Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Professional Cycling For the Fans Follow the Tour de France,the Giro de Italia, the Spring Classics, or other professional cycling races? Here's your home...

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-07-12, 08:35 PM   #151
LarDasse74
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Grid Reference, SK
Bikes: I never learned to ride a bike. It is my deepest shame.
Posts: 3,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninety5rpm View Post
In other words, the tests are designed to be reliable for positives (if it returns positive, it's almost certainly a true positive), at the price of often being unreliable for negatives (a negative says very little about whether the subject is truly negative).

Further, the cut-points are known to the riders' doctors, so they can design regimens that allow them to dope without testing positive. There is a plethora of evidence that this is exactly what happens, especially for the rich riders like Armstrong who can afford the best doctors.
What you are saying is exactly true... except the riders who have money for the best doctors are *everyone.* That is, everyone with a wealthy team sponsor. It is sad that the USDA is targeting Armstrong, though... I guess he is one of the few left who has not admitted it.
LarDasse74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-12, 11:15 PM   #152
Talldog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ontario, Canada
Bikes: Several
Posts: 461
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
Thanks. Such knowledge may be well-known among the competitive bicycling community, but I am looking for reputable sources that affirm the existence of the various methods of cheating those tests.

Zingggg ... slam the door, LOL ! Good one.
Talldog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-12, 02:19 PM   #153
Jed19 
Senior Member
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by himespau View Post
Does Tyler Hamilton's book give any clues as to how they did it? There's a pro who has admitted to doping.

I know when I was in high school for our physicals we needed to compete in sports we had to take a piss test. The guy next to me offered to buy my cup of piss, but it'd taken me like 15 minutes to work it out so I wasn't giving it up to anyone. I'm sure professional athletes have more stringent controls on them than that, but I heard of a pro football player getting busted with something called the Whizzinator.

Let me tell you a short story. A long time ago, when I was a junior in college, I had a full-time summer job as a night clerk of a convenience store called Quiktrip in my college-town. I saw a lot of athletes always buying cigarette wrapping papers all the time, and I knew that school authorities were always testing athletes for drugs, recreational drugs, for the most part. So, one night, one of my school's most famous athlete came in with his girlfriend, and I struck up a conversation with him re how come all these marijuana smokers on an almost everyday basis and nobody getting caught. He laughed, then told me that the testing was a joke. He mentioned something to do with orange juice, ground black pepper and some other ingredients I can't recall, and how they (the testing authorities) won't ever be able to get a positive on any athlete who is half-way savvy at my school.

For some reason, that experience has always stuck with me.
__________________
Regards,

Jed
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-12, 12:56 PM   #154
Pug
High Modulus
 
Pug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, NJ
Bikes: Cervelo R3, Ridley X-Night
Posts: 658
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by himespau View Post
Does Tyler Hamilton's book give any clues as to how they did it? There's a pro who has admitted to doping.
Haven't read Tyler's book, but Death of Marco Pantini by Matt Rendell explains how easy it was for them to screw around especially when enforcement was based on arbitrary hemocrit levels. Nonetheless, Pantini did get busted when he inexplicably blew past the hemocrit threshold then in force. Also interesting was Marco's tremendous cocaine habit not getting flagged either.
Pug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-12, 02:35 PM   #155
Keith99
Senior Member
 
Keith99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by himespau View Post
Does Tyler Hamilton's book give any clues as to how they did it? There's a pro who has admitted to doping.

I know when I was in high school for our physicals we needed to compete in sports we had to take a piss test. The guy next to me offered to buy my cup of piss, but it'd taken me like 15 minutes to work it out so I wasn't giving it up to anyone. I'm sure professional athletes have more stringent controls on them than that, but I heard of a pro football player getting busted with something called the Whizzinator.
Basics of why there has to be no unattended time between when an athlete is told of the test and when they produce the specimen.

One can cathedrize a patient, drain all the urine out and replace it with a clean sample (probably the best would be the patients own). All but foolproof.

I say all but as I can see ways a smart tester could detect issues, especially if the wrong lube is used when inserting the catheder.

The Wizzinator is an external system to accomplish the same thing.

It also seems there are lots of ways to contaminate the sample to avoid a positive for some drugs, which is why the actuall urination has to be observed. That would drive me nuts.
Keith99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-12, 02:44 PM   #156
Keith99
Senior Member
 
Keith99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
Ever think about joining Mensa? I am not kidding. The consensus of the online Mensa forum is that Armstrong's drug testing record proves his innocence, and they could really use some of your knowledge.
I've generally not been impressed by Mensa members. Generally they are propel too concerend with being thought of as smart. The exception was a girl who was a member, who did not think all that highly of most Mensa chapters but who had found one that was fun.
Keith99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-12, 07:34 PM   #157
ApostateAbe
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Bikes:
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith99 View Post
I've generally not been impressed by Mensa members. Generally they are propel too concerend with being thought of as smart. The exception was a girl who was a member, who did not think all that highly of most Mensa chapters but who had found one that was fun.
I don't count myself as an exception to that rule, because intelligence is about the only thing I have going for me. Even so, I think the bad rap against Mensans is unfair. You would never know if someone is a Mensan unless he or she lets you know. If he or she lets you know, then a normal person would be inclined to think that the Mensan intends to brag. The Mensan who doesn't let you know would not be included in your evaluation, because you wouldn't know.
ApostateAbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-12, 04:27 PM   #158
Keith99
Senior Member
 
Keith99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
I don't count myself as an exception to that rule, because intelligence is about the only thing I have going for me. Even so, I think the bad rap against Mensans is unfair. You would never know if someone is a Mensan unless he or she lets you know. If he or she lets you know, then a normal person would be inclined to think that the Mensan intends to brag. The Mensan who doesn't let you know would not be included in your evaluation, because you wouldn't know.
Actually a very good point. The ones who get into a group like Mensa and have ot let the world know are likely not the best representitives of the group.
Keith99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-12, 06:36 PM   #159
ChasH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Bikes:
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have no particular views about Mensa, but why would anyone suppose that members of that society would have valuable insights into the matter?

No, you'd be much more likely to hear something sensible from those attending a meeting of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.

hmm, maybe that's where Ferrari got some of his ideas ..... in a Sports Medicine poster session perhaps
ChasH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-12, 01:56 PM   #160
Kurt Erlenbach
Senior Member
 
Kurt Erlenbach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Space Coast, Florida
Bikes:
Posts: 2,423
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I recently finished Hamilton's book. I strongly recommend it for anyone interested in the answer to this question. The short answer is; autologous blood doping, microdosing EPO, knowing the testing schedules, and having an escape plan if a test came up while "glowing." The book is a good read. One point he gets into that I found interesting was his response to the "leveling the playing field" argument - if everyone did it, then the playing field was fair for everyone. His answer is that that argument is not true. A racer's results are the consequence of physiology (including natural hematocrit levels), training, tactics,, equipment, and other factors. The purpose of doping essentially is to raise hematocrit. (As an aside, I got Aranesp, a form of EPO while doing chemo. That stuff is magic. When you're anemic, bumping up the hematocrit changes a rotten day to a good day. As a cyclist, I know that bumping up the number a few points would made a big difference.) So if everyone in the race bumps up their hematocrit to 50 (the UCI upper limit), it changes the calculus on all the other factors in determining the results. And it also means those who do not dope have no chance. Read the book. He burns Lance, and makes it clear what USADA's case is against Lance.
Kurt Erlenbach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-12, 08:15 PM   #161
Racer Ex 
Resident Alien
 
Racer Ex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Location, location.
Bikes:
Posts: 12,534
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Hamilton's statement that a dope test is more an IQ test is spot on. All you need to do is look at how many non analytical positives there have been to understand this.

You can dope your ass off and not get caught.
Racer Ex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-12, 11:08 AM   #162
Jed19 
Senior Member
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer Ex View Post
Hamilton's statement that a dope test is more an IQ test is spot on. All you need to do is look at how many non analytical positives there have been to understand this.

You can dope your ass off and not get caught.
Absolutely! Marion Jones proved that.
__________________
Regards,

Jed
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-12, 01:09 PM   #163
mprelaw
Senior Member
 
mprelaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Bikes:
Posts: 2,318
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer Ex View Post
Hamilton's statement that a dope test is more an IQ test is spot on. All you need to do is look at how many non analytical positives there have been to understand this.

You can dope your ass off and not get caught.
It's also a lot easier to dope your ass off if you can buy your way out of it when you do get caught. Which a lot of reports now seem to indicate that he was doing. Centered around a positive for EPO during the Tour de Suisse in the early 2000s (2001 seems to ring a bell?).

Although we should probably hold up final judgment on that until USADA releases its report, it certainly seems like they have some evidence of that taking place.
mprelaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-12, 04:20 PM   #164
colombo357
Senior Member
 
colombo357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 1,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer Ex View Post
Hamilton's statement that a dope test is more an IQ test is spot on. All you need to do is look at how many non analytical positives there have been to understand this.

You can dope your ass off and not get caught.
By the end of Tyler's book, it became clear that a dope test is an IQ test for the doping doctor, not the patient/athlete.

Hamilton never once screwed up himself. He got caught because of Fuentes. Fuentes and/or his assistant f-ed up the frozen blood bags, and Tyler got traces of blood, if not an entire bag of blood, from another rider.

Lance had the luxury of exclusive rights to Michele Ferrari's services, most definitely because he had the most money. Can't really blame him though.
colombo357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-12, 12:26 PM   #165
Shimagnolo
Senior Member
 
Shimagnolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Zang's Spur, CO
Bikes:
Posts: 7,517
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by colombo357 View Post
Hamilton never once screwed up himself. He got caught because of Fuentes. Fuentes and/or his assistant f-ed up the frozen blood bags, and Tyler got traces of blood, if not an entire bag of blood, from another rider.
Man, that sucks. That could have been pretty bad if the blood types were incompatible.

Tyler's book just arrived in the mail today.
Shimagnolo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-12, 01:24 AM   #166
dersan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 111
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The main problem in here is evolution.We expect better results from athelets,we want new world records we want our team to devastate their oppenents.Yeah the problem is humanbody evolves slowly.But our need are fast.So our atheletes use streoids and other stuff to gain uppper hand in the evolution.of course we will put rules to stop this but as we know rules are to be broken.
The main problem is whole evolution on the entire universe.And we can not stop it.So accept the results.
Yes lance armstrong doped and win 7 stages and he got cought.Now we want a guy who can win 8 times to pass armstrong.Do you belive this guy gonna not dope
dersan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-12, 06:19 AM   #167
Campag4life
Voice of the Industry
 
Campag4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 10,655
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dersan View Post
The main problem in here is evolution.We expect better results from athelets,we want new world records we want our team to devastate their oppenents.Yeah the problem is humanbody evolves slowly.But our need are fast.So our atheletes use streoids and other stuff to gain uppper hand in the evolution.of course we will put rules to stop this but as we know rules are to be broken.
The main problem is whole evolution on the entire universe.And we can not stop it.So accept the results.
Yes lance armstrong doped and win 7 stages and he got cought.Now we want a guy who can win 8 times to pass armstrong.Do you belive this guy gonna not dope
Your post smacks of you taking a different kind of dope.
Campag4life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-12, 08:33 AM   #168
achoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 4,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mprelaw View Post
It's also a lot easier to dope your ass off if you can buy your way out of it when you do get caught. Which a lot of reports now seem to indicate that he was doing. Centered around a positive for EPO during the Tour de Suisse in the early 2000s (2001 seems to ring a bell?).

Although we should probably hold up final judgment on that until USADA releases its report, it certainly seems like they have some evidence of that taking place.
Speaking of which:

http://espn.go.com/olympics/cycling/...le-delay-usada

Quote:
"UCI assumes that USADA have the file, the full file, as they've already made a decision based on it and therefore it's difficult to understand why it hasn't arrived yet," McQuaid said from the Road Cycling World Championships in the southern Netherlands.
I am shocked - shocked - to find USADA hasn't released their report yet.
achoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-12, 09:23 AM   #169
colombo357
Senior Member
 
colombo357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 1,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dersan View Post
The main problem is whole evolution on the entire universe.And we can not stop it.So accept the results.
Yes lance armstrong doped and win 7 stages and he got cought.Now we want a guy who can win 8 times to pass armstrong.Do you belive this guy gonna not dope
Who is "we"? Surely not cycling fans, just wannabes sitting around at home wearing yellow bracelets. Does that describe you pretty well? A real cycling fan does NOT want to see someone win 8 times. Contador might do it, but at least he'll do it in a spectacular fashion.

Read Tyler's book.
colombo357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-12, 09:32 AM   #170
colombo357
Senior Member
 
colombo357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 1,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by achoo View Post
I am shocked - shocked - to find USADA hasn't released their report yet.
Probably dotting their i's and crossing their t's.

USADA has no physical evidence, but plenty of eyewitness testimony, which poses a tricky situation. Also, that testimony implicates the UCI itself in a specific scandal (Tour de Suisse 2001) as well as general incompetence over the years.
colombo357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-12, 12:13 PM   #171
Jed19 
Senior Member
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by achoo View Post
I am shocked - shocked - to find USADA hasn't released their report yet.
Don't forget that the same evidence is gonna have to be used in Bruyneel's arbitration, so it makes sense to be done with Bruyneel's hearing before releasing that body of evidence to the UCI. That is exactly what I'll do if I were USADA.
__________________
Regards,

Jed
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-12, 12:40 PM   #172
achoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 4,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by colombo357 View Post
Probably dotting their i's and crossing their t's.

USADA has no physical evidence, but plenty of eyewitness testimony, which poses a tricky situation. Also, that testimony implicates the UCI itself in a specific scandal (Tour de Suisse 2001) as well as general incompetence over the years.
You mean they're still writing it? AFTER banning Armstrong?

Ummm, what's wrong with this picture?

I also suspect USADA is having problems making their decision compliant with Articles 17 and 25 of the World Anti-Doping Code.

http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/Wo...DE_2009_EN.pdf
achoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-12, 12:41 PM   #173
achoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 4,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jed19 View Post
Don't forget that the same evidence is gonna have to be used in Bruyneel's arbitration, so it makes sense to be done with Bruyneel's hearing before releasing that body of evidence to the UCI. That is exactly what I'll do if I were USADA.
Yeah. Heaven forbid Bruyneel would have a chance to examine the evidence being used against him....
achoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-12, 04:07 PM   #174
colombo357
Senior Member
 
colombo357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 1,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by achoo View Post
Ummm, what's wrong with this picture?
I didn't understand any of it until reading Tyler's book. His 60 minutes interview doesn't even scratch the surface.

Lance didn't bring doping into the peloton, and I don't think anyone can really hold his personal doping decisions against him. Where he went wrong was he allegedly controlled the doping of his teammates (treated everyone like crap except for Bruyneel and Ferrari) and teamed up with the UCI against his competitors. This goes beyond sports doping and crosses the line into drug dealing and sports fixing.

Yeah, there's a statute of limitations, but under these extreme circumstances that WADA has never seen and is unlikely to see again in the foreseeable future, exceptions can be made. It's the arbitration panel's decision. Also, we're talking about sports here... the bar is set lower than that of civil and criminal courts.

Like it or not, Lance Armstrong's athletic future is dismal. He better workout his arms now since all he'll be doing is pounding sand.
colombo357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-12, 04:19 PM   #175
colombo357
Senior Member
 
colombo357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 1,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by achoo View Post
Yeah. Heaven forbid Bruyneel would have a chance to examine the evidence being used against him....
Again, the eyewitness testimony that has not yet been revealed to the public poses a tricky situation.

There are two sides to this.

Lance Armstrong, Johan Bruyneel, and Michele Ferrari

vs.

Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis (I know... laughable) but also Frankie and Betsy Andreu, Jonathan Vaughters, Christian Vandevelde, George Hincapie, Levi Leipheimer, Kristin Armstrong, Sheryl Crow, etc.

A bunch of these guys were in fact doping only because "everyone else was doing it". Unlike Lance, they weren't controlling the drugs nor working directly with the UCI to fix the results. Big difference, and they shouldn't be thrown under the bus.
colombo357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:55 PM.