|
News in July
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 31-07-2014 06:25
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
It will be nice to see him ride and possibly battle the top5 at Vuelta, what a field it will be. I think he will get banned sooner or later, but why he should sit at home, when authorities are working in slowest way possible.
|
| |
|
|
| ShortsNL |
Posted on 31-07-2014 07:29
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 898
Joined: 17-11-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Jacdk wrote:
deek12345 wrote:
Jacdk wrote:
I dont see a problem here , if UCI didn´t want him to ride they should suspend him or work a bit faster its not like have have had over 2 years to deal with this.
don't have a problem either, should be innocent until proven guilty, IMO.
Same here no matter which rider they are and should be considered innocent until they are proven guilty.
Something i feel UCI have a huge problem with sometimes.
Except that he has been proven guilty already by CADF. UCI simply havent punished him for it yet. The fact that he's being allowed to ride by his team isn't the problem (except lol Oleg for letting a proved doped rider race) But UCI indeed not punishing him yet.
Whether or not he is proved to dope is not a matter of question But a matter of fact. That is, unless you feel like hating on the UCI because they are proceeding against one of your favorite riders.
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 25-11-2024 03:54
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Guido Mukk |
Posted on 31-07-2014 09:43
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15830
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Oleg is more and more idiot.
Take the penalty soon as possible and move one is always had been best solution.. |
| |
|
|
| admirschleck |
Posted on 31-07-2014 09:48
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6690
Joined: 11-10-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
ShortsNL wrote:
Except that he has been proven guilty already by CADF. UCI simply havent punished him for it yet. The fact that he's being allowed to ride by his team isn't the problem (except lol Oleg for letting a proved doped rider race) But UCI indeed not punishing him yet.
Whether or not he is proved to dope is not a matter of question But a matter of fact. That is, unless you feel like hating on the UCI because they are proceeding against one of your favorite riders.
Although I am really not in all this doping stuff and I am really not informed much about it, simply because I don't care about it (I already stated my opinion that I think most, if not all, cyclists dope, as well as footballers, basketball players and most of other pro sportmen) - I partly agree with you. However, what pisses me off is double standards by UCI that are so visible. Situation with Sky, not allowing Kreuziger to ride just before Le Tour, literally skipping dope tests for some defined group of riders and clear examples like that makes me stay on Kreuziger's side - for now.
|
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 31-07-2014 09:53
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
Guido Mukk wrote:
Oleg is more and more idiot.
Take the penalty soon as possible and move one is always had been best solution..
What penalty?? Nobody was penalized yet, so Kreuziger should go and beg for a ban? UCI incompetence is incredible. He should have been given a ban two years ago...
|
| |
|
|
| CountArach |
Posted on 31-07-2014 11:42
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8290
Joined: 14-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
Guido Mukk wrote:
Oleg is more and more idiot.
Take the penalty soon as possible and move one is always had been best solution..
What penalty?? Nobody was penalized yet, so Kreuziger should go and beg for a ban? UCI incompetence is incredible. He should have been given a ban two years ago...
I've stated it before, and I am sure i will state it again...
That is not how the Bio passport works.
For the bio passport, data is collected over a long period of time and then anomalies are found. However, for someone to realise that they have an anomalous result they must first have a lot of data that proves that this result is indeed not in line with the rest of the data. They need results from before and after this problematic result in order to prove that it is indeed problematic. The only exception would be something like a stupid amount of EPO, which would show a positive anyway.
To put it another way:
https://inrng.com/...-passport/
Another delay is the gap between the apparent anomalous data and the UCI starting to ask questions. But this is how the system works, it is unlikely the AMPU “alarm bell” rang the instant the data were logged. Instead it’s the pattern over time that allows retrospective analysis.
Now, has the UCI delayed? Maybe. Can we know if that is the fact? Of course not. We don't know how often Kreuziger is tested and thus how many data points there are. We can't know how long the review process between the three corroborating experts takes. There are a lot of questions here.
|
| |
|
|
| Jacdk |
Posted on 31-07-2014 12:10
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 910
Joined: 20-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
ShortsNL wrote:
Except that he has been proven guilty already by CADF. UCI simply havent punished him for it yet. The fact that he's being allowed to ride by his team isn't the problem (except lol Oleg for letting a proved doped rider race) But UCI indeed not punishing him yet.
Whether or not he is proved to dope is not a matter of question But a matter of fact. That is, unless you feel like hating on the UCI because they are proceeding against one of your favorite riders.
I don't know which news you have been reading but no he hasn't been found guilty of anything, if CADF which btw has no real power except for being a part of UCI, had found a positive sample Kreuziger would have been banned by now.
What has happened is that UCI´s doping panel has again found the irregularities to be "doping" related and have "rejected" the explanation provided by Kreuziger and the teams experts. Which made them send the letter to Kreuziger and the team in may/june just before the Tour which led to him being withdrawn from the Tour, but since then nothing has happened and considering that Locke has received his ban, its strange that UCI seems to drag their feets with this.
So no Kreuziger is not a rider who have been caught using doping. What we have here is a riders bio-passport which contains data that is suspicious but no one really knows what caused them.
So UCI either needs to get their butt in gear and give him a ban or suspend him until the case is over. But neither has happened and therefore there is absolute no reason why he shouldn't ride. |
| |
|
|
| Jacdk |
Posted on 31-07-2014 12:13
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 910
Joined: 20-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Guido Mukk wrote:
Oleg is more and more idiot.
Take the penalty soon as possible and move one is always had been best solution..
How is Oleg Tinkoff a idiot?
And take what penalty? if kreuziger is found guilty he will be banned no matter what Oleg might think. |
| |
|
|
| ShortsNL |
Posted on 31-07-2014 13:54
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 898
Joined: 17-11-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Jacdk wrote:
I don't know which news you have been reading but no he hasn't been found guilty of anything, if CADF which btw has no real power except for being a part of UCI, had found a positive sample Kreuziger would have been banned by now.
What has happened is that UCI´s doping panel has again found the irregularities to be "doping" related and have "rejected" the explanation provided by Kreuziger and the teams experts. Which made them send the letter to Kreuziger and the team in may/june just before the Tour which led to him being withdrawn from the Tour, but since then nothing has happened and considering that Locke has received his ban, its strange that UCI seems to drag their feets with this.
So no Kreuziger is not a rider who have been caught using doping. What we have here is a riders bio-passport which contains data that is suspicious but no one really knows what caused them.
So UCI either needs to get their butt in gear and give him a ban or suspend him until the case is over. But neither has happened and therefore there is absolute no reason why he shouldn't ride.
-APMU runs the investigation, not CADF/UCI. APMU is funded by WADA. APMU then makes recommendations to CADF/UCI based on their research. APMU found the naturally unexplainable data. This is not something was thought up down the hall of Cookson's office.
-They didn't find a positive, that is not how the bio passport works. They look at his physiological values for lengthy periods of time, to be able to say with certainty if something unnatural has happened:
Spoiler The software rings an alarm bell if an athlete’s numbers deviate from an established patten. When this happens an expert with a background in clinical haematology, sports medicine and/or exercise physiology reviews the data from the system. The expert has four options:
do nothing because the data look normal to the human eye/brain
recommend the athlete is placed on a list for target testing
alert the athlete that they could be suffering from a serious illness
state improbable natural causes, a likely doping case
In the event of the fourth option, the procedures continue for the APMU. Two more experts are asked to evaluate the data and they can each recommend one of the four options above. All three must review the same data set and only if each concludes that, in the words of WADA’s procedural manuals, “it is highly likely that a prohibited substance or prohibited method had been used and unlikely that it is the result of any other cause” will the case proceed.
Above taken from INRNG.
Are you suggesting that the bio passport is not a reliable way of finding out drug cheats? That the fact that APMU has sent this case to the UCI/CADF somehow means he isn't actually doping? Can you really make a case for such a statement?
-Kreuziger hasn't been banned because he hasn't had his anti-doping hearing yet. See here and here. As we saw in the JTL case, this procedure can take up to another 7-8 months, before the rider actually gets banned.This has nothing to do with the UCI dragging its feet, it's simply how long the process takes.
-You are stating that the UCI has done nothing on Roman's case since the Tour. How do you know that? We don't know what happened because there haven't been any news reports on it. Don't say nothing has happened if you can't back it up.
If you are expecting the UCI to say anything, think again. They haven't released anything on the JTL case (not even that they would start an investigation on him) until he was suspended by them, so why should they do now in Roman's case?
-You can put "quotation marks" around the words doping and rejected but that doesn't make them any less of a fact. APMU have caught him doping based on his values. The explanation by Kreuziger was rejected because he couldn't substantially disprove the analysis done by APMU. If anything, you should consider putting quotation marks on Roman's "explanation" by his "experts". After all, all we know about them is what Roman has told us (which by the way, is practically nothing).
You are spinning the story based on your own opinion, instead of basing your opinion on the facts at hand: you are misrepresenting facts as false information and you are misrepresenting false information as fact. By doing this you are simply spreading lies on the forum.
Edited by ShortsNL on 07-08-2014 13:43
|
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 01-08-2014 06:25
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
ShortsNL wrote:
Jacdk wrote:
I don't know which news you have been reading but no he hasn't been found guilty of anything, if CADF which btw has no real power except for being a part of UCI, had found a positive sample Kreuziger would have been banned by now.
What has happened is that UCI´s doping panel has again found the irregularities to be "doping" related and have "rejected" the explanation provided by Kreuziger and the teams experts. Which made them send the letter to Kreuziger and the team in may/june just before the Tour which led to him being withdrawn from the Tour, but since then nothing has happened and considering that Locke has received his ban, its strange that UCI seems to drag their feets with this.
So no Kreuziger is not a rider who have been caught using doping. What we have here is a riders bio-passport which contains data that is suspicious but no one really knows what caused them.
So UCI either needs to get their butt in gear and give him a ban or suspend him until the case is over. But neither has happened and therefore there is absolute no reason why he shouldn't ride.
-APMU runs the investigation, not CADF/UCI. APMU is funded by WADA. APMU then makes recommendations to CADF/UCI based on their research. APMU found the naturally unexplainable data. This is not something was thought up down the hall of Cookson's office.
-They didn't find a positive, that is not how the bio passport works. They look at his physiological values for lengthy periods of time, to be able to say with certainty if something unnatural has happened:
Spoiler The software rings an alarm bell if an athlete’s numbers deviate from an established patten. When this happens an expert with a background in clinical haematology, sports medicine and/or exercise physiology reviews the data from the system. The expert has four options:
do nothing because the data look normal to the human eye/brain
recommend the athlete is placed on a list for target testing
alert the athlete that they could be suffering from a serious illness
state improbable natural causes, a likely doping case
In the event of the fourth option, the procedures continue for the APMU. Two more experts are asked to evaluate the data and they can each recommend one of the four options above. All three must review the same data set and only if each concludes that, in the words of WADA’s procedural manuals, “it is highly likely that a prohibited substance or prohibited method had been used and unlikely that it is the result of any other cause” will the case proceed.
Above taken from INRNG.
Are you suggesting that the bio passport is not a reliable way of finding out drug cheats? That the fact that APMU has sent this case to the UCI/CADF somehow means he isn't actually doping? Can you really make a case for such a statement?
-Kreuziger hasn't been banned because he hasn't had his anti-doping hearing yet. See here and here. As we saw in the JTL case, this procedure can take up to another 7-8 months, before the rider actually gets banned.This has nothing to do with the UCI dragging its feet, it's simply how long the process takes.
-You are stating that the UCI has done nothing on Roman's case since the Tour. How do you know that? We don't know what happened because there haven't been any news reports on it. Don't say nothing has happened if you can't back it up.
If you are expecting the UCI to say anything, think again. They haven't released anything on the JTL case (not even that they would start an investigation on him) until he was suspended by them, so why should they do now in Roman's case?
-You can put "quotation marks" around the words doping and rejected but that doesn't make them any less of a fact. APMU have caught him doping based on his values. The explanation by Kreuziger was rejected because he couldn't substantially disprove the analysis done by APMU. If anything, you should consider putting quotation marks on Roman's "explanation" by his "experts". After all, all we know about them is what Roman has told us (which by the way, is practically nothing).
You are spinning the story based on your own opinion, instead of basing your opinion on the facts at hand: you are misrepresenting facts as false information and you are misrepresenting false information as fact. By doing this you are simply spreading lies on the forum.
You still continue to reffer to JTLs case. Remind me, which year was that abnormalities of JTL? I will answer for you...2012/2013.
Abnormalities of Kreuziger are from 2011 and first half of 2012. Case of JTL is over and Kreuziger is still being dragged around. If one year is enough to establish the case against JTL, why one more year is not enough for Kreuziger?
You say there is no other explanation than doping, so why they are asking for answers and experts from the riders side instead of establishing a doping hearing?. I agree it is how the system works, but in fact this system sucks balls and should be changed...
Edited by Avin Wargunnson on 01-08-2014 06:26
|
| |
|
|
| valverde321 |
Posted on 01-08-2014 06:35
|
World Champion
Posts: 12986
Joined: 20-05-2009
PCM$: 530.00
|
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
ShortsNL wrote:
Jacdk wrote:
I don't know which news you have been reading but no he hasn't been found guilty of anything, if CADF which btw has no real power except for being a part of UCI, had found a positive sample Kreuziger would have been banned by now.
What has happened is that UCI´s doping panel has again found the irregularities to be "doping" related and have "rejected" the explanation provided by Kreuziger and the teams experts. Which made them send the letter to Kreuziger and the team in may/june just before the Tour which led to him being withdrawn from the Tour, but since then nothing has happened and considering that Locke has received his ban, its strange that UCI seems to drag their feets with this.
So no Kreuziger is not a rider who have been caught using doping. What we have here is a riders bio-passport which contains data that is suspicious but no one really knows what caused them.
So UCI either needs to get their butt in gear and give him a ban or suspend him until the case is over. But neither has happened and therefore there is absolute no reason why he shouldn't ride.
-APMU runs the investigation, not CADF/UCI. APMU is funded by WADA. APMU then makes recommendations to CADF/UCI based on their research. APMU found the naturally unexplainable data. This is not something was thought up down the hall of Cookson's office.
-They didn't find a positive, that is not how the bio passport works. They look at his physiological values for lengthy periods of time, to be able to say with certainty if something unnatural has happened:
Spoiler The software rings an alarm bell if an athlete’s numbers deviate from an established patten. When this happens an expert with a background in clinical haematology, sports medicine and/or exercise physiology reviews the data from the system. The expert has four options:
do nothing because the data look normal to the human eye/brain
recommend the athlete is placed on a list for target testing
alert the athlete that they could be suffering from a serious illness
state improbable natural causes, a likely doping case
In the event of the fourth option, the procedures continue for the APMU. Two more experts are asked to evaluate the data and they can each recommend one of the four options above. All three must review the same data set and only if each concludes that, in the words of WADA’s procedural manuals, “it is highly likely that a prohibited substance or prohibited method had been used and unlikely that it is the result of any other cause” will the case proceed.
Above taken from INRNG.
Are you suggesting that the bio passport is not a reliable way of finding out drug cheats? That the fact that APMU has sent this case to the UCI/CADF somehow means he isn't actually doping? Can you really make a case for such a statement?
-Kreuziger hasn't been banned because he hasn't had his anti-doping hearing yet. See here and here. As we saw in the JTL case, this procedure can take up to another 7-8 months, before the rider actually gets banned.This has nothing to do with the UCI dragging its feet, it's simply how long the process takes.
-You are stating that the UCI has done nothing on Roman's case since the Tour. How do you know that? We don't know what happened because there haven't been any news reports on it. Don't say nothing has happened if you can't back it up.
If you are expecting the UCI to say anything, think again. They haven't released anything on the JTL case (not even that they would start an investigation on him) until he was suspended by them, so why should they do now in Roman's case?
-You can put "quotation marks" around the words doping and rejected but that doesn't make them any less of a fact. APMU have caught him doping based on his values. The explanation by Kreuziger was rejected because he couldn't substantially disprove the analysis done by APMU. If anything, you should consider putting quotation marks on Roman's "explanation" by his "experts". After all, all we know about them is what Roman has told us (which by the way, is practically nothing).
You are spinning the story based on your own opinion, instead of basing your opinion on the facts at hand: you are misrepresenting facts as false information and you are misrepresenting false information as fact. By doing this you are simply spreading lies on the forum.
You still continue to reffer to JTLs case. Remind me, which year was that abnormalities of JTL? I will answer for you...2012/2013.
Abnormalities of Kreuziger are from 2011 and first half of 2012. Case of JTL is over and Kreuziger is still being dragged around. If one year is enough to establish the case against JTL, why one more year is not enough for Kreuziger?
You say there is no other explanation than doping, so why they are asking for answers and experts from the riders side instead of establishing a doping hearing?. I agree it is how the system works, but in fact this system sucks balls and should be changed...
I like the idea of the bio-passport but the whole doing something when they find an irregularity is the issue here imo.
|
| |
|
|
| Guido Mukk |
Posted on 01-08-2014 07:20
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15830
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
Guido Mukk wrote:
Oleg is more and more idiot.
Take the penalty soon as possible and move one is always had been best solution..
What penalty?? Nobody was penalized yet, so Kreuziger should go and beg for a ban? UCI incompetence is incredible. He should have been given a ban two years ago...
yeaah..race at Vuelta, have fun..and he wont be able to ride even 2015 TdF after that. Because he's race pause started at the end of the season.
And all that Because team just wont do anything about theyr suspicious riders. |
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 01-08-2014 07:29
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
Guido Mukk wrote:
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
Guido Mukk wrote:
Oleg is more and more idiot.
Take the penalty soon as possible and move one is always had been best solution..
What penalty?? Nobody was penalized yet, so Kreuziger should go and beg for a ban? UCI incompetence is incredible. He should have been given a ban two years ago...
yeaah..race at Vuelta, have fun..and he wont be able to ride even 2015 TdF after that. Because he's race pause started at the end of the season.
And all that Because team just wont do anything about theyr suspicious riders.
Guido, you are off here, as team has nothing to do about when he will get his possible ban started, that is the call of UCI. It is even opposite of what you say,as it would be stupid to sit Kreuziger now and another two years because of ban....better race him when he is allowed to by UCI.
Also Saxo is commited to let Kreuziger ride as stated in contract. He is not suspended, so he is allowed to ride. Kreuziger could even sue Saxo, if they were forbidding him to ride for a longer period of time.
Edited by Avin Wargunnson on 01-08-2014 07:30
|
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 01-08-2014 09:09
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
Meanwhile ,Kreuziger just got himslef a new lawyer and says that he hopes his case will move on before Christmas. Gosh, i hope it will be "solved" sooner...
He again repeated that he send his data to three experts without mentioning his name before the results came back. All of them said there is nothing abnormal in his biological passport data.
|
| |
|
|
| The Hobbit |
Posted on 01-08-2014 09:11
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2730
Joined: 18-08-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
I think what people aren't getting is they don't just find an abnormality, or an irregularity, immediately, they might notice something like a slight rise or decrease in a value, which inherently isn't enough to suggest someone is doping as it is more likely natural. The cyclist could then be put on a list to watch, or recommended for more tests. The only way you can prove something is to take lots of data and compare it to see if there is an issue. They do act as soon as they see something dodgy, they just don't announce it, as that would look seriously stupid since a lot of the time it is probably natural. |
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 01-08-2014 09:14
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
I understand the process. Problem is, that on exactly same data (at least i hope riders are provided same data as UCI have, to defend themselves) are for someone "clear signs of doping" and for other experts "nothing abnormal". So who is right?
|
| |
|
|
| The Hobbit |
Posted on 01-08-2014 09:17
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2730
Joined: 18-08-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
It is pretty hard to tell, as even with this system, it is not an exact process, unlike with normal tests, where you are above the limit or you aren't, this time it has to be judged, and like anything the human eye can interpret things differently, which I guess means its probably pretty close. |
| |
|
|
| Guido Mukk |
Posted on 01-08-2014 14:11
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15830
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
I understand the process. Problem is, that on exactly same data (at least i hope riders are provided same data as UCI have, to defend themselves) are for someone "clear signs of doping" and for other experts "nothing abnormal". So who is right?
you just need to drop down these Czech glasses for a moment.
Like our national treasure here at estonia cross country skier Veerpalu beat WADA at international court..so?! For me he is still a doper. |
| |
|
|
| admirschleck |
Posted on 01-08-2014 14:58
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6690
Joined: 11-10-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
https://prntscr.co...
Hmm.
|
| |
|
|
| Dusen |
Posted on 01-08-2014 15:07
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1173
Joined: 30-07-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Lol did tinkov actually tag Kreuziger in his tweet xD |
| |
|
