being on the record...manifesto baby

[SirLes]

I'm not going to suggest that no rugby players take PEDs but I'm not convinced that sophisticated team organised doping programs exist. A look through the list of offences involving rugby players from your link and the UKAD doping one seems to confirm what I have heard from a number of different sources involved in rugby in the UK.
The use of PEDs is on the rise but it is individuals doing the sort of gym bunny supplements to try and get big. Far more common in the lower/ amateur ranks where there is little or no testing but also worryingly amongst juniors- again the line is blurred between "vanity"doping and furthering a sporting career.

Amongst pro teams, junior international and academy squads the message is very anti doping with education, warnings etc.
Now I'm not suggesting that I know the whole story but it's interesting that what I have heard is at least consistent.

Again, I keep an open, sceptical mind and I have no doubt that rugby is an at risk sport which is getting worse.

By way of comparison I only know one person who went across to do some bike racing with a club in Europe briefly as a teenager and they encountered PEDs immediately!

 

[Dear Wiggo]

By way of comparison I only know one person who went across to do some bike racing with a club in Europe briefly as a teenager and they encountered PEDs immediately!

Which year was that, for interests sake? I'd ask the club but know you probably would have said if you wanted to / could. Can you share the region at least?

Damn scary / sad / tragic regardless.

 

[SirLes]

Not really the sort of evidence that could be used unfortunately.

Actually I'd forgotten there was another young lad at about the same time I knew but his experience was the same. They were just a couple of young lads. Got into cycling in the UK and joined a local clubs. Did races etc and were quite good- not suggesting a future pros or anything, just keen, enjoying it and taking it quite seriously. Had the chance to do some races in Belgium.

I asked them what it was like over there including PEDs and they both said they were common place. Now- that might have been their impression rather than the reality but dangerous none the less.

This was about 5 years ago.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Not really the sort of evidence that could be used unfortunately.

Actually I'd forgotten there was another young lad at about the same time I knew but his experience was the same. They were just a couple of young lads. Got into cycling in the UK and joined a local clubs. Did races etc and were quite good- not suggesting a future pros or anything, just keen, enjoying it and taking it quite seriously. Had the chance to do some races in Belgium.

I asked them what it was like over there including PEDs and they both said they were common place. Now- that might have been their impression rather than the reality but dangerous none the less.

This was about 5 years ago.

Don't mean to interrogate you - but did they provide any detail on which products?

I see so many other sports doping stories, and ongoing cycling doping, and struggle to see how people can claim the sport of professional cycling has or is cleaning itself up.

 

[poupou]

We just have to read the Donati report on doping and the volume of PED produced and shipped to be sure that doping is widespread. Tha amount is so big that can only suggest that they are consummed by the most popular sports like football, rugby, basket,...
Difficult to believe that those tennis players who get a big advantage by being fresher than their opponents at the end of sets or matchs would nout use them to preserve their mental toughness.

 

[SirLes]

This bit should have been in my first post but ran out of time.

One thing that annoys me about the clinic is when any variation in performance is put down to drug use or lack thereof.

In my experience performances can vary hugely for a vast number or different reasons that have nothing to do with PEDS. I'm not suggesting that variation in PED use can't be a reason but is far from being the only reason and therefore it is not helpful to use variation in performance as proof of doping.

Could it raise suspicions that lead to further investigation? Of course, but the fact that someone is a professional cyclist pretty much means they are under suspicion and require further investigation anyway.

 

[Gavandope]

New member - got sick of getting my posts pulled on other forums about doping. Are we all supposed to clap our hands now Lance is finally outed and it's gone away? And I've just found this place

Occasional cyclist, armchair fan, science geek, got put off watching dopers go like supermen in the 90's. I was told about Edgar in 91! I'm not a fan of any team, only suspicious stats and when my eyes see something that's not normal.

Though I confess to being a Pirate fan regardless

 

[sittingbison]

Gentke(wo)men,
Just a reminder this thread is not an interrogation its a declaration of position. Opinion. Thoughts.

So please try not to flay each other... Keep that for the rest of the clinic

Cheers
Bison

 

[pastronef]

Rogers coming back cleans, Kreuziger riding Poland (and maybe Vuelta), Froome training with Levi, Bardet training with Pellizzotti, Talansky training with Levi, Phinney buddy with Lance, Nibali thanking Vino. etc etc

I do not see any possibility of new generation, new deal, new cycling on the horizon. and I wonder if Kimmage, Stokes, Vayer and the others will come up with anything.

or maybe it's just better enjoy twitter and notice the hypocrisy

 

[pastronef]

hail to the Oleg!

 

[pastronef]

I am glad Alberto rides the Vuelta and I look forward to see him racing hard.

Racing entertaiment aside, it looks strange to see some people support his decision and welcoming it, while as usual slamming Horner and Froome.

I repeat -racing entertaiment aside-

 

[pastronef]

a friend I often ride with is a local wheels producer (Asti) and knows a bit of the U23 and pro-cycling world
we were talking about the journalism, national bias, people beliefs and so on.
he said:
"look, Italy is going awry, we sücked at soccer WC, we needed a new hero. look what strenght Nibali's Tour win had in PR and newspapers and TV.
he does what the others do, it's just they don't want to catch them"

I agree with him. Nibali's win it's ok for me. at the end he deserved it, he rode well, he was even too strong. and the other 2 contenders I preferred retired. the rest goes to national bias, hypocrisy, Sky hate, newspapers to sell, good boys-bad boys and fanboyism.

 

[Granville57]

I think that's partly due to a huge misconception about The Clinic, that is often put forward as a criticism of The Clinic—that being that The Clinic is supposed to be this bastion of ANTI-DOPING.

Where that comes from, I've no idea.

The Clinic is a place to DISCUSS doping, and since the very topic isn't even "allowed" into other some other sections of the forum, this is where the doping talk takes place.

The Clinic was never established as The International Center to Stamp Out Doping. It's simply a place to discuss it without people whining about the fact that it's being discussed.

Some people are vehemently anti-doping.
Some people would prefer a free-for-all.
Some people are completely ambivalent on the matter.
Some people hold more than one view depending on any number of issues.

It is not the responsibility of The Clinic to end doping or to crucify every single person who dopes. It is a place to further one's understanding of doping.

People are free to cheer for whatever doper, or as many dopers as they like. Doing so does make that person a hypocrite just because they post in The Clinic.

No one signed an agreement of being anti-doping when they showed up here. It's simply not part of the equation.

As the sub-title of this sub-forum indicates, the purpose of The Clinic is to "discuss doping-realted issues."

It seems quite straight forward to me.

....................

 

[Granville57]

I think that's partly due to a huge misconception about The Clinic, that is often put forward as a criticism of The Clinic—that being that The Clinic is supposed to be this bastion of ANTI-DOPING.

Where that comes from, I've no idea.

The Clinic is a place to DISCUSS doping, and since the very topic isn't even "allowed" into other some other sections of the forum, this is where the doping talk takes place.

The Clinic was never established as The International Center to Stamp Out Doping. It's simply a place to discuss it without people whining about the fact that it's being discussed.

Some people are vehemently anti-doping.
Some people would prefer a free-for-all.
Some people are completely ambivalent on the matter.
Some people hold more than one view depending on any number of issues.

It is not the responsibility of The Clinic to end doping or to crucify every single person who dopes. It is a place to further one's understanding of doping.

People are free to cheer for whatever doper, or as many dopers as they like. Doing so doesn't make that person a hypocrite just because they post in The Clinic.

No one signed an agreement of being anti-doping when they showed up here. It's simply not part of the equation.

As the sub-title of this sub-forum indicates, the purpose of The Clinic is to "discuss doping-realted issues."

It seems quite straight forward to me.

..........

 

[MarkvW]

There won't be any meaningful change in UCI doping policy until the fundamental corruption of the sport is addressed. The disgusting and disreputable cheating of the riders is proof that the UCI is debased and corrupt beyond repair.

 

[pastronef]

I must say that reading the clinic opened my eyes. they were not closed eh, but I see what could go on behind this pro cycling "carnival"

in 2011 I still believed in Cadel
after the SKY explosion, and all that went with that on here (a kind of semi justified madness) all the little backdated facts, interviews, PR train wrecks, riders love for other riders, a few Vueltas and Tours... well, I see pro racing as entertainment. not a question of life and death. a fight of the evil against the good
I root for Sky and know they're dirty as the others, I understand now what Gilbert did in 2011, I understand riders minds are in their world of racing and training, and we have not to think that riders think the same way as fans and followers.
I can understand VAughter's way of speaking. they have to protect their environment and people investigating are rightly ****ed. that does not prevent me from rooting for D.Martin or Slagter

There is a line to draw between following and enjoying the races, and analyzing them after the adrenaline went down.
in the middle of an attack, a cobble sector, a steep climb, everybody is a fan and watches that and says GREAT!

obviously, later, on here and twitter, one can read all the details, and watts, and so on, and decide to pay attention or not.

reading some members comments anyway, I think...
alles gleich, alles gleich! aber wir sind gleicher!

 

[RedheadDane]

Just some random thoughts.

1: I do believe that doping isn't organised big-style on the teams anymore.
Those who still dope are probably mostly the "middle-tier" riders, those who could do just fine being the loyal helper with some personal chances now and then, but who wants to make it big and think doping is the way to that goal.

2: I can't help but question the intelligence of anyone who still dopes.

3: I don't believe the claim in the CIRC report that 90% of the peloton still dopes. However, maybe they should keep an eye on whoever said that, coz I wouldn't be too surprised if he believes it and has taken the only "logical" action.

4: I don't think everyone working in cycling who has a doping-related past should be fired from the sport immediatly. However, from as of today no rider who'd ever tested positive should be allowed to work with riders.

5: I will never, ever, ever! be in favour of a lifetime ban on first offence. It's my honest belief that everybody can change. What I'm in favour of is a sort of "two-strikes system" (used to be in favour of a three-strikes system, but... naaah!):

First offence:
Four year ban.
Upon return the rider have to ride the first at least two years on a Continental-Level team.
When the rider's active career is over he'd not be allowed to work with the riders, but could still have a "lower-level" support job.

Second offence:
OUT!
Not even allowed to work as the person handing out hats from the sponsor caravan. Not because the ex-rider would that way be in a position to supply any current rider with doping, but because then his face simply shouldn't be associated with cycling.


Also back-traced bans should be eliminated! I'm here looking specifically at the Contador case; I'm pretty sure there wasn't any indications he was doped when he won the 2011 Giro, yet he had the win removed because the back-traced ban he was later given covered that time period, so it had to look like he never rode the Giro that year. He did, I saw it. Of course I know that if he'd been given a 2-year-ban of two year, starting the day the verdict was (finally) given, then he wouldn't have won the 2012 Vuelta, but to me not winning a race because you simply didn't ride it - whether it's due to being banned or for some other reason - makes a lot more sense than having a victory taken away because you got a back-traced ban so it had to look like you didn't ride a race.

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Cunego BioPassport

It is now possible to check Cunego's BioPassport values on line if you register here:

http://www.nippovinifantini.com/atleti.php#passaporto

 

[pastronef]

I wanted Zakarin to beat Martin yesterday. just as Froome did last year. shame he had to change bikes.

anyway, as a non-Zakarin fan, I can understand how the non-Froome fans looked at him when he rode that 2011 Vuelta.

 

[sir fly]

While I don't approve the doping praxis, I understand it's a part of the profession.
Being illegal and punishable just makes it the most complicated part of the job. So, if you do it - make sure you don't look ridiculous.

 

[Red Rick]

People often say that in order to be a pro athlete you have to make a lot of sacrifices. I think you could see doping as one of these sacrifises

 

[pastronef]

Lotto-Jumbo (former Rabobank) should now be clean at last. Kruijswijk spent 3 weeks on Teide but was not enough for today's stage win

let's wait to see what Gesink does on Mt Baldy tonight

 

[carton]

Pretty much everyone in cycling wants doping. The fans want the exiting races. But not as much as the race organizers that aren't making any money. And whatever money that they make Velon is desperate for a cut. The owner's egos feed only on wins. The patriots tune in only for the victories. The broadcasters want to see Ulissi dying for the win, Alaphillipe coming form nowhere and Sagan somehow keeping up. Spectators want to see gladiators who are so committed march up there without so much as mourning their mothers (nothing against Atapuma). A rider overcooks a corner and the blood spatter from his head wounds gets broadcast worldwide in HD. Viewers really want to see bloodsport, rollerball, the hunger games; this has always been the case. Panem et circenses, boxing and chips, it's in our DNA. Astana had all nine freaking riders on that last mountain. All freaking nine. After what they've done this first week. Of all the dominant teams in the last three decades, La Vie Claire, Telekom, Rabobank, Once, Sky, et al; I don't remember seeing that from anyone else but USPS. They dropped the whole peloton bar the three GC contenders and any feint at dissimulation with it.

I disagree with many here in that I do believe that the UCI, USADA and WADA are trying to do something. I seem to be the only one that believes that at least indulging in the pretense that doping matters helps stem the tide. And that cycling's psychotic obsession with winning will by itself forever sustain an overwhelming tide towards cheating. For here "Rule 5" rules all and "for when the great scorer comes" is but mellifluous drivel.

So, yeah, at the end of the day, people may feel bad about of for a day or to but they really don't care when kids from a faraway country of whom they know nothing die from cancer due to drugs whose names they can't even spell. They cheated and they deserved it, the rationalization will go. After the test for whatever the last crop was doing is refined, they'll look at the fans and organizers who stood by in finger-wagging shock and thank god the crisis is over, the culprits have been duly hanged and any latent guilt can be lifted off their shoulders. Back to finally being able to watch incredible victories from those tapped by the gods as hungry enough to be worthy.

Most cycling fans want the unbelievable. And that's what they're going to get. And I may be the biggest hypocrite of them all for tuning in.

 

[pastronef]

I liked this post by member Saganftw

sometimes on twitter and forums you can find this 2 points of view

here is how this forum works:

you like a certain cyclist : he is not only clean,he also comes from middle class family and has never been given anything for free,he is tough,NEVER sits on anyones wheel,always in attack mode and is also a model professional,role model for kids and his hobby is fishing with dad and grandfather where they share heartwarming stories sitting around campfire

you dont like a certain cyclist: not only is he on PEDs,he is also probably a communist and homophobe,arrogant,hates american flag and apple pie,hates dallas cowboys and is a fan of patriots and real madrid...oh yeah,he is also vegan - so pretty much the most despicable human being you can imagine

 

[Escarabajo]

I am close to convinced that Chaves is cleans. And when I say clean I mean bread and water!