|
Doping in cycling, is it really?
|
| felix_29 |
Posted on 28-05-2012 21:21
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3054
Joined: 08-08-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Yes, that does make sense. Ever heard of the funtcion of testicles?
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 28-05-2012 21:30
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Aicar first appeared during 2009. Later that year, at the Tour, the contenders were ridiculously thin. And I do mean ridiculously. The journalists spent half the Tour talking about how thin riders were.
I especially remember them being amazed that Andy Schleck looked anorectic
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
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 25-11-2024 05:49
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Squire |
Posted on 28-05-2012 21:33
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1404
Joined: 24-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
No one beats Wiggins when it comes to thin-ness in the 09 Tour
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 28-05-2012 21:37
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Squire wrote:
No one beats Wiggins when it comes to thin-ness in the 09 Tour
Yeah, that was pretty ridiculous too.
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
|
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 28-05-2012 21:38
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Everytime I hear anorexic, cycling and 2009, there's one image to come to my mind. And it's not Andrew:
Damn, second Zabel of the day. I'm not in good shape. Gotta lose weight. 
Edited by kumazan on 28-05-2012 21:39
|
| |
|
|
| AaB-ern |
Posted on 28-05-2012 21:39
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 1489
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
In an interview this weekend, Sports Director of Lotto Pharma and former EPO user, Brian Holm, estimated 90 % of professional riders to be clean. Of course, it's just guessing, but his thoughts on the younger generation of professional cycling were quite interesting. He told about how the rest of the peloton and the sports directors hate the riders who get caught. |
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 28-05-2012 21:41
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
kumazan wrote:
That is doping, strictly speaking.
It's doping loosely speaking.
|
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 28-05-2012 21:41
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
I guess the journalist didn't ask him about Ibarguren. Of course not, that's not the journalists job nowadays.
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
It's doping loosely speaking.
Uh? Using a banned substance voluntarily to get a performance boost -> doping. Period.
Edited by kumazan on 28-05-2012 21:43
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 28-05-2012 21:45
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
AaB-ern wrote:
Sports Director of Lotto Pharma
Bye bye credibility
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 28-05-2012 21:45
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
kumazan wrote:
I guess the journalist didn't ask him about Ibarguren. Of course not, that's not the journalists job nowadays.
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
It's doping loosely speaking.
Uh? Using a banned substance voluntarily to get a performance boost -> doping. Period.
That's what I meant, it's not just a technicality, it's doping in every sense of the word.
|
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 28-05-2012 21:47
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Oh, yes, of course. I misread your post.
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 28-05-2012 22:00
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ian Butler wrote:
No, I'm pretty sure riders are allowed taking an amount of certain substances. Just to give an example, you can't have a male rider with 0% testosteron, you see? So of course, everyone makes sure their their percentage of testosteron is the allowed percentage. But that isn't dopin, strictly speaking.
You might know, or not, that it's a little more complicated than that.
They test for testosterone/epitestosterone ratio, as taking testosterone will only affect the first one, which will give an indication. They also test for endogenous/exogenous amounts (endogenous : body-produced, exogenous : external, which might be artificial or from another human body, or any other living body, actually).
You may claim your metabolism is acting weirdly, but you're not supposed to have any exogenous amount of some substances. Exogenous testosterone is found ? That's a positive test.
To an extent, the allowed amount of substances (nandrolone, testosterone), is the minimum amount that testing machines can measure. That's not legal of course, and they don't always warn when they manage to get a better accuracy (guess what happened with Contador's positive...). |
| |
|
|
| Feketelaszlo |
Posted on 28-05-2012 22:03
|
Junior Rider
Posts: 34
Joined: 31-10-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
AaB-ern wrote:
In an interview this weekend, Sports Director of Lotto Pharma and former EPO user, Brian Holm, estimated 90 % of professional riders to be clean. Of course, it's just guessing, but his thoughts on the younger generation of professional cycling were quite interesting. He told about how the rest of the peloton and the sports directors hate the riders who get caught.
Let's hope they're really that clean. But talking about the 90% - there are many in the peloton who don't need any doping, what for? I think in sprints these things won't help - the finish is decided by skill, speed and positioning. Lead-out men, helpers and bottle-carriers don't have to use it either, it wouldn't affect their performance too much. Doping matters in big tours and races where toughness and strength is important.
It's offtopic, but a cyclist joke about doping:
A cyclist speaks with the team-physician:
-Doctor, I saw the riders of the other team taking some strange medicines and they were so good at the race yesterday. Can you recommend us some similar stuff?
-Eat oranges.
-Will it help?
-No, but it tastes good. |
| |
|
|
| CrueTrue |
Posted on 28-05-2012 22:06
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 29989
Joined: 20-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
It's naive to think that doping is only useful to certain people / types. Lead-out men still need to be able to complete the stage, and they still need to be fresh by the end of the stage. A lot of different doping products can help with this.
And the same can be said about chess players or any other sports "athletes"  |
| |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 28-05-2012 22:44
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21854
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
I still believe that cycling is quite a clean sport. But I'm also still convinced that you can't win TDF on tapwater alone. The problem is, some products they call doping, others not. Of course, I'm not an expert in the field of illegal substances in sports, but that's just my opinion. |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 28-05-2012 22:47
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Feketelaszlo wrote:
But talking about the 90% - there are many in the peloton who don't need any doping, what for? I think in sprints these things won't help - the finish is decided by skill, speed and positioning.
Yeah, why dope to still be there, why dope to be fresher, why dope to be more agressive, or more relaxed, why dope to be faster ? Really, no point in doping for sprinters.
Feketelaszlo wrote:Lead-out men, helpers and bottle-carriers don't have to use it either, it wouldn't affect their performance too much.
Yeah, my 81 years old Grand-ma might sign with Team Sky next year, beware, she'll be launching Cavendish sprints. I should just check out whether she can ride a bike, but as physical condition doesn't matter, why not ?
Irony aside, the lead out guys must 1) be there 2) ride fast 3) several times. Doping wouldn't help ? Come on...
Feketelaszlo wrote:Doping matters in big tours and races where toughness and strength is important. Why are amateurs caught then ? Why are lesser riders caught then ? Why are athletes cheating in other sports ? Why is the human being a natural-born cheating-prone creature ? |
| |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 28-05-2012 22:48
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21854
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
kumazan wrote:
That is doping, strictly speaking.
Anything above the allowed amount would be doping, if you're following the rules. You get my point, or is it not that clear? I'm not saying it's a good thing, I'm just saying that if hypothetically they could use 10g of product X, because of a cold or something, any amount up to 10g is not considered doping, but anything from 11g is. I hope you do get my point, because it's much more difficult explaining something so abstract in another language. So excuse me if this is Chinese to you (also not my native tongue, btw ) |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 28-05-2012 22:52
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ian Butler wrote:
I still believe that cycling is quite a clean sport. But I'm also still convinced that you can't win TDF on tapwater alone. The problem is, some products they call doping, others not. Of course, I'm not an expert in the field of illegal substances in sports, but that's just my opinion.
There's a defined list of products (I have it, in French language though, it's from 2011 too, but still), it's up to people to check what they take and not take anything that's on that list. What's the problem ?
Of course there are several ridiculous situations, like Franck Bouyer from JR Bernaudeau's team, who had a recognised condition that made him a sleepy (narcoleptic) guy, yet even though there was one medicine that could solve his problems, he couldn't take it because it'd make him positive.
At the same time, many riders were using AUT for a bunch of pathologies they've never really had. That increased their performances, but given they didn't get controlled when they used excessive amounts of it, they could still ride freely. |
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 28-05-2012 22:53
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ian Butler wrote:
kumazan wrote:
That is doping, strictly speaking.
Anything above the allowed amount would be doping, if you're following the rules. You get my point, or is it not that clear? I'm not saying it's a good thing, I'm just saying that if hypothetically they could use 10g of product X, because of a cold or something, any amount up to 10g is not considered doping, but anything from 11g is. I hope you do get my point, because it's much more difficult explaining something so abstract in another language. So excuse me if this is Chinese to you (also not my native tongue, btw )
While they may not get caught for it, it is still doping.
|
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 28-05-2012 22:58
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ian Butler wrote:
kumazan wrote:
That is doping, strictly speaking.
Anything above the allowed amount would be doping, if you're following the rules. You get my point, or is it not that clear? I'm not saying it's a good thing, I'm just saying that if hypothetically they could use 10g of product X, because of a cold or something, any amount up to 10g is not considered doping, but anything from 11g is. I hope you do get my point, because it's much more difficult explaining something so abstract in another language. So excuse me if this is Chinese to you (also not my native tongue, btw )
No, you're very clear, but it doesn't make any sense. I repeat, voluntarily taking any banned substance to get a performance boost is D-O-P-I-N-G. Whether enough to get caught or not is irrelevant.
Or is it not doping to have a blood transfussion if you do it right and it goes under the blood passport radar?
Edited by kumazan on 28-05-2012 22:58
|
| |
|
