Brits don't dope?

[King Boonen]

Re:

british people are so used to the upper class setting the agenda that they never question anything they are being told by authorities. Probably the main reason why so many people eat up the Sky myth and why the media can get away with being a british version of the Pravda.

Yeah, Brits never protest anything...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_Discontent

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_miners%27_strike_(1984–85)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_Tax_Riots

 

[sniper]

Another of Pete Coe's inspirations was Swedish coach/doctor Per Olof Astrand:

High-Intensity Interval Training first gained notoriety in the 1980’s after British athletics coach, Peter Coe, decided to take a new course in training his son, track star Sebastian Coe. Inspired by German doctor Woldemar Gerschler’s 1930’s research, as well as the 1950’s workof Swedish physiologist, Dr. Per-Olof Astrand, Coe guided his son to various world track records and gold medals in the 1500 meter at the 1980 and 1984 Olympic Games.

In contemporary reports, Astrand is singled out as having introduced blood doping into the Swedish prosport scene (mainly skiing and iceskating) in the 60s and 70s:
https://books.google.pl/books?id=5pTwCQAAQBAJ&pg=PA119&lpg=PA119&dq=Per-Olof+%C3%85strand+blood+doping&source=bl&ots=DtQPwKB5-m&sig=XYmyzMTlGCJ-GML8UQVuOEHZE4o&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAWoVChMI_8Smw-q5xwIVRtgsCh0QuwjS#v=onepage&q=Per-Olof%20%C3%85strand%20blood%20doping&f=false

 

[sniper]

and of course there are the rumored links between Peter Coe and Conconi, e.g. in this post from Race Radio on velorooms:

I will have to dig up a copy but I recall Coe thanking Conconi in his early 80's book. He even included pictures of him training in Sestriere prior to the Moscow Olympics.

I have also heard stories about Coe's dad/coach Peter writing about the benefits of transfusions in the 70's but I have not seen anything to support this.

http://velorooms.com/index.php?topic=798.415;wap2

 

[flying_plum]

Re: Re:

No it is not British (nor true of any country) to be fair play. That may be some jingoistic myth for the sheep to believe just like some Americans believe they are "the greatest country on earth" but its never been anti British to be a cheat or liar or fraud anymore than any other country.

Lol at the "push in front" analogy. As if, if you push in front of someone in another country that will be widely accepted, but do it in Britain and people will be upset, cos Britain is such a fair and honorable country. lol, what BS.

I don't think your second paragraph makes sense. If it was British to be anti cheat then "the brits" whoever they are, wouldn't defend their athletes purely on the basis that they are British.

to be anti cheating is to oppose cheats. to believe because someone is British they must be clean isn't an anti doping stance. At all.

It's entirely possible that it doesn't make sense...it's been a bit of a mad week. I agree entirely with your last sentence, and I was more thinking aloud, I suppose. I've been thinking about this all a bit more yesterday, trying to pull it apart (anything for a bit of procrastination). I don't doubt there is some moral superiority complex going on with a lot of people, but I think my point was that there was something more to it. Take, for example, my mum. After Froome's stage 10 shenanigans we were talking about doping, and her main hope was that 'oh, but not Geraint and Bradley'. It's not that she doesn't think they wouldn't...she's hoping they don't, because they are nice British boys, and it wouldn't be British. I appreciate that this is splitting hairs.

But my main point in all of this hasn't been to say that Brits don't dope, it's been thinking about why British fans appear to be able to employ massive cognitive dissonance in believe that their riders, and their riders alone, don't dope. For some fans, no doubt it's massive arrogance stemming from a sense of moral superiority. but for some, like my mum, i think it's a sense of they are British athletes and so should reflect British values, which many people see as 'fair play' (whether or not we actually adhere to that in our day to day lives or not).

Yes, i agree that none of this comes from any kind of strong anti-doping stance, but that isn't what i was thinking about. the general discussion was why British fans are so delusional about their own athletes. I was just thinking about why.

 

[buckle]

Re:

and of course there are the rumored links between Peter Coe and Conconi, e.g. in this post from Race Radio on velorooms:

I will have to dig up a copy but I recall Coe thanking Conconi in his early 80's book. He even included pictures of him training in Sestriere prior to the Moscow Olympics.

I have also heard stories about Coe's dad/coach Peter writing about the benefits of transfusions in the 70's but I have not seen anything to support this.

http://velorooms.com/index.php?topic=798.415;wap2

Coe ran his ridiculous WR in Florence but not sure if it is significant.

 

[zalacain]

Re: Re:

Understanding league and union grants an insight into the bizarre class system which has dominated British society for centuries.

I thought for a moment you meant the National Cyclists' Union and the British League of Racing Cyclists. That was truly bizzare. Prize money out of the question with the former. Being banned for daring to race in Europe.....

 

[armchairclimber]

Re:

and of course there are the rumored links between Peter Coe and Conconi, e.g. in this post from Race Radio on velorooms:

I will have to dig up a copy but I recall Coe thanking Conconi in his early 80's book. He even included pictures of him training in Sestriere prior to the Moscow Olympics.

I have also heard stories about Coe's dad/coach Peter writing about the benefits of transfusions in the 70's but I have not seen anything to support this.

http://velorooms.com/index.php?topic=798.415;wap2

I am putting this here, although it probably belongs in the Athletics thread.
David Martin And Peter Coe's book does mention Conconi, but only to discuss the "Conconi Test", the efficacy of which they seem to doubt. It's a great book by the way "Better Training for Distance Runners". Hard work in places mind....unless you are a sports scientist.

There is only a brief mention of Gerschler with respect to his proposed optimum recovery during HIT...ie. when the HR returns to approx 120 bpm.

I don't think transfusions are even discussed....certainly not in the 2nd edition, which is the one I have.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

and of course there are the rumored links between Peter Coe and Conconi, e.g. in this post from Race Radio on velorooms:

I will have to dig up a copy but I recall Coe thanking Conconi in his early 80's book. He even included pictures of him training in Sestriere prior to the Moscow Olympics.

I have also heard stories about Coe's dad/coach Peter writing about the benefits of transfusions in the 70's but I have not seen anything to support this.

http://velorooms.com/index.php?topic=798.415;wap2

I am putting this here, although it probably belongs in the Athletics thread.
David Martin And Peter Coe's book does mention Conconi, but only to discuss the "Conconi Test", the efficacy of which they seem to doubt. It's a great book by the way "Better Training for Distance Runners". Hard work in places mind....unless you are a sports scientist.

There is only a brief mention of Gerschler with respect to his proposed optimum recovery during HIT...ie. when the HR returns to approx 120 bpm.

cheers.

I don't think transfusions are even discussed....certainly not in the 2nd edition, which is the one I have.

we wouldn't expect them to discuss blood doping, would we.

 

[armchairclimber]

Re: Re:

and of course there are the rumored links between Peter Coe and Conconi, e.g. in this post from Race Radio on velorooms:

I will have to dig up a copy but I recall Coe thanking Conconi in his early 80's book. He even included pictures of him training in Sestriere prior to the Moscow Olympics.

I have also heard stories about Coe's dad/coach Peter writing about the benefits of transfusions in the 70's but I have not seen anything to support this.

http://velorooms.com/index.php?topic=798.415;wap2

I am putting this here, although it probably belongs in the Athletics thread.
David Martin And Peter Coe's book does mention Conconi, but only to discuss the "Conconi Test", the efficacy of which they seem to doubt. It's a great book by the way "Better Training for Distance Runners". Hard work in places mind....unless you are a sports scientist.

There is only a brief mention of Gerschler with respect to his proposed optimum recovery during HIT...ie. when the HR returns to approx 120 bpm.

cheers.

I don't think transfusions are even discussed....certainly not in the 2nd edition, which is the one I have.

we wouldn't expect them to discuss blood doping, would we.

Actually, I'm surprised that it wasn't at least mentioned...in relation to Viren, if nothing else.

 

[sniper]

iinm the book was written in a period when transfusions were already illegal, so i'd expect Coe to not unnecessarily draw attention to blood doping or to known (blood) dopers such as Gerschler.

Gerschler and Conconi share the fact that initially people thought they were brilliant with groundbreaking training techniques creating world champions. Looking back we know their only brilliance lay in their administration&application of (new and existing) doping products&methods.
Insiders like Peter Coe or Peter Keen (another "Conconi-test" fan) must have known that all along.

 

[armchairclimber]

Re:

iinm the book was written in a period when transfusions were already illegal, so i'd expect Coe to not unnecessarily draw attention to blood doping or to known (blood) dopers such as Gerschler.

Gerschler and Conconi share the fact that initially people thought they were brilliant with groundbreaking training techniques creating world champions. Looking back we know their only brilliance lay in their administration&application of (new and existing) doping products&methods.
Insiders like Peter Coe or Peter Keen (another "Conconi-test" fan) must have known that all along.

Quite possibly....though it is speculation. As I said though, the Conconi test is not something they appear to be a fan of. I would also take issue with the term "only brilliance". As often seems to be the case, those at the cutting edge of performance science have expert knowledge of doping methods...but it is wrong to suggest that it's their only "value". Ferrari is a case in point.

 

[Nellyspania]

Re: Re:

british people are so used to the upper class setting the agenda that they never question anything they are being told by authorities. Probably the main reason why so many people eat up the Sky myth and why the media can get away with being a british version of the Pravda.

Another troll in the Brits forum looking for a reaction to sweeping generalisations, how unusual

If you think there is something factually wrong in my post feel free to correct it.

There is a distinct lack of social mobility in the UK that ensures that on the whole, the Old Boy's network and the moneyed few tend to prevail when it comes to governance etc.
But to say that "british people are so used to the upper class setting the agenda that they never question anything they are being told by authorities" is a ridiculous presumtion; there is a huge mistrust of authority in this country but nobody feels empowered enough to do anything about it.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

No it is not British (nor true of any country) to be fair play. That may be some jingoistic myth for the sheep to believe just like some Americans believe they are "the greatest country on earth" but its never been anti British to be a cheat or liar or fraud anymore than any other country.

Lol at the "push in front" analogy. As if, if you push in front of someone in another country that will be widely accepted, but do it in Britain and people will be upset, cos Britain is such a fair and honorable country. lol, what BS.

I don't think your second paragraph makes sense. If it was British to be anti cheat then "the brits" whoever they are, wouldn't defend their athletes purely on the basis that they are British.

to be anti cheating is to oppose cheats. to believe because someone is British they must be clean isn't an anti doping stance. At all.

But my main point in all of this hasn't been to say that Brits don't dope

And I don't think anyone has claimed that it is. I don't get why you keep putting that in every post. I didn't say you were claiming brits don't dope. I said that fair play is not tied with being british.

You then say that your mum believes British athletes should reflect British values. Well believing that British athletes should reflect British values is different from believing that because an athlete is British then it is certain that they possess British values and anyone who doubts that is a bitter jealous French person.

Which is what the believers think.

 

[Ventoux Boar]

Teach us more about values and being British, wise one. I'm learning lots.
Thanks

 

[flying_plum]

Re: Re:

No it is not British (nor true of any country) to be fair play. That may be some jingoistic myth for the sheep to believe just like some Americans believe they are "the greatest country on earth" but its never been anti British to be a cheat or liar or fraud anymore than any other country.

Lol at the "push in front" analogy. As if, if you push in front of someone in another country that will be widely accepted, but do it in Britain and people will be upset, cos Britain is such a fair and honorable country. lol, what BS.

I don't think your second paragraph makes sense. If it was British to be anti cheat then "the brits" whoever they are, wouldn't defend their athletes purely on the basis that they are British.

to be anti cheating is to oppose cheats. to believe because someone is British they must be clean isn't an anti doping stance. At all.

But my main point in all of this hasn't been to say that Brits don't dope

And I don't think anyone has claimed that it is. I don't get why you keep putting that in every post. I didn't say you were claiming brits don't dope. I said that fair play is not tied with being british.

You then say that your mum believes British athletes should reflect British values. Well believing that British athletes should reflect British values is different from believing that because an athlete is British then it is certain that they possess British values and anyone who doubts that is a bitter jealous French person.

Which is what the believers think.

ok, the distinction between should reflect and do possess is maybe a subtley I need to let go of. But if fair play is not so vital to an understanding of Britishness, why do people think our athletes are so whiter than white? Where does that come from? That isn't meant to be aggressive, I'm curious as to your opinion. I'm prepared to be wrong on this...it's not like I've spent years studying British psyche, it's just something I've been thinking about more than usual recently in light of the response to froome and the IAAF stuff.

 

[gillan1969]

i think it probably has a lot to do with the amateur ethos and the looking down the nose at professional athletes...it was 'gentlemen' who partook in sports and did so under their own bizarre code of ethics which presumably saw fair play on the sports field and in duels etc as being more important than say quelling a rebellion in the colonies with extreme prejudice...to borrow a modern phrase from an ex-colony..

money sullied the sporting arena which should be left to those with higher ideals...in a way they were not wrong...

 

[flying_plum]

Re:

Teach us more about values and being British, wise one. I'm learning lots.
Thanks

I assume that's directed at me. It wasn't intended as a lecture, it was just a thought following on from blackcat's meme. However, I think I've derailed the conversation significantly. Apologies, I'll shut up and get back to packing.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Quite possibly....though it is speculation. As I said though, the Conconi test is not something they appear to be a fan of. I would also take issue with the term "only brilliance". As often seems to be the case, those at the cutting edge of performance science have expert knowledge of doping methods...but it is wrong to suggest that it's their only "value". Ferrari is a case in point.

good points.

 

[Swifty's Cakes]

The beeb have done a helpful guide on where the filthy dopers come from in the tour.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/34023348

No points for spotting the obvious omission.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Omission?

Who could have guessed...

Sickening nationalism by a state sponsored media outlet.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re: go on confess

there does not appear to be any omission.........article indicates actual doping

not suggestion

i have to laugh ................zero busts for uk riders is probably only reflective

of low number taking part.......................................

Mark L

David Millar? Seems they've framed the question so that it only counts doping busts AT THE TOUR DE FRANCE (though who is the Canadian in 2010? Hesjedal? Don't think he confessed to doping AT THE TOUR DE FRANCE, which makes it disingenuous to mention him and not Millar) for whatever reason, but we know that just because the busts weren't at the Tour that the riders weren't dopers. I mean, strictly speaking Matteo Priamo was clean at the 2008 Giro, but we know cos of Sella that he was handing vials of CERA out to his teammates.

They also left out Rémy di Gregorio though.

 

[Swifty's Cakes]

Re: go on confess

there does not appear to be any omission.........article indicates actual doping

not suggestion

i have to laugh ................zero busts for uk riders is probably only reflective

of low number taking part.......................................

Mark L

David Millar? Seems they've framed the question so that it only counts doping busts AT THE TOUR DE FRANCE (though who is the Canadian in 2010? Hesjedal? Don't think he confessed to doping AT THE TOUR DE FRANCE, which makes it disingenuous to mention him and not Millar) for whatever reason, but we know that just because the busts weren't at the Tour that the riders weren't dopers. I mean, strictly speaking Matteo Priamo was clean at the 2008 Giro, but we know cos of Sella that he was handing vials of CERA out to his teammates.

They also left out Rémy di Gregorio though.

i waI thinking of Millar. Pretty sure he describes one of his TdF stage wins as being assisted in his book. Either way its disingenuous of the beeb to exclude him from a list of known dopers

 

[sniper]

didn't Millar admit to being doped for the TdF 2000?

Millar not only omission.
Why only three Dutch guys? I think De Jongh and Knaven weren't counted even though the French police tested them positive in 1998.

 

[Frosty]

Yes, i don't understand the list either - there is a Luxembourg flag for 2008, 2009, 2011 and 2012 which presumably refers to Frank Schleck's positive from 2012. Frank Schleck has never been done for anything before 2012 though.

On the other hand, Paolini was done this year and competed last year, among other years. However, there is clearly no Italian flag for last year. Therefore, it is at least inconsistent.

Not sure about the 2010 Canadian flag either. It could be Barry rather than Hesjedal although Barry admitted to doping 2003-2006 rather than at Sky.

 

[TheSpud]

Re:

didn't Millar admit to being doped for the TdF 2000?

Millar not only omission.
Why only three Dutch guys? I think De Jongh and Knaven weren't counted even though the French police tested them positive in 1998.

Presumably as those 2 weren't sanctioned or confessed. Not sure why Millar isnt there though.