|
News in October
|
| ABridgeTooFar |
Posted on 11-10-2007 18:12
|
Domestique
Posts: 463
Joined: 17-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I hear ya isso. But it is far from being crystal clear. That is the problem with all this doping. It is just one muddy mess. The dopers have cheated the fans and they have cheated their fellow riders. Just ask Pereiro how much money he could have earned if he had won the yellow jersey last year....or should we not feel too sorry for him.
We must also be careful not to convict the innocent riders that are out there. I believe Hincapie is one of them.
|
| |
|
|
| mattiasgt |
Posted on 11-10-2007 18:58
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2471
Joined: 15-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
And remember what Armstrong did to Filippo Simeoni, who now signed with Ceramica Flaminia by the way.
https://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2004/.../jul24news
(Previously) Manager of Koenigsegg
Koenigsegg: ( Media)
Livin' Loud |
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 11-10-2007 19:26
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
ABridgeTooFar wrote:
I hear ya isso. But it is far from being crystal clear.
it is a fact that Armstrong tested positive. search the forum for it, there's been quite a discussion on it lately.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| Setzel |
Posted on 11-10-2007 19:37
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3692
Joined: 16-04-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
1999 epo  lance 
Edited by Setzel on 11-10-2007 19:37
Eating my daily Breakfast at 9 pm
|
| |
|
|
| kida |
Posted on 11-10-2007 20:37
|
Domestique
Posts: 405
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
but why only bring up LA , why not the winner of the 1975 TDF or the winner of AGR in 2001, and surely the most important thing is to get rid of all the dopers still riding now, then maybe going after those from the past. |
| |
|
|
| Crommy |
Posted on 11-10-2007 20:42
|
World Champion
Posts: 10018
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Who is the most famous cyclist today (and in most degrees the most successful) - LA, that's why its brought up so often 
|
| |
|
|
| kida |
Posted on 11-10-2007 20:49
|
Domestique
Posts: 405
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
so being successful means you're a cheat? oh and before you ask i'm not a LA fan |
| |
|
|
| Crommy |
Posted on 11-10-2007 20:52
|
World Champion
Posts: 10018
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Nope - taking a positive test makes you a cheat...like Lance's retest from 1999, showing EPO
|
| |
|
|
| CrueTrue |
Posted on 11-10-2007 21:01
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 29989
Joined: 20-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Team Gerolsteiner might continue in 2009 Team Manager Hans-Michael Holczer has said he has received several "offers" from companies who want to sponsor the team. They are now negotiating with Haribo and the computer company SAP, according to the rumours. |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 24-11-2024 00:41
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Setzel |
Posted on 11-10-2007 21:11
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3692
Joined: 16-04-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Good
Eating my daily Breakfast at 9 pm
|
| |
|
|
| samtheman |
Posted on 11-10-2007 22:06
|
Domestique
Posts: 610
Joined: 07-05-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
CrueTrue wrote:
Team Gerolsteiner might continue in 2009 Team Manager Hans-Michael Holczer has said he has received several "offers" from companies who want to sponsor the team. They are now negotiating with Haribo and the computer company SAP, according to the rumours.
Team Haribo
funny thought
wouldn't surprise me though if Kagermann(SAP Chef) decided to get a Cycling team aswell, now that he's already got his own football club(TSG Hoffenheim)
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 11-10-2007 22:14
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
samtheman wrote:
CrueTrue wrote:
Team Gerolsteiner might continue in 2009 Team Manager Hans-Michael Holczer has said he has received several "offers" from companies who want to sponsor the team. They are now negotiating with Haribo and the computer company SAP, according to the rumours.
Team Haribo
funny thought
wouldn't surprise me though if Kagermann(SAP Chef) decided to get a Cycling team aswell, now that he's already got his own football club(TSG Hoffenheim)
after team "Chocolades Jacques", nothing surprises me anymore
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| kida |
Posted on 11-10-2007 23:02
|
Domestique
Posts: 405
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Crommy wrote:
Nope - taking a positive test makes you a cheat...like Lance's retest from 1999, showing EPO
well i wasn't to up on the in's and out's of that case i was aware of it and yes it could well be correct, but a few questions:"It reported that 12 samples taken on the 1999 Tour, six of them from Armstrong, had shown "indisputable" traces of EPO, or erythropoietin.
The retrospective tests on the frozen urine samples were allegedly carried out in 2004 by the French national testing laboratory of Chatenay-Malabry near Paris, the newspaper reported.
No details were given of the other riders alleged to have tested positive."
why not name the other riders not just LA?
Only the B urine samples were left from the 1999 Tour as the A samples were all used for the original drug testing. It appears that UCI scientists, trying to fine tune their testing methods for EPO, have been testing the B samples from 1999. These samples were supposed to be anonymous and were not supposed to be able to be matched against a particular cyclist. The only identifying mark on the samples was a six digit ID number. But the French newspaper L'Equipe has provided documents that match the six digit ID number on one of the positive EPO tests to the six digit ID number on one of Armstrong's post Tour stage medical documents.
how come L'Equipe have the ID numbers but not the UCI?
Anyway as Ikkuh says "all cyclists are doped" |
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 12-10-2007 00:33
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Teams unite to form British 'superteam'
British teams RaphaCondor and Recycling.co.uk have announced that they will merge for the 2008 season, making a team which will have many of the country's top riders and led by one of the country's top directors, John Herety. The announcement comes just two weeks after British Cycling announced it would form its own professional team.
Herety, a highly respected director, has led the highly successful Recycling.co.uk team for the past two years after resigning from his post as national team director. "After working for many years with Team GB and for the past two seasons with the successful Recycling.co.uk team, I am looking forward to working with Rapha and Condor," Herety said. "Having met Dominique [Gabellini, RaphaCondor] and his colleagues during the course of the season their professionalism, competitiveness as well as their easy-going, honest and open nature makes the alliance feel good."
See: https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/web/..._unite.asp
Edited by SportingNonsense on 12-10-2007 00:35
|
| |
|
|
| KurtinSC |
Posted on 12-10-2007 04:53
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 997
Joined: 20-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Just for accuracy's sake, I will mention that those 1999 test results were actually performed 5 years later in 2004. Now I'm not sure what happens to a urine sample over 5 years of storage, but I'm sure you could peruse the internet to see if any tests would still be viable.
Apparently the tests that were performed were not the standard procedures used to find guild amonst racers... rather they were tests done as part of a wider research study on EPO tests and would not be considered sufficient to prove guilt on any rider. In a later finding, WADA was found to be in the wrong on all accusations against Armstrong and the reports in L'Equippe were found to be non-credible. The main problem seemed to be that since the tests were performed without supervision (since it was a study, NOT searching for evidence on a rider) and that since there was no A sample (which had been used up testing during the 1999 tour) there was no way to eliminate the possibility of tampering. Apparently there are some other scientific issues with excessive protein levels from excessive exercise also skewing results... though it's a bit above my head. Aparently the storage and transport of samples has to be done in very specific ways for urine to be tested for EPO in a scientifically valid manner, and it's extremely unlikey that samples taken prior to the test being invented were handled and stored in that manner.
On the flip side... a couple of former Armstrong teammates have said they believed he used EPO (though they never saw him use it). Several former Armstrong teammates have served drug suspensions. The lab doing the testing was found to not be searching for stuff directly on Armstrong (though they did break the law by releasing the documents to the newspaper). There are also reports that the doctor who performed his cancer operation was told he used EPO for years prior to that.
I personally think he doped his entire career... but I believe 85% of all cyclists dope, and 100% of those that are the "top level" cyclists dope. I don't think at this point you can win at the highest level of cycling without doping.
|
| |
|
|
| Frisky cat |
Posted on 12-10-2007 08:04
|
Amateur
Posts: 6
Joined: 11-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Two of Britain's leading road cycling teams are joining forces RaphaCondor and Recycling.co.uk are to merge for the 2008 season, some good news for once |
| |
|
|
| CrueTrue |
Posted on 12-10-2007 08:06
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 29989
Joined: 20-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
SportingNonsense wrote:
Teams unite to form British 'superteam'
British teams RaphaCondor and Recycling.co.uk have announced that they will merge for the 2008 season, making a team which will have many of the country's top riders and led by one of the country's top directors, John Herety. The announcement comes just two weeks after British Cycling announced it would form its own professional team.
Herety, a highly respected director, has led the highly successful Recycling.co.uk team for the past two years after resigning from his post as national team director. "After working for many years with Team GB and for the past two seasons with the successful Recycling.co.uk team, I am looking forward to working with Rapha and Condor," Herety said. "Having met Dominique [Gabellini, RaphaCondor] and his colleagues during the course of the season their professionalism, competitiveness as well as their easy-going, honest and open nature makes the alliance feel good."
See: https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/web/..._unite.asp
Two posts above yours, frisky, you would have won this quote |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 12-10-2007 09:00
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
KurtinSC wrote:
Just for accuracy's sake, I will mention that those 1999 test results were actually performed 5 years later in 2004. Now I'm not sure what happens to a urine sample over 5 years of storage, but I'm sure you could peruse the internet to see if any tests would still be viable.
Apparently the tests that were performed were not the standard procedures used to find guild amonst racers... rather they were tests done as part of a wider research study on EPO tests and would not be considered sufficient to prove guilt on any rider. In a later finding, WADA was found to be in the wrong on all accusations against Armstrong and the reports in L'Equippe were found to be non-credible. The main problem seemed to be that since the tests were performed without supervision (since it was a study, NOT searching for evidence on a rider) and that since there was no A sample (which had been used up testing during the 1999 tour) there was no way to eliminate the possibility of tampering. Apparently there are some other scientific issues with excessive protein levels from excessive exercise also skewing results... though it's a bit above my head. Aparently the storage and transport of samples has to be done in very specific ways for urine to be tested for EPO in a scientifically valid manner, and it's extremely unlikey that samples taken prior to the test being invented were handled and stored in that manner.
On the flip side... a couple of former Armstrong teammates have said they believed he used EPO (though they never saw him use it). Several former Armstrong teammates have served drug suspensions. The lab doing the testing was found to not be searching for stuff directly on Armstrong (though they did break the law by releasing the documents to the newspaper). There are also reports that the doctor who performed his cancer operation was told he used EPO for years prior to that.
I personally think he doped his entire career... but I believe 85% of all cyclists dope, and 100% of those that are the "top level" cyclists dope. I don't think at this point you can win at the highest level of cycling without doping.
5 years in a freezer, or carrying urine samples upside down before testing them might be against the procedures, but that doesn't make EPO appear in them out of nowhere. You can't convict somebody of EPO use in a court if such samples appear to be positive, but you can be sure the man used them.
Personnally, I'm more interested in the truth : "Did L.A. use EPO, yes or no ? Yes, he friggin' did" rather than in the legal point of view "Can L.A. be condamned for using EPO, yes or no ? No, he can't". Using the second one to claim he didn't use EPO is just lame, I do know it's not what you are doing here, but I've seen many (intelligent) people doing it on internet, how disappointing. 
The tests were performed in 2005, btw. not in 2004. The story is rather the following :
WADA ordered a study to the laboratory about the decreasing of EPO use between the 1998 and 1999 Tour de France, to see if it was right to speak of a "Tour of the renewal" in 1999. Tests were performed on B samples (not A, with a B one to use afterwards), as mentionned, as it was all that was left.
They were performed anonymously, but with a code to know if it were the same riders tested several times or not.
It later appeared that they didn't code the samples again, and used the codes present on them.
Three methods were used for testing. All the three of them are valid on their own.
L'Equipe knew what the laboratory was working on, and asked for tests conclusions. The lab didn't mind as the testings had been performed anonymously, it wouldn't harm anyone namely.
There, L'Equipe acted in a sneaky way. At the same time they asked the UCI the permission to write an article about the medicines Armstrong was authorised to use during the 1999 Tour de France, because of his cancer.
Vrijman (UCI guy who cleared Armstrong) says in his report, that UCI accepted to show tests forms from the 1999 TDF after clearing them from the medicines list (see how UCI covered Armstrong's ass, this should have led to L'Equipe writing Armstrong didn't take anything).
L'Equipe got a copy of those dope tests forms, on those forms was the name of the rider, and the code of the urine samples corresponding to each test.
Then they didn't write any of the two formerly mentionned articles (state of dope use in TDF 1998 and 1999, and which medicines Armstrong was authorised to take), but they matched samples numbers from both sources, and found that Armstrong was the man tested 6 times and 6 times positive (which is logical, as he won stages and carried the yellow jersey a lot, he was the most tested guy of that TDF).
Armstrong could have proved his innocence easily though (given he was really innocent), as the lab stated there was enough urine left to perform both a DNA test and other EPO tests. Of course the Texan refused, so much easier to claim it's a conspiracy by jealous Frenchies. |
| |
|
|
| KurtinSC |
Posted on 12-10-2007 13:22
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 997
Joined: 20-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
As I said before, I think he (along with probably the entire top 20 of every tour for the last 10-15 years) was doping.
But I will point out that the tests used to detect EPO have been found to be capable of being false under certain conditions. Specifically with improper transport. Also the EPO test is not a present/not present test. It provides a number which is then determined to be a pass/fail depending on it meeting a certain criteria. The proteins that are measured are not specific to EPO... they are classified as "EPO-like". The problem with that is that there ARE proteins that show up as "EPO-like" in most tests... they're just short of the pass/fail line established.
What that means is "EPO-like proteins" can get into your urine out of nowhere. It's why you have some cases where A and B samples do not both test positive. That's why they have all the conditions for testing... because the results can be incorrect (even though rare).
If more facts were available (such as was he barely topping the pass/fail line for the test or did the samples go way above that number) I'm sure Armstrong could be definitively identified... but we don't have those facts.
All in all I think all top atheletes over the last 10 years are doping in virtually every sport. I simply don't believe you can win at bike racing, running, swimming, basketball, football, baseball, tennis or anything unless you're cheating at this point. I've gotten to the point where it doesn't bother me much anymore... it's just part of the playing field for the sports. That may be a little jaded, but it lets me enjoy the Tour or the Boston Marathon or the Iron Man without getting hung up on who's clean and who's cheating. They're all cheating. |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 12-10-2007 14:31
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
I agree with the thing about most top athletes being cheaters. But I can't close my eyes on it, as I deeply respect those who fight without cheating and get spoiled every day (plus they're wrongly called talent-less riders/sportsmen).
As for Armstrong, each of his six samples was tested positive with the three different methods, which are all valuable on their own. I don't know if the three of them are based on EPO-like proteins though.
Had only some of those six (18) samples turned positive, that'd have left room for doubts, but a 18 positive on 18 tested is too much for doubts.
|
| |
|
