Van Den Broeck admits to having visited presumed doping doc Mertens - Page 4 - Cyclingnews Forum

Go Back   Cyclingnews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 01-07-13, 22:04
Cloxxki Cloxxki is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,926
Default

Throw O2 on a fire, what happens? Yet putting O3 in your blood using a needle is not something to worry over?
I'm for zero tolerance here. Was a needle involved? 2 year ban, done.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-07-13, 22:09
Netserk's Avatar
Netserk Netserk is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mellow Velo View Post
I'd say some of the guys on 0 are as dodgy as they come.
Who?

I agree for Horner (and perhaps Voeckler and Canc), but other than those I don't view any of the others as extremely dodgy.

EDIT:
__________________
Cancellara is like The Black Album. Really good but way overrated.
Quote:
Definition of Wheelsucking:
When a rider refuses to take a pull even though it is tactically and/or strategically more sound to take a pull
*Refusing to pull when it is tactically and/or strategically more sound not to is therefore not wheelsucking
Change my pitch up/Smack my bitch up

Last edited by Netserk; 01-07-13 at 22:11.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-07-13, 22:14
staubsauger staubsauger is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 582
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Netserk View Post
Who?

I agree for Horner (and perhaps Voeckler and Canc), but other than those I don't view any of the others as extremely dodgy.

EDIT:
Voeckler only became suspicious from 2011 on. Maybe Europcar was just finally joining the juice-club after the Bbox nearly collapsed at the end of 2010.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-07-13, 22:26
taiwan's Avatar
taiwan taiwan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,477
Default

That list is a load of cobblers. They couldn't even print it in coherent columns. Says it all. Horner zero. AHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHHAHAAHAHAHAAH.

OK stupid post, but it's clearly not a straightforward index of cleanlihood.
__________________
Scientific Expert

Last edited by taiwan; 01-08-13 at 10:33.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-08-13, 00:38
Orvieto's Avatar
Orvieto Orvieto is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 117
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theyoungest View Post
A suspicion index is just that. If you don't think the guys on the top are more suspicious than the guys on the bottom you don't attach value to it. Simple.
It's important to remember that this is an index of suspicion for a specific point in time. Earning a 0 in 2011 doesn't mean that there was never any suspicion. Indeed there riders here who subsequently confessed to doping who have 1 and 0 ratings (Zabriskie, Barie, Hincapie). We don't know what the suspicion index was in later in 2012 or in 2010 and earlier. Indeed perhaps the reason that the former Disco/Postal riders were rated zeros in 2011 is because the UCI was comparing their performances to earlier times when their suspicion index was higher.

A low suspicion number in 2011 doesn't exonerate anyone (any more than a high index convicts someone), it is just a handicapping of doping probability based on evidence available to the compilers of the index. There may may be evidence that the compilers were not aware of. I note that Di Gregario was rated a 2 and was arrested at the 2012 TDF. The index sets the odds, but sometimes long shots come in.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-08-13, 05:36
18-Valve. (pithy) 18-Valve. (pithy) is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,062
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orvieto View Post
It's important to remember that this is an index of suspicion for a specific point in time. Earning a 0 in 2011 doesn't mean that there was never any suspicion. Indeed there riders here who subsequently confessed to doping who have 1 and 0 ratings (Zabriskie, Barie, Hincapie). We don't know what the suspicion index was in later in 2012 or in 2010 and earlier. Indeed perhaps the reason that the former Disco/Postal riders were rated zeros in 2011 is because the UCI was comparing their performances to earlier times when their suspicion index was higher.

A low suspicion number in 2011 doesn't exonerate anyone (any more than a high index convicts someone), it is just a handicapping of doping probability based on evidence available to the compilers of the index. There may may be evidence that the compilers were not aware of. I note that Di Gregario was rated a 2 and was arrested at the 2012 TDF. The index sets the odds, but sometimes long shots come in.
Di Gregario was injected with ozone-enriched blood and glucose, but hasn't been proven to have taken anything else, as far as I know. He may indeed have been relatively clean.
__________________
"The likelihood of cheats succeeding in the London Olympics is somewhat remote." - David Howman, WADA Director General
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-08-13, 07:10
dsut4392 dsut4392 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 562
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theyoungest View Post
A suspicion index is just that. If you don't think the guys on the top are more suspicious than the guys on the bottom you don't attach value to it. Simple.
The utility of any screening test is always a balance between sensitivity, specificity and prevalence (the consequence of a false positive/false negative is also important).

In the context of this index of suspicion being to enable targeting of dirty riders for easy anti-doping wins, it's entirely plausible that the index be biased to high specificity [we only want to target people we have a high chance of busting] and sacrifice sensitivity [we don't care about busting every doper, particularly given the presumed high prevalence of doping].

There's a good primer at:http://www.ehd.org/science_technology_testresults.php.

Needless to say the timing of any test is also important; one could test negative with the best pregnancy test in the world on 1 January and still give birth in September...
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-08-13, 09:57
Mr.38% Mr.38% is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 337
Default

Word from a friend (researching at the Cologne Sports University) is, UV therapy may be related to possible positive effects on CNS, PNS, especially during intensive/extensive training periods. So even morally it's kind of an attempt to dope if you would like to say so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroregeneration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_D
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-08-13, 10:23
Dear Wiggo's Avatar
Dear Wiggo Dear Wiggo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Sunny Australia
Posts: 5,558
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.38% View Post
Word from a friend (researching at the Cologne Sports University) is, UV therapy may be related to possible positive effects on CNS, PNS, especially during intensive/extensive training periods. So even morally it's kind of an attempt to dope if you would like to say so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroregeneration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_D
This makes far more sense.

It seems imminently risky to do a procedure like that (high risk) for such little reward (not getting a cold as was previously stated as the reason for the procedure).
__________________
Letters to and from the pro peloton. twitter | blog
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-09-13, 17:33
Fearless Greg Lemond's Avatar
Fearless Greg Lemond Fearless Greg Lemond is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 3,392
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloxxki View Post
Was a needle involved? 2 year ban, done.
Agreed, I was only trying to explain.....

Never mind

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...5jmaH80#t=225s

vetooo ‏@ammattipyoraily
#Tour 1990, Luz Ardiden (13.30 km, 7.44 %, 989 m). Greg LeMond: 39 min 46 sec, 20.07 Kph, VAM 1492 m/h, ~5.40-5.50 W/kg.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:53.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.