What 2 year ban? He has been provisionally suspended, it is likely he will get a 2 year ban but that hasn't happened yet. Also what are you basing your argument that the UCI and doing this because they dislike Riis? I'm really confused on that one.
Hells 500 Crew and 6 x Everester
Don Rd Launching Place
Melbourne Hill Rd Warrandyte
Colby Drive Belgrave South
William Rd The Patch
David Hill Rd Monbulk
Lakeside Drive Emerald
https://www.everesting.cc/hall-of-fame/ |
| |
|
|
| Strydz |
Posted on 03-08-2014 04:18
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5894
Joined: 02-08-2011
PCM$: 1625.00
|
Jacdk wrote:
Strydz wrote:
Must be a real "witch hunt" to be proceeding towards a ban
You do know right that exactly like UCI have their experts saying one thing and Kreuziger´s experts saying another, its possible that even with a ban that the rider is innocent?
This is not a positive sample, this is simply some data - which btw no one even knows how much outside the normal it is. that has shown to be irregular and because UCI see ghosts all over, they decided to run this sham of a legal system.
Where any rider is guilty until UCI either get paid enough to look the other way or paid to ban them.
This is getting ridiculous now mate, you keep coming up with arguments that make less and less sense so either you have no clue and refuse to learn about how the bio passport works or are actually a troll who is running out of good material.
Hells 500 Crew and 6 x Everester
Don Rd Launching Place
Melbourne Hill Rd Warrandyte
Colby Drive Belgrave South
William Rd The Patch
David Hill Rd Monbulk
Lakeside Drive Emerald
https://www.everesting.cc/hall-of-fame/ |
| |
|
|
| Jacdk |
Posted on 03-08-2014 06:13
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 910
Joined: 20-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Strydz wrote:
This is getting ridiculous now mate, you keep coming up with arguments that make less and less sense so either you have no clue and refuse to learn about how the bio passport works or are actually a troll who is running out of good material.
Mate? im not your mate.
But do please explain your expertise in bio-passport that in your mind proves that he have been using doping and therefore should rightfully receive a ban.
But in case you're wondering and actually want to learn something, Bio-passports are just a collection of data from a riders season which UCI can look at. It is despite you clearly misunderstanding of something thats easy to understand not a positive sample.
So call me a troll all you want i honestly couldn't give a crap, because it just proves that you don't have any arguments and have lost. so enjoy the loss "Mate" |
| |
|
|
| Jacdk |
Posted on 03-08-2014 06:36
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 910
Joined: 20-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
felix_29 wrote:
Looking at the data Horner has released one can figure out how much out of the normal Kreuziger's must be. Only because you have no idea of haematology/physiology doesn't mean the biopassport only produces useless data.
What a load of nonsense, Horner doesn't give you any clear data, you are still guessing based on a 41 year old man who won the vuelta, which clearly proves that the bio-passport is not a valuable tool when it doesn't even catch someone who looks to be a hell of a lot more doped then a 26 year old rider at that point.
But lets take what some experts say about it.
Does an abnormal outcome of the ABP means doping?
No, for two reasons.
Firstly, because the decision rule as described above is not based on a true probability of doping, but rather on “how the profile differs from what is expected in clean athletes”. This conceptual difference is well known in forensics for the evaluation of scientific evidence: to sentence an athlete solely from a high level of specificity would be a fallacy of statistical reasoning that results from misunderstanding the idea of multiple testing. A high number of anti-doping tests simply elevates the likelihood of finding a positive by pure chance alone.
Secondly, doping is not the only possible cause to explain a detected abnormality. A pathological condition must be excluded first. In haematology for example, the prevalence of blood disorders may be high in certain populations - typically a few percents - in function of factors such as age and ethnic origin.
That information in mind, it is not necessary to increase the specificity higher than 99% since the proportion of athletes presenting a medical condition may be significantly higher than 1% and can be remained undetected with a too permissive threshold. In comparison, in health-related fields, a reference range for a particular test or biological marker is usually defined as the values that 95% - or 2 standard deviations - fall into.
Thus, what is done when the ABP shows an unusually large deviation?
The ABP is reviewed by a panel of experts to determine the cause of the abnormality. This reviewing can typically be carried out during the short withdrawal of the athlete if a competition rule has been implemented. The panel of experts is composed of specialists in the field: haematologists for the evaluation of markers stored in the AHP, endocrinologists for the evaluation of markers stored in the AEP. The role of this panel of experts is not only to protect the athlete’s right to a qualified review prior to the possible assertion of an anti-doping rule violation, but it also ensures that all possible factors, causes and events are considered thoroughly
Also the full bio passport consists of 3 passports 3 1: haematologi 2: steroidologi 3: endocrinologi. |
| |
|
|
| The Hobbit |
Posted on 03-08-2014 07:53
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2730
Joined: 18-08-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Jacdk wrote:
felix_29 wrote:
Looking at the data Horner has released one can figure out how much out of the normal Kreuziger's must be. Only because you have no idea of haematology/physiology doesn't mean the biopassport only produces useless data.
What a load of nonsense, Horner doesn't give you any clear data, you are still guessing based on a 41 year old man who won the vuelta, which clearly proves that the bio-passport is not a valuable tool when it doesn't even catch someone who looks to be a hell of a lot more doped then a 26 year old rider at that point.
But lets take what some experts say about it.
Does an abnormal outcome of the ABP means doping?
No, for two reasons.
Firstly, because the decision rule as described above is not based on a true probability of doping, but rather on “how the profile differs from what is expected in clean athletes”. This conceptual difference is well known in forensics for the evaluation of scientific evidence: to sentence an athlete solely from a high level of specificity would be a fallacy of statistical reasoning that results from misunderstanding the idea of multiple testing. A high number of anti-doping tests simply elevates the likelihood of finding a positive by pure chance alone.
Ok, lets try this again. Biological Passports do not have a threshold, like a test. They do not say, this person has higher x therefore he must be taking x. Obviously, everyone's body is different, which is part of what helps them make it pro. They also do it related to the rider's baseline, with very regular testing, so they know when someone is ill, or if someone is taking something. Test times are not known to the athlete, so they cannot stop or start cheating, to clean up their data, just before. Obviously doing tests will help, thats why they have them as well.
Secondly, doping is not the only possible cause to explain a detected abnormality. A pathological condition must be excluded first. In haematology for example, the prevalence of blood disorders may be high in certain populations - typically a few percents - in function of factors such as age and ethnic origin.
Like I said, the reviewers are told, and can tell the difference, they are among the best in the world at this. This case would not be here if it was decided it was probably caused by illness. As I have said before, they will look at any anomilous readings, and decide whether to monitor more closely, put someone on a list of posssible suspects, extend the case, or decide it is unlikely to have been caused by doping.
That information in mind, it is not necessary to increase the specificity higher than 99% since the proportion of athletes presenting a medical condition may be significantly higher than 1% and can be remained undetected with a too permissive threshold. In comparison, in health-related fields, a reference range for a particular test or biological marker is usually defined as the values that 95% - or 2 standard deviations - fall into.
The UCI also have an option of informing the athlete they have a blood disorder, or something similar. They can tell, and then run more tests to be sure, unless they have some alien pathogen, then the UCI will know that it is not because of doping.
Thus, what is done when the ABP shows an unusually large deviation?
The ABP is reviewed by a panel of experts to determine the cause of the abnormality. This reviewing can typically be carried out during the short withdrawal of the athlete if a competition rule has been implemented. The panel of experts is composed of specialists in the field: haematologists for the evaluation of markers stored in the AHP, endocrinologists for the evaluation of markers stored in the AEP. The role of this panel of experts is not only to protect the athlete’s right to a qualified review prior to the possible assertion of an anti-doping rule violation, but it also ensures that all possible factors, causes and events are considered thoroughly
Also the full bio passport consists of 3 passports 3 1: haematologi 2: steroidologi 3: endocrinologi.
Yes, this is pretty much what has happened. In this case the panel clearly feel the cause is very likely to be doping and therefore the rider has been punished, that is all there is to this. |
| |
|
|
| felix_29 |
Posted on 03-08-2014 07:56
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3054
Joined: 08-08-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
You're hilarious. Same source says
"For the ABP, can a decision rule be defined on a true probability of doping?
Yes, but only in conditions when the prevalence of doping can be precisely estimated."
Also, do you even know what data was released by Horner?
Some experts say that the likelyhood of some kind of blood manipulation carried out by Chris Horner is as high as 99,999999%. Seems like a pointless guessing game based on his age.
|
| |
|
|
| Atlantius |
Posted on 03-08-2014 08:22
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6795
Joined: 21-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
I can't be bothered to go deep into this discussion as a full and thorough understanding of the bio passport demands the knowledge of a specialized doctor.
Changes in blood values however doesn't come out of nothing and this discussion reminds me of the happy days in the 90's where athletes would get a 2-week ban for health reason if they had a haematocrit above 50. Not a positive test, just not healthy to ride with. Abnormal blood values you could call it.
Now what was the reason for those abnormal blood values again?
|
| |
|
