ADD ( Anti Doping Denmark) report..

[hrotha]

Re:

"team wide doping became a thing of the past".....since when? Why do teams have multiple doctors if team wide doping is a thing of the past?

Why did you leave out the "literal" from the quote?

After Festina*, what we saw was largely unconnected doping clusters coordinated by DS's and doctors with plausible deniability on a need-to-know basis, and, frequently, an outsourcing of the dope; not whole 25-man squads being allowed into the team's darkest secrets.

*Or between Festina and Puerto.

 

[Benotti69]

We have never seen nothing but the tip of the iceberg in relation to doping in the sport. Team wide doping can also be done on a riders need to know basis. Doesn't mean every team parks the bus on a col and blood bags fall from the ceiling. Some teams have up to 4 docs and my guess is the less riders know the better. I bet half the riders don't know half the stuff they are given.

 

[veganrob]

Re:

"team wide doping became a thing of the past".....since when? Why do teams have multiple doctors if team wide doping is a thing of the past?

Sastre clean? no way.

Agree. I believe team wide doping is as rampant as ever. Sky, Astana, Tinkof, Katusha, QS, Movistar. The arms race is full on.

Edit, I should say team monitored with administration to the most importatant riders.

 

[Benotti69]

If anyone doubted Riis's team wide doping programs, just look at CSC's long list of names on dopeology

http://www.dopeology.org/teams/CSC/

 

[SeriousSam]

Re:

Love how cyclingnews have included a picture of the clean Jensie next to Uncle 60%.

Such a terrific photo.

 

[The Carrot]

Re:

We have never seen nothing but the tip of the iceberg in relation to doping in the sport. Team wide doping can also be done on a riders need to know basis. Doesn't mean every team parks the bus on a col and blood bags fall from the ceiling. Some teams have up to 4 docs and my guess is the less riders know the better. I bet half the riders don't know half the stuff they are given.

Exactly this, incidentally, I've read that this is the same way terrorist cells work, one cell wouldn't know about the other or what it was doing. It greatly reduces the risk of security compromise.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

We have never seen nothing but the tip of the iceberg in relation to doping in the sport. Team wide doping can also be done on a riders need to know basis. Doesn't mean every team parks the bus on a col and blood bags fall from the ceiling. Some teams have up to 4 docs and my guess is the less riders know the better. I bet half the riders don't know half the stuff they are given.

Exactly this, incidentally, I've read that this is the same way terrorist cells work, one cell wouldn't know about the other or what it was doing. It greatly reduces the risk of security compromise.

It also increases the control over riders.

 

[hrotha]

Glad to see you guys agree with what I was saying from the beginning.

 

[Dr.Guess]

Is Froome one of those un- knowings? He kinda sounds like it at times and in older interviews. No one can fake that stupid ladismo thing that well, surely?

 

[The Carrot]

Re: Re:

We have never seen nothing but the tip of the iceberg in relation to doping in the sport. Team wide doping can also be done on a riders need to know basis. Doesn't mean every team parks the bus on a col and blood bags fall from the ceiling. Some teams have up to 4 docs and my guess is the less riders know the better. I bet half the riders don't know half the stuff they are given.

Exactly this, incidentally, I've read that this is the same way terrorist cells work, one cell wouldn't know about the other or what it was doing. It greatly reduces the risk of security compromise.

It also increases the control over riders.

Good point, control of the riders is the number one priority for DSs, Managers, governing bodies etc.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

"team wide doping became a thing of the past".....since when? Why do teams have multiple doctors if team wide doping is a thing of the past?

Why did you leave out the "literal" from the quote?

After Festina*, what we saw was largely unconnected doping clusters coordinated by DS's and doctors with plausible deniability on a need-to-know basis, and, frequently, an outsourcing of the dope; not whole 25-man squads being allowed into the team's darkest secrets.

*Or between Festina and Puerto.

yes, a diffused structure. nothing changes, they tweak it, like game theory, so they maintain the plausible deniability.

or, as i call it, implausible undeniability[sic] (a pleonasm, not a double negative)

 

[Billie]

Shame there is nothing in there about Voigt. Wouldn't mind seeing a smackdown on him

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re:

Glad to see you guys agree with what I was saying from the beginning.

It takes a while

 

[markene2]

I kinda feel sorry for Rasmussen, going rouge, dropping names, not holding anything back. And ADD makes it so the select few they chose to name in the report gets protected by SOL.

 

[sniper]

Re:

We have never seen nothing but the tip of the iceberg in relation to doping in the sport. Team wide doping can also be done on a riders need to know basis. Doesn't mean every team parks the bus on a col and blood bags fall from the ceiling. Some teams have up to 4 docs and my guess is the less riders know the better. I bet half the riders don't know half the stuff they are given.

nail head stuff.

 

[No_Balls]

Re:

I kinda feel sorry for Rasmussen, going rouge, dropping names, not holding anything back. And ADD makes it so the select few they chose to name in the report gets protected by SOL.

Last thing they need right now is another Landis and Rasmussen has played that tune for a while. Chicken is already plucked and everybody knows that in a time when the clean-narrative is about to getting established. Just look what happened with Degenkolb after his comments - dead silence.

I feel sorry for Chicken but this was bound to happen.

 

[WildspokeJoe]

Cycling is so great for the yucks.

It's all a big shell game. Funny enough the guys that turn on cycling are the ones that cycling turned on first.
Deny – Deny – SOL – yeah but once and only once.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

true.

well, we can now say "We know Sastre worked with Riis at one point, at least"

jokes aside, you're right of course, Sastre is an interesting case and has done remarkably well to keep his name out of the gossips.

What makes Sastre so puzzling, IMO, is that we largely know who was taking care of the doping at his teams, and yet his name has never popped up anywhere. He wasn't in Puerto as far as we know, which would be a likely way to get caught for a CSC rider (after being paged to Fuentes by Cecchini or Riis; but he's never been linked to Cecchini either).

About the only high-profile name I can think of is Terrados, who was ONCE's doctor when Sastre turned pro with them in 1998. But as far as I know, there's never been any indication that Terrados freelanced later on.

Sastre strikes me as the kind of guy who would stick to the logistical minimum* (EPO/blood bags, testosterone, and little else), going by previous experience of what he felt worked for him rather than by whatever the latest doping theories said. If that's the case, perhaps he didn't need to have a doping doctor after literal time-wide doping became a thing of the past. But still, that would work for EPO, but presumably not for transfusions. It's hard to imagine the Carlos Sastre from Overcoming dealing with anything more complicated than a syringe or some pills.

*Just to be clear, I don't mean he'd necessarily be getting only a minor boost, just that he'd want to keep things simple.

great post, cheers. agreed on all accounts.
the fact that he won in 08, following Fuentes' exposure in 07, also suggests he wasn't related to, or at least not dependent on, that network.

DearWiggo posted a graph of Sorensen's results dropping in 2008 suggesting it was due to the introduction of the BP. Another reason may have been the fact that Fuentes' business was exposed leaving several of his clients (Nicki?) without the regular blood supply. Not Sastre though.

 

[hfer07]

will Andy Schleck's name come up?

 

[Netserk]

Re: Re:

true.

well, we can now say "We know Sastre worked with Riis at one point, at least"

jokes aside, you're right of course, Sastre is an interesting case and has done remarkably well to keep his name out of the gossips.

What makes Sastre so puzzling, IMO, is that we largely know who was taking care of the doping at his teams, and yet his name has never popped up anywhere. He wasn't in Puerto as far as we know, which would be a likely way to get caught for a CSC rider (after being paged to Fuentes by Cecchini or Riis; but he's never been linked to Cecchini either).

About the only high-profile name I can think of is Terrados, who was ONCE's doctor when Sastre turned pro with them in 1998. But as far as I know, there's never been any indication that Terrados freelanced later on.

Sastre strikes me as the kind of guy who would stick to the logistical minimum* (EPO/blood bags, testosterone, and little else), going by previous experience of what he felt worked for him rather than by whatever the latest doping theories said. If that's the case, perhaps he didn't need to have a doping doctor after literal time-wide doping became a thing of the past. But still, that would work for EPO, but presumably not for transfusions. It's hard to imagine the Carlos Sastre from Overcoming dealing with anything more complicated than a syringe or some pills.

*Just to be clear, I don't mean he'd necessarily be getting only a minor boost, just that he'd want to keep things simple.

great post, cheers. agreed on all accounts.
the fact that he won in 08, following Fuentes' exposure in 07, also suggests he wasn't related to, or at least not dependent on, that network.

DearWiggo posted a graph of Sorensen's results dropping in 2008 suggesting it was due to the introduction of the BP. Another reason may have been the fact that Fuentes' business was exposed leaving several of his clients (Nicki?) without the regular blood supply. Not Sastre though.

Nicki had nothing to do with Fuentes. Only the big riders got send that way. Not even Jörg Jaksche was introduced to Fuentes until he joined Liberty Seguros.

 

[IzzyStradlin]

Re: Re:

About the only high-profile name I can think of is Terrados, who was ONCE's doctor when Sastre turned pro with them in 1998. But as far as I know, there's never been any indication that Terrados freelanced later on.

Married to Jimenez's sister
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/carlos-sastre-exclusive-the-forgotten-tour-de-france-winner

 

[sniper]

there was this Sastre thread in velorooms:
http://velorooms.com/index.php?topic=1098.0
His dad had/has(?) a cycling school. Maybe it included a lab and a practitioner room.

 

[mrhender]

A thing I have to re-mention is the point 5. of the meeting between UCI (including Cookson) and ADD/DIF held in february..

ADD is saying tonight that things are better today, but not totally clean...
That is exactly what the CIRC report told us..

I don't like the fact that they had to meet to "convey messages" because the messages sent are, and have been for 15 years that things are much better now even though someone has yet to provide solid evidence of such...

What is better other than change of methods and doping evolution?

Meanwhile tonight the uci have been busy tweeting of a makeover...

In light of todays report, one could think that makeover was internal practices but in fact it is the design of their freakin' LOGO.......

In other news JV has been busy all day tweeting about UCI reforms -how bad he is treated and how unfair the bad ASO are....

Well I guess he has been a master of manipulation for some time now...

Meanwhile 2: Cookson has gone missing since everything went haywire with Astana/kreuziger...

Sigh......................

 

[mrhender]

Here are some reccomendations from the report:

UCI should change its licensing system by introducing a "fit-for-purpose" criterion (suitability assessment) for sports directors and team doctors who give UCI option not to grant a license to sports directors and team doctors who have not made up their doping past. Sporting directors and team doctors must in vidne- and truly responsible to account for their possible relationships for their own or others' drug use and could be awarded quarantines and deprived of its license if they speak falsely or withhold information, or if it later can be shown that they have spoken untrue or withheld information. The recommendation is because the study group finds it problematic for cycling continued development towards a clean sport that previous doping sinners and their aides continued working in the sport and often in key items, as others may have a clamp on them if they never publicly acknowledged that they have been involved in doping.

Sounds a lot like the Cookson "fit and proper" persons test... How far are you on that Brian?

Don't get me wrong.. I love the idea.. Just not so much in the hands of the UCI... (promoter and policer)

Another one:

The study group should in this context not fail to note that it considers it depressing that apart from Michael Rasmussen, none of the interviewed riders wanted to inaugurate the public in what they have experienced in their cycling career of doping-related issues and how they had it right. It is highly been to some very general opinions of individual riders where they regret their drug use, but they do not want to get in on specific stories with depth and detail that might seem enlightening and discouraging for young cyclists.
The study group is, however, aware that the existing suspicion - even from UCI's former management and other sports authorities - of riders who have come forward and told about their own and others 'drug use has not been conducive for riders' willingness to publicly tell their doping history. The study group therefore urges the UCI, national cycling and sports federations and others to take these whistleblowers seriously rather than immediately to suspicion them in a misguided defense of the sport's welfare.

So to be fair, they are promoting some criticism of the UCI...
Being a whistleblower does not pay off.... Far from it...

The TOR in CIRC was suppose to be the cardinal point... Yet CIRC and now this report has shown that the system does not increase incentive to talk... But how is that when on surface the authorities are backing up and eager to make deals? Could it be that the trust between the promoters and the "producers" are non-existent?

If so, it'll take more then a few "independent" commissions to change that...

 

[Beech Mtn]

Re:

will Andy Schleck's name come up?

Frank Schleck has suddenly pulled out of the TdF and national championships with a knee injury. I admit to having a few tinfoil hat moments about silent bans.

--

Re Sastre: I don't see him as a transfusions kind of guy. It's my opinion that he could have been clean or at least cleanish, with any program being rather minimal (test and cortico), less messing about with the blood parameters. YMMV obviously, but in my mind, Carlos is one of the "clean" ones. (With some leeway to how we define clean.) I don't see him fooling with insulin or EPO.