Log in:  

Register

Is Philippe Gilbert Doping?

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

Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

21 Apr 2017 19:49

An easy counterargument is that while "research tends to improve things", "things" can be on both sides of the table. Sure, anti-doping tools get better. So do the doping ones...

It really is a non-argument.
Goodbye, Tommeke; thank you for all you have given us!
User avatar Netserk
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,997
Joined: 30 Apr 2011 13:10
Location: Denmark

Re:

22 Apr 2017 06:39

frisenfruitig wrote:It seems like you're just wasting your time trying to have a discussion with Torebear tbh. I don't know if he's trolling or actually believes the hogwash he's spouting but either way it's a waste of time. He has apparently somehow convinced himself the sport is clean now despite the fact that we're still seeing alien performances on a regular basis. I'm sure the guys from the full blown EPO/blood doping era like Armstrong and Riis feel like dumb asses now that they realize they could have performed at the same level on water and bread.

ToreBear has geneterated a lot of anger in the XC-skiing thread, using the same kind of "alternative reasoning". He got no support from anyone about anything when trying to defend the norwegian dominance in the most VO2max-driven sport during the EPO era :rolleyes:

When the top two XC skiers of Norway got busted for doping last year, he couldn't handle the cognitive dissonance and went silent for a long time. Now he's managed to suppress those facts and is back in full swing... arguing alternative facts in a different dimension, never adressing the core issues head on...
Nicko.
Junior Member
 
Posts: 126
Joined: 15 Jul 2012 12:37

22 Apr 2017 13:30

You know, there are other possibilities of doping progress than a "magical potion". Like better knowledge of how to manipulate the passport.
Goodbye, Tommeke; thank you for all you have given us!
User avatar Netserk
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,997
Joined: 30 Apr 2011 13:10
Location: Denmark

Re:

22 Apr 2017 14:11

ToreBear wrote:@netserk
I'we adressed that earlier. As for this year, thats news to me.

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...

As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....

@frisenfruitig
Didn't we have this discussion a few pages back? I think we did. ;)

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

@Nicko.
If you haven't noticed. Saying someone is not doping in the clinic is like saying the earth is not flat to the Roman Inquisition.

It takes time to explain to the religious that they might have a wrong world view. Time I don't have, or am willing to spend when there are other things I would rather be doing.


How do you explain the rank amateur British journalist who used EPO every other day for six weeks with no red flags over 14 tests? That was in 2015.

If he could do it, the pros were doing it then and are doing it now. The amount of blind leaps of faith and mental gymnastics required to assume the contrary is pretty significant. For starters we would have to assume that something miraculous has happened to the tests in the last two years that has made it impossible to dope and/or that all athletes and doctors in every endurance sport out there (and we know endurance sports have been riddled with doping for as long as they have existed) have suddenly developed a conscience and decided to never cheat again, and both would require that the now former dopers like Valverde, to take one we know used to dope, suffer a significant blow to their performances that I certainly haven't seen. In fact I've seen the exact opposite in Thomas, Froome, Wiggins and Porte. Not exactly good news for the already highly unlikely "theory" of clean athletes.
User avatar Saint Unix
Member
 
Posts: 771
Joined: 14 Feb 2014 11:00
Location: Norway

Re:

22 Apr 2017 14:51

ToreBear wrote:

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....


Can you provide evidence for this please?

You've said this a few times now and I haven't seen evidence to support it. I wasn't aware any pharmaceutical companies were doing this, and if they are, it's very interesting.
Dan2016
Member
 
Posts: 634
Joined: 21 Jul 2016 15:36

Re: Re:

22 Apr 2017 16:25

Dan2016 wrote:
ToreBear wrote:

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....


Can you provide evidence for this please?

You've said this a few times now and I haven't seen evidence to support it. I wasn't aware any pharmaceutical companies were doing this, and if they are, it's very interesting.


They *can* be if the drug can't be monitored directly. But they don't do it for anti-doping reasons! If they did, someone would just manufacture without markers and rake in the dough. Amgen Tour of California...

Lance got popped by the passport!?

John Swanson
ScienceIsCool
Member
 
Posts: 1,733
Joined: 05 Jul 2009 15:34

Re: Re:

22 Apr 2017 18:25

spetsa wrote:
ToreBear wrote:@netserk
I'we adressed that earlier. As for this year, thats news to me.

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...

As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....

@frisenfruitig
Didn't we have this discussion a few pages back? I think we did. ;)

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

@Nicko.
If you haven't noticed. Saying someone is not doping in the clinic is like saying the earth is not flat to the Roman Inquisition.

It takes time to explain to the religious that they might have a wrong world view. Time I don't have, or am willing to spend when there are other things I would rather be doing.


Why does no one participate on this forum anymore? Oh, now I remember. It sucks because of people like this.


The forum exists because we are discussing a subject of issue - It's like any forum that mixes the good and the bad - Plenty of good info and mature discussion of different points of view in this forum - We don't need one-sided arguments.
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,494
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

Re:

23 Apr 2017 04:34

ToreBear wrote:@netserk
I'we adressed that earlier. As for this year, thats news to me.

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...

As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....

@frisenfruitig
Didn't we have this discussion a few pages back? I think we did. ;)

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

@Nicko.
If you haven't noticed. Saying someone is not doping in the clinic is like saying the earth is not flat to the Roman Inquisition.

It takes time to explain to the religious that they might have a wrong world view. Time I don't have, or am willing to spend when there are other things I would rather be doing.
I am sorry to disagree. Putting markers in medicines, would assume that they would be used for nefarious purposes!
This Charming Man
Junior Member
 
Posts: 232
Joined: 17 May 2016 02:46

Re:

23 Apr 2017 04:38

TourOfSardinia wrote:Hypothesis:
the fact that Gilbert wins BIG then drops out of the next race
is a sign that those who control cycling are have a group of favoured riders
who are free to dope/motor but only to win their allotted races.

This makes cycling more attractive to the causal punter
- since races can be "manipulated" to guarantee:
1) entertaining finishes &
2) reliable stars - with higher degree of recognition
- making it simpler to sell as an online betting sport.

it leaves me (a non-punter) with a undertone of being manipulated.
Agreed, this is how pro sports are manipulated
This Charming Man
Junior Member
 
Posts: 232
Joined: 17 May 2016 02:46

Re: Re:

23 Apr 2017 09:16

ScienceIsCool wrote:
Dan2016 wrote:
ToreBear wrote:

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....


Can you provide evidence for this please?

You've said this a few times now and I haven't seen evidence to support it. I wasn't aware any pharmaceutical companies were doing this, and if they are, it's very interesting.


They *can* be if the drug can't be monitored directly. But they don't do it for anti-doping reasons! If they did, someone would just manufacture without markers and rake in the dough. Amgen Tour of California...

Lance got popped by the passport!?

John Swanson


Thanks John.

I thought that was the case but wondered if I'd missed something. As you say, *if* it's ever done, it is never for anti-doping reasons. I had a memory of this idea being mooted a few years ago and the pharmaceutical giants flat-out rejected it. A quick google gave me this as some confirmation of the situation:

https://thinksteroids.com/news/roche-denies-planting-secret-molecule-in-mircera/
Dan2016
Member
 
Posts: 634
Joined: 21 Jul 2016 15:36

23 Apr 2017 11:08

Paul Kimmage in today's Sindo leaves little doubt where he stands on the PhilGil question. Link later.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,848
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

23 Apr 2017 12:08

I remember when ToreBear joined the forum in 2012, not neccesarily posting that much in Clinic threads, I immediately could tell that this was not a rational individual. Looks like my instinct was right.
User avatar The Hitch
Veteran
 
Posts: 28,907
Joined: 14 Jun 2010 10:58
Location: London.

Re:

23 Apr 2017 12:39

The Hitch wrote:I remember when ToreBear joined the forum in 2012, not necessarily posting that much in Clinic threads, I immediately could tell that this was not a rational individual. Looks like my instinct was right.

Yes, but ball
not man
User avatar TourOfSardinia
Veteran
 
Posts: 7,754
Joined: 16 Feb 2010 14:25
Location: Sardinia

Re: Re:

23 Apr 2017 12:47

yaco wrote:
spetsa wrote:
ToreBear wrote:@netserk
I'we adressed that earlier. As for this year, thats news to me.

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...

As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....

@frisenfruitig
Didn't we have this discussion a few pages back? I think we did. ;)

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

@Nicko.
If you haven't noticed. Saying someone is not doping in the clinic is like saying the earth is not flat to the Roman Inquisition.

It takes time to explain to the religious that they might have a wrong world view. Time I don't have, or am willing to spend when there are other things I would rather be doing.


Why does no one participate on this forum anymore? Oh, now I remember. It sucks because of people like this.


The forum exists because we are discussing a subject of issue - It's like any forum that mixes the good and the bad - Plenty of good info and mature discussion of different points of view in this forum - We don't need one-sided arguments.


I must have missed the good info part of the "argument"
User avatar spetsa
Member
 
Posts: 633
Joined: 03 Aug 2010 13:45
Location: between a bar stool and a bike saddle

Re:

23 Apr 2017 14:36

The Hitch wrote:I remember when ToreBear joined the forum in 2012, not neccesarily posting that much in Clinic threads, I immediately could tell that this was not a rational individual. Looks like my instinct was right.



It's hard to reason with him. I am not surprised though, it's not easy to reason with many Norwegians when it comes to doping in xc skiing and particularly when it relates to Norwegian skiers. "Everyone but Norwegians dopes." If a non Norwegian wins a race it's because he/she was doping. If a Norwegian wins a race it's because they worked hard, had better equipment, better training, more research, a better diet, better culture, there's a lot of Norwegian clubs and skiers, it's a national pastime.....you get the idea. Most Norwegians I've come across come up with virtually the same reasons I mentioned above.
BullsFan22
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,068
Joined: 22 Jun 2010 21:19

Re:

23 Apr 2017 15:18

ToreBear wrote:@netserk

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...


The issue is that none of that explains how doctors don't have the same information (likely a lot more) and haven't devised ways of circumventing it. You have shown a link which explains there are changes since the first implementations. What you have not explained is why these changes mean anything to stopping doping

ToreBear wrote:As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....


Lance was not busted by the passport. You sort of have a point here in that Lance's blood values clearly showed manipulation when USADA used them in the reasoned decision as part of their evidence against him, but you're totally wrong to say Lance was "popped by the passport in 2010". His blood values were well within passport parameters. To imagine he and his team didn't know what those parameters were, and what they could get away with is unreasonable. As you say he had the doctors he needed. They did exactly what they were trying to do, dope within the parameters of the passport. They solved the problem they were trying to solve. That USADA came along and used the info in ways they had not imagined does not change the fact that he beat the passport and that they knew exactly how to do so.


ToreBear wrote:@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.


As mentioned above you have produced no evidence of blood markers in drugs actually being used to detect doping, and if you provided evidence of blood markers I missed it.

The real problem is what you need to show is that ALL PED's have markers which can be used to detect doping. Because in 2 minutes I can find Russian or Chinese EPO on the web and I'm willing to bet they're not marked. The reality is that there is exactly zero chance that ALL easily available sources of PED's are trackable. As such, this line of argument is at a dead end.

Again, beyond this you need to show how the passport can detect drugs like EPO which have a very short detection window when used in small doses. They clear before the morning window opens. As such, they are not detectable, markers or no (and "No is the answer) and will not be picked up. So they're irrelevant to the passport.

What is the record for sanctions by the passport? How many riders since its inception? That's rhetorical.
User avatar red_flanders
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,103
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 06:45

Re: Re:

23 Apr 2017 16:57

spetsa wrote:
yaco wrote:
spetsa wrote:
ToreBear wrote:@netserk
I'we adressed that earlier. As for this year, thats news to me.

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...

As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....

@frisenfruitig
Didn't we have this discussion a few pages back? I think we did. ;)

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

@Nicko.
If you haven't noticed. Saying someone is not doping in the clinic is like saying the earth is not flat to the Roman Inquisition.

It takes time to explain to the religious that they might have a wrong world view. Time I don't have, or am willing to spend when there are other things I would rather be doing.


Why does no one participate on this forum anymore? Oh, now I remember. It sucks because of people like this.


The forum exists because we are discussing a subject of issue - It's like any forum that mixes the good and the bad - Plenty of good info and mature discussion of different points of view in this forum - We don't need one-sided arguments.


I must have missed the good info part of the "argument"


And your post validates my post.
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,494
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

23 Apr 2017 17:00

Think ABP violations for cyclists is in the 20's - Believe athletics is around 80.
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,494
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

Re:

23 Apr 2017 23:00

Netserk wrote:You know, there are other possibilities of doping progress than a "magical potion". Like better knowledge of how to manipulate the passport.


Don't forget good old palm greasing.
The poster formerly known as yespatterns.
User avatar GraftPunk
Member
 
Posts: 757
Joined: 21 Feb 2017 21:15
Location: High Desert Steppe

24 Apr 2017 16:03

@spetsa
Why does no one participate on this forum anymore? Oh, now I remember. It sucks because of people like this.

I think you are right about that.


So here we go again, round 2:
@netserk
But there is no indication that anyone has found any better way to fool the passport. But according to you there must be because? because someone always know better? because the dopers are always ahead? because you feels it?

@Saint Unix
I wrote about this in a series of posts earlier in this thread. I suggest you read them.

@Dan2016
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2013/may/31/epo-cycling-generation-doping-cheats
It's technically not a marker. It's a process where pharmaceutical companies identify drugs with potential for doping abuse and cooperate with Wada/AD bodies to develop signatures. As in identify aspects of the product that can be used for later identification.
My memory has registered this as a marker. Though it's a lot more complex than that, I think marker is a good shortand.
Here is more information:
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/pharmaceutical-industry

@sciensiscool
As far as I can remember, the statute of limitations were extended in part due to his 2010 passport positive. Anyway, the point is about his passport showing him doping. Or rather that there was 1 in a millionth bla bla...

@The Hitch
I seem to remember being involved with you in a thread about Purito. I remember I was about to explain to you the concept of Modus ponens, but having been previously warned by someone else on this forum about you, I felt it was better to leave it alone since you would likely take it as a personal insult that a lowly forum user could ever know more than the great Hitch.

@Buffalo soldier:
I'we seen this argument before, but have yet to be shown any link containing any such accusations. In Norway it's considered bad sportsmanship to accuse someone of doping. And that is especially true if they beat you. And it is also considered to be bad for performance to think others are beating you by cheating, since that leads to energy leakage and negative thoughts. If it's in reference to something I have written the same applies. Looking at the doping thread, it's not Norway or Norwegians which seem to accuse winners of doping.

@Red_Flanders
How people don't know something is kind of hard to argue. How about you try with you tell me how people do know how to do something rather than expecting me to tell me how they don't know something?

EPO was developed in the 70-80s Long before markers(cooperation). Aditionally it's endogenuous to the body. Thats why I indicated that it was still the best method to dope known to me.
And I don't see how I can explain any better than I already have in my previous posts.

How about you do some reading and learn something new?
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/questions-answers/epo-detection#item-628

As for the rhetorical question. It seems to indicate that my posts are not understood or internalized by you.
User avatar ToreBear
Member
 
Posts: 1,714
Joined: 08 Aug 2012 23:08
Location: Norway

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 71 guests

Back to top