All pro-cyclists?

[Matty_Tucks]

Dopers, yes?

 

[thehog]

Dopers, yes?

Levels my friend.

Its not those whom are doping and not doping but levels of doping.

Let me break it down:

* Team-wide systematic doping - Sky

* Individual prolific doping - Ricco/Valverde

* Occasional individual/team doping depending on race - Most of peloton

* Infrequent desperation / loss of form / end of contract doping - nondescript French riders whom no one can remember

* On the floor, can't move, body has broken down to the point of no return recovery doping - the rest of the peloton (this is good doping - it actually helps)

__

* Anti-doping doping - Garmin

 

[DirtyWorks]

Dopers, yes?

It's not a yes/no question. However, if you insist, no.

Don't forget, there's at least one tier below the UCI's elite calendar with riders with UCI Professional licenses. Not all of those riders are doping.

 

[DirtyWorks]

* Anti-doping doping - Garmin

I nominate this one for Post of the Day.

 

[ValleyFlowers]

All Pro cyclists? No.

 

[Von Mises]

Levels my friend.

Its not those whom are doping and not doping but levels of doping.

Let me break it down:

* Team-wide systematic doping - Sky

* Individual prolific doping - Ricco/Valverde

* Occasional individual/team doping depending on race - Most of peloton

* Infrequent desperation / loss of form / end of contract doping - nondescript French riders whom no one can remember

* On the floor, can't move, body has broken down to the point of no return recovery doping - the rest of the peloton (this is good doping - it actually helps)

__

* Anti-doping doping - Garmin

I have different view. All evidence seems to suggest that there are only two doping products - blood tranfusion and EPO - what give real and immediate benefits and latter has became over time more and more masking agent.

Considering this and adding what we know about bio passport, I do not see what is the point occasional doping. In fact, occasional doping in bio passport era is even more risky strategy than systematic doping.

If I think about current situation, I think picture is smth like this:

- most of peloton is clean
- infrequent (loss of form, returning from injury, desperation, loss of contract) doping
- prolific individuals, rich start riders (maybe somebody like Contador), though even in these cases quantities and frequency of doping and benefits are much smaller
- I do not think that there are team-wide doping programs in the scale of US Postal. Maybe there are teams, where exist doping with help and support from management, but not team wide, more like inner circle of few star(more important, close to management) riders.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

If most of the peloton is clean then why would the majority of riders busted be small fry?

It would be incredible bad luck that the one time a year you charge up is the one time you get tested.

 

[Kwibus]

No.

I'm convinced there are plenty of riders clean right now.

Based on what? A gut feeling really.

 

[ebandit]

of course

No.

I'm convinced there are plenty of riders clean right now.

Based on what? A gut feeling really.

of course there are non doping clean cyclists................listen to how many state they are cycling clean......they can't all be lying

 

[barn yard]

No.

I'm convinced there are plenty of riders clean right now.

Based on what? A gut feeling really.

everyone said the same thing after festina

 

[Franklin]

I have different view. All evidence seems to suggest that there are only two doping products - blood tranfusion and EPO - what give real and immediate benefits and latter has became over time more and more masking agent.

Unless you haven't read the USADA files I dont see how you can possibly come to this conclusion.

There are also Testosteron and HGH. Even corticosteroids are an option even though detection time there is probably too large by now.

 

[Von Mises]

Unless you haven't read the USADA files I dont see how you can possibly come to this conclusion.

There are also Testosteron and HGH. Even corticosteroids are an option even though detection time there is probably too large by now.

I thought that maybe I should mention testosteron and HGH too, but my take is different and USADA files reinforced my impression. What I mean is simple: testo and HGH are optional, they may give you some long term benefits, but tranfusions and EPO are must - they are game changers, they give you real benefit, they make winners. I would say that if you take testo and HGH, you may get smth, but all your risks are still meaningless if you have to compete with guys who are taking blood and/or epo.

 

[Von Mises]

If most of the peloton is clean then why would the majority of riders busted be small fry?

It would be incredible bad luck that the one time a year you charge up is the one time you get tested.

Have you made statistical analysis to say that majority of riders busted are small fry? I am not sure that your claim is true.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Have you made statistical analysis to say that majority of riders busted are small fry? I am not sure that your claim is true.

Have you made a statistical analysis to show that it isn't true?

Where is the statistical analysis to support your claims earlier in this thread?

 

[Von Mises]

Have you made a statistical analysis to show that it isn't true?

Where is the statistical analysis to support your claims earlier in this thread?

My claims are speculation, like the hog´s claims earlier. I cannot support it with statistics. I cannot control or validate my claims in this sense. So yea, it is pure speculation.

But your statement "most of caught are small fry" is different. As we do know who are caught, we can control veracity of your claim. Thats why I asked it from you.

Anyway, I have not made my own statistical analysis, but I refreshed my memory and checked cyclists busted from year 2007 to present and impression from this list is not "most are small fry".

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Was that definitive research on riders busted since 2007 or just an impressionistic survey of those busted?

My impressionistic survey concludes that no-name riders get busted more than big name riders.

 

[thehog]

- I do not think that there are team-wide doping programs in the scale of US Postal. Maybe there are teams, where exist doping with help and support from management, but not team wide, more like inner circle of few star(more important, close to management) riders.

Systematic is the safest way but also the most expensive. Team-wide doping doesn't exist today but what does exist is "inner circle" doping. Festina was team-wide. USPS was a smaller version of that and now Sky is 4-5 riders only and at GTs.

 

[Von Mises]

Was that definitive research on riders busted since 2007 or just an impressionistic survey of those busted?

My impressionistic survey concludes that no-name riders get busted more than big name riders.

I looked just at European pro scene and counted 28 big names, who have been busted from 2007 (I did not include Boonen´s coke or Valverde´s or Basso´s suspensions and other stuff like that, only those who were directly busted via drug control).

Then I counted 18 "so-so names ( Leukemans, Gusev, Caspers etc- are they small fry or not?) who have been busted.

And lastly 26 no-names, small fry.


Of course it is not definite. But my impression is different from "mostly small-fry".

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Systematic is the safest way but also the most expensive. Team-wide doping doesn't exist today but what does exist is "inner circle" doping. Festina was team-wide. USPS was a smaller version of that and now Sky is 4-5 riders only and at GTs.

What about the other smaller stage races where they have dominated? What do Sky do then? The 4-5 would be who?

And what were Columbia on with their train?

I looked just at European pro scene and counted 28 big names, who have been busted from 2007 (I did not include Boonen´s coke or Valverde´s or Basso´s suspensions and other stuff like that, only those who were directly busted via drug control).

Then I counted 18 "so-so names ( Leukemans, Gusev, Caspers etc- are they small fry or not?) who have been busted.

And lastly 26 no-names, small fry.


Of course it is not definite. But my impression is different from "mostly small-fry".

OK - using http://www.dopeology.org/

Positive tests/Biopassport violations/whereabout violations

2012
Houanard
F.Schleck - Big name
Di Gregorio (arrested)
Furdi
Grabovski
Galimzyanov - Big-ish name
Offredo

(Total 7 - 1 big name)

2011
Andrenacci
Pont
Muto
Sinkewitz
Kolobnev (cleared later)
Baptista
Lopes
Knopf
Kugler

(Total 9 - 0 big names)

2010
Mosquera - big name
Depena Garcia - medium name
Sentjens
Gründlinger
Ortega
Benta
Contador - very big name
Costa R
Costa M
Pellizotti - Big name
Valjavec - Big name
Zaballa
Neilson
Colo - both of these at the tour of mexico...
Gavazzi - coke
Li
Frei - medium name
larpe
Vazquez Hueso - apparently 'targeted testing' nice to see they were going for the big names
Giunti
Ratti

(Total 21 - 4 big names)

2009
Fernandez De La Puebla
Duval
Bosisio - medium name
Jiménez
Biondo
Guerra
Nozal
Ribeiro, N
Astarloza - bigish name
Dekker T - big name
Serrano
Caucchioli
De Bonis
Astarloa - bigish name
Landaluze
Bazayev
Di Luca - big name
Valverde - big name
Rebellin - big name
Lhotellerie - medium name
Colom - medium
Pfannberger
Redondo
Hamilton - big name but riding for a small team at the time
Shilov

(Total 24 - 5 big names)

2008
Piepoli - big name
Schumacher - big name
Cavallari
Stević
Kopp
Sella - big name
Fofonov - med name
Ricco - big name
Casper
Kohl - big name
duenas
Beltran
Bossoni
Sosenka
ventoso - med name
Cabreira
Bileka
Vila
Richeze
Leukemans

(Total 20 - 5 big names)


2007
Pecharroman
Bernucci
Kashechkin - big name
Mayo - big name
Rasmussen - big name
Vinokourov - big name
Moreni
Ascani
Sinkewitz
Petacchi - big name
Honchar - big name
Peña
Kessler - big name
Coletta
Horrillo
Muraglia
Fertonani
Torres

(Total 18 - 7 big names)

So

Since 99 positive tests/violations etc of whom 22 were big names.

 

[maltiv]

What about the other smaller stage races where they have dominated? What do Sky do then? The 4-5 would be who?

And what were Columbia on with their train?



OK - using http://www.dopeology.org/

Positive tests/Biopassport violations/whereabout violations

2012
Houanard
F.Schleck - Big name
Di Gregorio (arrested)
Furdi
Grabovski
Galimzyanov - Big-ish name
Offredo

(Total 7 - 1 big name)

2011
Andrenacci
Pont
Muto
Sinkewitz
Kolobnev (cleared later)
Baptista
Lopes
Knopf
Kugler

(Total 9 - 0 big names)

2010
Mosquera - big name
Depena Garcia - medium name
Sentjens
Gründlinger
Ortega
Benta
Contador - very big name
Costa R
Costa M
Pellizotti - Big name
Valjavec - Big name
Zaballa
Neilson
Colo - both of these at the tour of mexico...
Gavazzi - coke
Li
Frei - medium name
larpe
Vazquez Hueso - apparently 'targeted testing' nice to see they were going for the big names
Giunti
Ratti

(Total 21 - 4 big names)

2009
Fernandez De La Puebla
Duval
Bosisio - medium name
Jiménez
Biondo
Guerra
Nozal
Ribeiro, N
Astarloza - bigish name
Dekker T - big name
Serrano
Caucchioli
De Bonis
Astarloa - bigish name
Landaluze
Bazayev
Di Luca - big name
Valverde - big name
Rebellin - big name
Lhotellerie - medium name
Colom - medium
Pfannberger
Redondo
Hamilton - big name but riding for a small team at the time
Shilov

(Total 24 - 5 big names)

2008
Piepoli - big name
Schumacher - big name
Cavallari
Stević
Kopp
Sella - big name
Fofonov - med name
Ricco - big name
Casper
Kohl - big name
duenas
Beltran
Bossoni
Sosenka
ventoso - med name
Cabreira
Bileka
Vila
Richeze
Leukemans

(Total 20 - 5 big names)


2007
Pecharroman
Bernucci
Kashechkin - big name
Mayo - big name
Rasmussen - big name
Vinokourov - big name
Moreni
Ascani
Sinkewitz
Petacchi - big name
Honchar - big name
Peña
Kessler - big name
Coletta
Horrillo
Muraglia
Fertonani
Torres

(Total 18 - 7 big names)

So

Since 99 positive tests/violations etc of whom 22 were big names.

Since you're first at it, you might as well calculate how many of the pro's are considered "big names". If you use any kind of logic whatsoever you'll probably find out that there are considerably fewer "big names" than others, so naturally one would expect that fewer big names test positive as well...

You can't analyse two samples of completely different sizes and conclude something based on numerical values of an occurred incident

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Outstanding work, MJM.

I calculate approximately 79% small-fry riders caught out of all riders caught in the last 6 years, 2007-2012, based on your analysis.

This would be classified using words such as
predominantly
largely
mostly
unquestionably.

Should you need any more quantitative adverbs describing the proportion of "small fry" riders caught in recent times, please let me know.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Since you're first at it, you might as well calculate how many of the pro's are considered "big names". If you use any kind of logic whatsoever you'll probably find out that there are considerably fewer "big names" than others, so naturally one would expect that fewer big names test positive as well...

You can't analyse two samples of completely different sizes and conclude something based on numerical values of an occurred incident

How about ****ing off?

You tell me what makes a big name a big name, then apply this to the pro-peloton, then work out the ratio of big names to crappers, then from there we can work out whether the ratio of big names to crappers being popped matches.

And the original question was about whether the rank and file in the peloton dope. That 99 have been popped in 5 years suggests that a fair number still do.

Also, if you are *****ing about different sample sizes, big names - ie those who win something or are placed are generally more likely to be tested (since winner 1,2,3) than those who don't, so the number of potential opportunities to pop a big name rider is going to be greater than for a rank and file rider. So perhaps you can build that into your new and improved methodology for working out whether big name riders are popped more or less than the rank and file.

Till then **** off and stick to *****ing about why no one bothers to ***** about Katusha. ****

 

[D-Queued]

What about the other smaller stage races where they have dominated? What do Sky do then? The 4-5 would be who?

And what were Columbia on with their train?
...
So

Since 99 positive tests/violations etc of whom 22 were big names.

Grossly underestimates big names, and you should minimally add your medium names - otherwise your statistics are distorted by only including the GC leaders of the top teams, for example. Minimally, you must include all GC Leaders and the super domestiques as Big Names. In addition, those who test positive twice (e.g. Nozal) should be counted for each positive.

e.g.

Victor Hugo Pena - first Colombian to wear the yellow jersey; former Postie
Tyler Hamilton - Hello?
Sinkewitz - T-Mobile, winner of the Tour of Germany, consistent top 5 in classics
Nozal - ONCE, Liberty Seguros, Runner Up in 2003 Vuelta
Triki Beltran - Hello?
etc.

Dave.

 

[maltiv]

How about ****ing off?

You tell me what makes a big name a big name, then apply this to the pro-peloton, then work out the ratio of big names to crappers, then from there we can work out whether the ratio of big names to crappers being popped matches.

Till then **** off and stick to *****ing about why no one bothers to ***** about Katusha.

I'm sorry for applying elementary statistical concepts to criticize your faulty reasoning. How rude of me

 

[Von Mises]

What about the other smaller stage races where they have dominated? What do Sky do then? The 4-5 would be who?

And what were Columbia on with their train?



OK - using http://www.dopeology.org/

Positive tests/Biopassport violations/whereabout violations

2012
Houanard
F.Schleck - Big name
Di Gregorio (arrested)
Furdi
Grabovski
Galimzyanov - Big-ish name
Offredo

(Total 7 - 1 big name)

2011
Andrenacci
Pont
Muto
Sinkewitz
Kolobnev (cleared later)
Baptista
Lopes
Knopf
Kugler

(Total 9 - 0 big names)

2010
Mosquera - big name
Depena Garcia - medium name
Sentjens
Gründlinger
Ortega
Benta
Contador - very big name
Costa R
Costa M
Pellizotti - Big name
Valjavec - Big name
Zaballa
Neilson
Colo - both of these at the tour of mexico...
Gavazzi - coke
Li
Frei - medium name
larpe
Vazquez Hueso - apparently 'targeted testing' nice to see they were going for the big names
Giunti
Ratti

(Total 21 - 4 big names)

2009
Fernandez De La Puebla
Duval
Bosisio - medium name
Jiménez
Biondo
Guerra
Nozal
Ribeiro, N
Astarloza - bigish name
Dekker T - big name
Serrano
Caucchioli
De Bonis
Astarloa - bigish name
Landaluze
Bazayev
Di Luca - big name
Valverde - big name
Rebellin - big name
Lhotellerie - medium name
Colom - medium
Pfannberger
Redondo
Hamilton - big name but riding for a small team at the time
Shilov

(Total 24 - 5 big names)

2008
Piepoli - big name
Schumacher - big name
Cavallari
Stević
Kopp
Sella - big name
Fofonov - med name
Ricco - big name
Casper
Kohl - big name
duenas
Beltran
Bossoni
Sosenka
ventoso - med name
Cabreira
Bileka
Vila
Richeze
Leukemans

(Total 20 - 5 big names)


2007
Pecharroman
Bernucci
Kashechkin - big name
Mayo - big name
Rasmussen - big name
Vinokourov - big name
Moreni
Ascani
Sinkewitz
Petacchi - big name
Honchar - big name
Peña
Kessler - big name
Coletta
Horrillo
Muraglia
Fertonani
Torres

(Total 18 - 7 big names)

So

Since 99 positive tests/violations etc of whom 22 were big names.

I counted by date of violation, not by date of suspension. So, some names from 2007 I did not count.

I do not have time to go over all names, but ...

Moreni is a stage winner of Vuelta and Giro + Italian road race champion. Not sure is it small fry...
Sinkewitz is at least med name.
Horillo was cleared later.
Leukemans is a med name.
Beltran 6th overall Vuelta + 9th overall Vuelta.
Casper - med name at least.
Sosenka - hour record holder.
Pfannberger - top10 places Amstel, LBL, World Road Race, Fleche.
Caucchioli - top 10 Giro, 11th at Tour.
etc...