Log in:  

Register

Samuel Sanchez positive for growth hormone

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

Moderators: Irondan, Eshnar, Red Rick, Valv.Piti, Pricey_sky, Tonton, King Boonen

Re: Re:

18 Aug 2017 13:30

staubsauger wrote:
Red Rick wrote:
Jancouver wrote:
Saint Unix wrote:
Durden93 wrote:
Does Ricco count? He had two stages wins halfway through the tour when he was popped.

Contador was after Ricco.


Contador got busted in 2011 ... so does it mean that there was no big name busted in six years?

So yeah, the peloton is clean since no big name got busted in six years and all the testing definitely works, right?

Or am I missing something? :cool:

The second Ricco bust?
Or the 3rd Di Luca bust?
Frank Schleck

I don't remember

Arguably it's Schleck who was 3rd at the Tour the year before. Since Menchov, just like Di Luca, Sanchez and Ricco 2.0 weren't big names anymore when they got caught and Contador instantly was about to get covered up. But Fränk was busy with a pretty mediocre season when he tested positive and maybe already was in decline. Ricco was the new kid on the block when he got caught. Runner up at both the Tour of Italy and Lombardy. Twice stage winner at the Tour. Tested positive while being in the polka dot jersey. Had won the Tre Cime stage at the Giro and 2 stages at T-A. He just had become a superstar. Absolutely a big gun. But that was 2008!

It's Di Luca in 2009 actually. Runner up at the Giro. Champion back in 2007. Winner of multiple classics. About to sign a big paycheck contract with Lampre because of his Indian summer. The Cera positive eventually ruined his career.


2008 Tour was a special case because:

a) The manufacturers of CERA (Roche) helped WADA develop a test while it was still in clinical trials.
b) CERA stays in the body much longer than EPO.
c) The French ran anti-doping themselves at the 2008 Tour due to the dispute with the UCI and seem to have done a much better job of it, considering the number of guys they caught.

It was braindead of Di Luca to get caught for CERA in 2009 when Ricco, Piepoli, Schumacher, and Kohl were all serving bans for same.
User avatar vedrafjord
Member
 
Posts: 760
Joined: 15 Jan 2013 03:35
Location: Land of Ire

Re: Samuel Sanchez positive for growth hormone

18 Aug 2017 13:58

JosephK wrote:I feel for Sammy. Who knew that he would be the season's designated sacrifice to appease the gods of dissimulation? I mean, here he's busted for some run-of-the-mill roid while scores of glowing mutants around him remain untouched, unfazed.

It might be Cookson's election gamble without shaking the boat
IndianCyclist
Member
 
Posts: 1,689
Joined: 12 Nov 2010 12:26
Location: Bangalore, India

Re: Re:

18 Aug 2017 16:27

vedrafjord wrote:2008 Tour was a special case because:

a) The manufacturers of CERA (Roche) helped WADA develop a test while it was still in clinical trials.
b) CERA stays in the body much longer than EPO.
c) The French ran anti-doping themselves at the 2008 Tour due to the dispute with the UCI and seem to have done a much better job of it, considering the number of guys they caught.

It was braindead of Di Luca to get caught for CERA in 2009 when Ricco, Piepoli, Schumacher, and Kohl were all serving bans for same.


They caught guys for other substances, not just CERA.
It was almost entirely reason c)

It was done by Patrice Clerc. ASO didn't like all the positives that actually trying to catch dopers meant, so they fired Clerc. And the wattages increased again.
User avatar GuyIncognito
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,465
Joined: 27 Jun 2013 21:19

Re: Samuel Sanchez positive for growth hormone

18 Aug 2017 16:40

IndianCyclist wrote:
JosephK wrote:I feel for Sammy. Who knew that he would be the season's designated sacrifice to appease the gods of dissimulation? I mean, here he's busted for some run-of-the-mill roid while scores of glowing mutants around him remain untouched, unfazed.

It might be Cookson's election gamble without shaking the boat


That's my speculative hunch. The biggest fish with the least negative consequences, a guy about to retire anyway.
jahn
Junior Member
 
Posts: 75
Joined: 22 Jul 2015 21:09

Re: Samuel Sanchez positive for growth hormone

18 Aug 2017 16:59

@verdafjord

Per a) they didn't help develop a test but put a marker in the medicine that the tests looked for to confirm CERA use. The company informed AFLD of the maker not WADA. When the UCI took back testing no one tested postive for CERA for a long time afterwards. The AFLD caught Kohl by retroactively going back on his tests post Tour. There was a video of when the AFLD summoned Beltran for his test, the look on his face was sheer amazement that he asked to be tested. Goes to the UCI don't take testing hat seriously.

There was also a rumour circulating which Ricco confirmed that up to 60 riders tested positive for CERA but the UCI buried the results.

Monday July 27th 2009
'NEW DOPING PRODUCTS USED IN TOUR':
French Anti-Doping Agency President Pierre Bordry, revealed news this morning on the continued fight against doping in the recent Tour de France. Bordry said "We suspect certain riders had blood transfusions," The president of the AFLD has also "convinced that two new EPO products have been used during the Tour, two drugs that are not yet on the market."

The first drug HEMATIDE, another third generation of EPO to maintain hemoglobin levels, yet without CERA’s ID marker which the manafactures install to make it identifiable in testing. Still in clinical phase, the drug, whose introduction is scheduled for 2011, is already on the list of substances banned from World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

The second drug AICAR, a product that acts on muscle tissue and helps burn fat. "I was amazed at the leanness of certain riders," says Pierre Bordry. Testing for these two products could be ready by September-October. Needless to say, like CERA EPO last year, positive cases could be reported..
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,291
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

18 Aug 2017 17:16

Sanchez should now join the Armstrong podcast.
Special guest involves Dekker and the "chicken".
Dazed and Confused
Veteran
 
Posts: 11,362
Joined: 27 Jan 2012 23:14

Re:

18 Aug 2017 17:40

Dazed and Confused wrote:Sanchez should now join the Armstrong podcast.
Special guest involves Dekker and the "chicken".


Only if they are completely truthful about their PED use.
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 18,986
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

18 Aug 2017 18:30

Sanchez is still 66/1 with Paddy Power for the Vuelta overall...... :confused:
Norks74
Junior Member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: 20 Aug 2016 18:18

18 Aug 2017 19:10

BMC for the win in the TTT.
User avatar spetsa
Member
 
Posts: 549
Joined: 03 Aug 2010 13:45
Location: between a bar stool and a bike saddle

Re: Samuel Sanchez positive for growth hormone

19 Aug 2017 12:48

GuyIncognito wrote:They caught guys for other substances, not just CERA.
It was almost entirely reason c)

It was done by Patrice Clerc. ASO didn't like all the positives that actually trying to catch dopers meant, so they fired Clerc. And the wattages increased again.


CERA was the main one though - four positives (Ricco, Piepoli, Schumacher, Kohl) vs two EPO (Beltran, Duenas) and one heptaminol (Fofonov). But yeah it's likely that Clerc's firing led to the rapprochement with the UCI and letting Astana back into the race in 2009, and Contador going thermonuclear on Verbier.

thehog wrote:@verdafjord

Per a) they didn't help develop a test but put a marker in the medicine that the tests looked for to confirm CERA use. The company informed AFLD of the maker not WADA. When the UCI took back testing no one tested postive for CERA for a long time afterwards. The AFLD caught Kohl by retroactively going back on his tests post Tour. There was a video of when the AFLD summoned Beltran for his test, the look on his face was sheer amazement that he asked to be tested. Goes to the UCI don't take testing hat seriously.

There was also a rumour circulating which Ricco confirmed that up to 60 riders tested positive for CERA but the UCI buried the results.


According to this story they provided WADA with "data and samples": http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/manufacturer-helped-wada-with-cera-test/

But yes, the Beltran video was great. The biggest question mark in 2008 is against CSC - the team was as strong as any in the post-USPS/Discovery, pre-Sky era, and the sight of Voight, O'Grady, and Cancellara pulling on HC climbs is a bit comical, especially Voigt dropping Valverde on the Tourmalet.

But anyway, Sanchez... It seems like the last few years have been a bit of a wild west era for all kinds of peptides. Does anyone know if Sanchez got popped for the same substance as the Bardiani-CSF guys? Funny how the top GC guys never test positive any more... I would imagine if one of them got popped for something previously undetectable they'd get hauled in and told to more careful next time.
User avatar vedrafjord
Member
 
Posts: 760
Joined: 15 Jan 2013 03:35
Location: Land of Ire

19 Aug 2017 14:53

If you would have asked me before this positive test, which of the big riders, might not be doping, I would have said sanchez, as he seemed to decline with age, and was very likeable. This shows that the top guys are loaded, and things are not getting better in cycling. Very sad for the sport, that a top rider tests positive.
Frankschleck
Member
 
Posts: 311
Joined: 17 Jul 2016 20:10

Re: Samuel Sanchez positive for growth hormone

19 Aug 2017 15:56

vedrafjord wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:They caught guys for other substances, not just CERA.
It was almost entirely reason c)

It was done by Patrice Clerc. ASO didn't like all the positives that actually trying to catch dopers meant, so they fired Clerc. And the wattages increased again.


CERA was the main one though - four positives (Ricco, Piepoli, Schumacher, Kohl) vs two EPO (Beltran, Duenas) and one heptaminol (Fofonov). But yeah it's likely that Clerc's firing led to the rapprochement with the UCI and letting Astana back into the race in 2009, and Contador going thermonuclear on Verbier.

thehog wrote:@verdafjord

Per a) they didn't help develop a test but put a marker in the medicine that the tests looked for to confirm CERA use. The company informed AFLD of the maker not WADA. When the UCI took back testing no one tested postive for CERA for a long time afterwards. The AFLD caught Kohl by retroactively going back on his tests post Tour. There was a video of when the AFLD summoned Beltran for his test, the look on his face was sheer amazement that he asked to be tested. Goes to the UCI don't take testing hat seriously.

There was also a rumour circulating which Ricco confirmed that up to 60 riders tested positive for CERA but the UCI buried the results.


According to this story they provided WADA with "data and samples": http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/manufacturer-helped-wada-with-cera-test/

But yes, the Beltran video was great. The biggest question mark in 2008 is against CSC - the team was as strong as any in the post-USPS/Discovery, pre-Sky era, and the sight of Voight, O'Grady, and Cancellara pulling on HC climbs is a bit comical, especially Voigt dropping Valverde on the Tourmalet.

But anyway, Sanchez... It seems like the last few years have been a bit of a wild west era for all kinds of peptides. Does anyone know if Sanchez got popped for the same substance as the Bardiani-CSF guys? Funny how the top GC guys never test positive any more... I would imagine if one of them got popped for something previously undetectable they'd get hauled in and told to more careful next time.
shame if they were popping riders on retirement or letting them go like Menchov that attention seeking spot monkey of a rider Jens Voigt wasn't caught and slaughtered
Scarponi
Member
 
Posts: 1,308
Joined: 21 Apr 2015 08:56

Re:

19 Aug 2017 16:13

Frankschleck wrote:If you would have asked me before this positive test, which of the big riders, might not be doping, I would have said sanchez, as he seemed to decline with age, and was very likeable. This shows that the top guys are loaded, and things are not getting better in cycling. Very sad for the sport, that a top rider tests positive.


Likable dopes as much as unlikable.

Everyone is loaded.
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 18,986
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

Re: Samuel Sanchez positive for growth hormone

19 Aug 2017 16:56

My post in this thread seems to have offended one or more of you. I sincerely apologize if I did. I sometimes display a sick sense of humor...my post was of poor taste. Lesson learned.
When I woke up and saw the yellow jersey that I had left by my bed the night before, I asked myself: "what are you doing in Merckx's bedroom?" I couldn't believe it - Bernard Thevenet
User avatar Tonton
Moderator
 
Posts: 3,249
Joined: 17 May 2013 18:59

Re: Re:

19 Aug 2017 18:45

Benotti69 wrote:
Bolder wrote:
nayr497 wrote:Ouch. Guy has been riding like a super domestique even though he's an old horse. No wonder. I honestly wonder what hurts more - retiring and letting everyone think you're great, while you know, deep down, you're a cheater. Or, getting exposed right at the end.

No matter how heartless you think they might be, I don't think you can cheat and feel good about it. Deep down, that has to eat at you.


This is a classy response, and points to why doping is such an insidious problem. Look, I have no idea if Samu is a nice guy or not, but very few people actually enjoy being a cheat. As to why he got popped, one can only imagine that he got careless.

I don't believe in the UCI sending "warnings" -- there's always going to be one or two riders who screw up and test positive. And if there have been such warnings in the past, clearly they aren't working...


It really shows on the faces of Merckx, Hinault, Indurain, Vino, Wiggins etc...........


Can't tell if serious.

But I suspect for a lot of riders all the fun goes out of the sport once they get on a program.
Bolder
Junior Member
 
Posts: 259
Joined: 25 Jun 2015 07:29

Re: Samuel Sanchez positive for growth hormone

19 Aug 2017 20:47

Surely I am not the only one that's a bit disturbed by BMC's win today. One of their men, an over the hill great rider gets busted two days before the race begins, and they win the first stage. Was Sanchez on his own program or was it a team effort and he was the unlucky one?
BullsFan22
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,801
Joined: 22 Jun 2010 21:19

Re: Samuel Sanchez positive for growth hormone

19 Aug 2017 20:49

http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling/nicholas-roche-i-was-disgusted-to-hear-my-teammate-sanchez-failed-a-drugs-test-36047698.html

Is it possible that after all these years Nico doesn't actually know what's going on . Is he really that slow.
He actually has the balls to finish with a line which would lead you to believe pro cyclists in general are the victims :lol:

It's a sad day for the team and it's sad for the sport. Once again, we're the ones left answering the questions to the media.
noddy69
Member
 
Posts: 561
Joined: 04 Oct 2011 07:37

Re: Re:

19 Aug 2017 21:42

Bolder wrote:
Benotti69 wrote:
Bolder wrote:
nayr497 wrote:Ouch. Guy has been riding like a super domestique even though he's an old horse. No wonder. I honestly wonder what hurts more - retiring and letting everyone think you're great, while you know, deep down, you're a cheater. Or, getting exposed right at the end.

No matter how heartless you think they might be, I don't think you can cheat and feel good about it. Deep down, that has to eat at you.


This is a classy response, and points to why doping is such an insidious problem. Look, I have no idea if Samu is a nice guy or not, but very few people actually enjoy being a cheat. As to why he got popped, one can only imagine that he got careless.

I don't believe in the UCI sending "warnings" -- there's always going to be one or two riders who screw up and test positive. And if there have been such warnings in the past, clearly they aren't working...


It really shows on the faces of Merckx, Hinault, Indurain, Vino, Wiggins etc...........


Can't tell if serious.

But I suspect for a lot of riders all the fun goes out of the sport once they get on a program.


Once a rider turns pro, the fun takes a back seat, it is down to business. There will be lots of moments that are fun, but being a professional anybody requires serious dedication and in most sports in the 21st century that involves doping.

I think most riders go into pro cycling with both eyes open and fully prepared to dope.

But i dont think Merckx for a second regrets it, neither do any of the GT winners that kept their wins and probably those that lost them still have lots of kudos in the sport.

Remember Merckx insisted Ferrari train Armstrong!
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 18,986
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

Re: Samuel Sanchez positive for growth hormone

19 Aug 2017 22:12

noddy69 wrote:http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling/nicholas-roche-i-was-disgusted-to-hear-my-teammate-sanchez-failed-a-drugs-test-36047698.html

Is it possible that after all these years Nico doesn't actually know what's going on . Is he really that slow.
He actually has the balls to finish with a line which would lead you to believe pro cyclists in general are the victims :lol:

It's a sad day for the team and it's sad for the sport. Once again, we're the ones left answering the questions to the media.


Roche must have been pissing himself writing that tripe.

The team bus pep talk would've been make sure you don't get caught as well.... rather than shock.
UKPostal
Newly Registered Member
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 19 Aug 2017 22:07

Re: Re:

20 Aug 2017 10:25

vedrafjord wrote:
staubsauger wrote:
Red Rick wrote:
Jancouver wrote:
Saint Unix wrote:[
The second Ricco bust?
Or the 3rd Di Luca bust?
Frank Schleck

I don't remember

Arguably it's Schleck who was 3rd at the Tour the year before. Since Menchov, just like Di Luca, Sanchez and Ricco 2.0 weren't big names anymore when they got caught and Contador instantly was about to get covered up. But Fränk was busy with a pretty mediocre season when he tested positive and maybe already was in decline. Ricco was the new kid on the block when he got caught. Runner up at both the Tour of Italy and Lombardy. Twice stage winner at the Tour. Tested positive while being in the polka dot jersey. Had won the Tre Cime stage at the Giro and 2 stages at T-A. He just had become a superstar. Absolutely a big gun. But that was 2008!

It's Di Luca in 2009 actually. Runner up at the Giro. Champion back in 2007. Winner of multiple classics. About to sign a big paycheck contract with Lampre because of his Indian summer. The Cera positive eventually ruined his career.


2008 Tour was a special case because:

a) The manufacturers of CERA (Roche) helped WADA develop a test while it was still in clinical trials.
b) CERA stays in the body much longer than EPO.
c) The French ran anti-doping themselves at the 2008 Tour due to the dispute with the UCI and seem to have done a much better job of it, considering the number of guys they caught.

It was braindead of Di Luca to get caught for CERA in 2009 when Ricco, Piepoli, Schumacher, and Kohl were all serving bans for same.

If the likes of Menchov and di Luca 2013 weren't big names because their stars had faded by then, then Samu isn't either because we're now several years removed from his biggest successes and recent years have been hanging back into the Zubeldia zone. I suspect he's simply chasing another year at the top level and has either missed a memo on what's being tested for now or took too big a risk on something he'd been microdosing.

As for di Luca being busted for CERA in 2009, it is worth noting that his case was that he submitted six tests in the 2009 Giro (I thought it would likely have been more as he led from stage 5 until the stage 12 ITT, and won stage 4 as well, but we're using di Luca himself as a source here) and only two of these were positive with CERA. Given the long half-life of CERA and that it was known to be detectable from the point of Riccò and Piepoli being busted in the Tour (at which point Schumi probably knew he was toast, having won a stage and been tested, so went all out for the rest of the race. Kohl quietly accumulated and by his own admission flushed his final blood bag after being told to tone it down) it would appear that it essentially became useless from that point, as once it was detectable its long half-life made it no more advantageous than regular old first generation EPO, same as how darbo was detectable so early that when Johann Mühlegg got busted for it in 2002 they hadn't even got around to putting it on the banned list. What's most likely I think is that di Luca had stored blood bags in a down period when he was using CERA to manage his hct% and that when he used those during the Giro he'd got the half life calculations wrong so one of the bags still had sufficient CERA to trigger a positive. But really, just watching the 2009 Giro was enough to know that Killer was doping so, given that he didn't actually win the race and could be dismissed as a wildcard team rider getting reckless while pushing for a return to the PT (as you noted, Lampre were onto him).

And also, LPR Brakes-Farnese Vini were just beyond the pale in that race, let's face it, and it was mainly di Luca getting greedy in search of a stage win in his home region of Abruzzo that stopped them winning, because they chased a lot of breaks unnecessarily through that last week rather than letting Menchov's depleted reserves, with only really Laurens Ten Dam of any mountain strength, try to control the race. And let's look at the LPR 9:

121 Danilo di Luca - 2004 Oil for Drugs (2007 ban), 2009 CERA, 2013 EPO, banned for life
122 Gabriele Bosisio - 2009 EPO positive following biopassport irregularities
123 Riccardò Chiarini - 2010 raided in Padova investigation, 2014 EPO positive (after going from LPR/de Rosa to Androni then moving to MTB)
124 Giairo Ermeti
125 Jure Golčer - 2004 50% hct failure
126 Matteo Montaguti
127 Alessandro Petacchi - 2007 salbutamol, 2010 raided in Padova investigation
128 Daniele Pietropolli - 2009 Mantova Investigation
129 Alessandro Spezialetti - 2004 Oil for Drugs (2008 ban)

Of 9 riders that's 5 who've failed tests, four of whom for bannable substances (1 of which an egregious overuse of TUE values) and only two who've not been placed under investigation or sanction. And several who may not have served bans at the time but were known to be dubious for a long time (Chiarini, for example). That was probably LPR's problem, that they were simply too strong in Italy to be a lowly wildcard team, but there was simply too much unpalatable about the team's continued success with the sport trying to rehab its public image that made di Luca - who of course had previous himself - riding in such a transparent fashion become persona non grata.
User avatar Libertine Seguros
Veteran
 
Posts: 18,919
Joined: 20 Feb 2010 11:54
Location: Land of Saíz

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: deValtos, EdgarWinner, Google Adsense [Bot], Tim Booth and 24 guests

Back to top