- Jul 28, 2009
- 333
- 0
- 0
mistahsinclair said:Everyone passes the controls...until they get caught!QUOTE]
Why is this a problem?
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
mistahsinclair said:Everyone passes the controls...until they get caught!QUOTE]
Why is this a problem?
mistahsinclair said:Everyone passes the controls...until they get caught!
cromagnon said:Why is this a problem?
psychlist said:I must admit I have never seen the above quote, but I certainly have heard the "never failed..." language on numerous occasions. That is definitely what AC's response sounds like to me.
So what was the question Armstrong was answering in bold above?
mistahsinclair said:Seems to be a very politically correct answer...actually, it's not an answer at all...at least not to the question being asked.
It's a yes/no question. To say you pass the controls means nothing. Everyone passes the controls...until they get caught!
"I always pass the controls with a happy face"
dienekes88 said:"Until they get caught." So you'd rather catch a lot more people, right? Everyone would.
What's the acceptable false positive rate, though? Every tests has a certain sensitivity and specificity (wiki it if you don't know what I'm talking about). You have to protect those who are innocent from the possibility of getting screwed. They have to test with as high specificity as possible in order to have as few false positives as possible.
Is it better to have 10 dopers race? Or to have 1 innocent guy skewered?
mistahsinclair said:As far as I know the testers know who the dopers are (at least the detectable products) however, due to the sensitivity limits, they are very rarely caught...this is where the micro-dosing comes in.
The limits set mean that plenty of people who are doping get through, but the innocent guys don't get skewered.
dienekes88 said:I don't think it really matters what the specific question was. He said the magic words. He also said them in 1999 apparently... and continued to do so for 10 years. Internet myths are perpetuated by assumptions that aren't fact-checked because people want them to be true. Those people have been proven - unequivocally - to be the kind of people who lie in order to promote their agenda.
But if 1O EPO are not caught, they would destroy the races... so the other riders have to dope too....dienekes88 said:"Until they get caught." So you'd rather catch a lot more people, right? Everyone would.
What's the acceptable false positive rate, though? Every tests has a certain sensitivity and specificity (wiki it if you don't know what I'm talking about). You have to protect those who are innocent from the possibility of getting screwed. They have to test with as high specificity as possible in order to have as few false positives as possible.
Is it better to have 10 dopers race? Or to have 1 innocent guy skewered?
Dr. Maserati said:How do you mean a myth? It would be a myth if it was accepted that LA had never uttered those words- no-one ever said that.
In relation to your second statement - I was the one who highlighted the CNN transcript, in the interest of fairness. I think you already know where my opinions are on the LA doping debate.
As for your comment that LA was saying that in 1999 'apparently' - I do not remember that. From memory -I waited a long time for him to utter "I have never doped" - before that his comments were similarly vague like Contadors.
If you have a link to an earlier comment than after he was forced to defend himself in 2005 I would be grateful to see it.
poupou said:But if 1O EPO are not caught, they would destroy the races... so the other riders have to dope too....
dienekes88 said:So you would rather convict innocent riders?
Or do you think that no rider is innocent.
mistahsinclair said:It may well be a 10:1 ratio of dopers:clean, but the system has very little danger of convicting the guilty let alone the innocent.
dienekes88 said:As I've tried to explain
dienekes88 said:Well, cruising teh intarwebz, the claim that "he always says 'I have never tested positive,' but he never says 'I have never doped" is repeated so often that it's assumed that it's true. Just wait a couple weeks. You'll see it surface a couple more times.
I said "apparently," because it's according to an archived news article I have to pay to see. However, it's included in the quick abstract via google as a quote from French Television.
http://news.google.com/archivesearch?um=1&ned=us&hl=en&q=armstrong+"i+am+not+doped"&cf=all
Just trying to keep everyone honest here.
cromagnon said:Readin the posts here the general attitude seems to be -
If someone you don't like for reasons of race or anything else wins - he must be a cheater.
If more people aren't caught it's because the cheats are a step ahead of the tests and the tests are not "good" enough (I assume this is based on a vast knowledge of physiology maybe they should work as anti-doping consultants to help these poor stupid PhD's design better tests).
If someone - anyone - is caught it just goes to show everyone is cheating.
That's why I will never click on this pointless subforum again - have fun.
lean said:Velonews
there's a website called google, i typed some of the quotation and then left-clicked search![]()
cromagnon said:Readin the posts here the general attitude seems to be -
If someone you don't like for reasons of race or anything else wins - he must be a cheater.
If more people aren't caught it's because the cheats are a step ahead of the tests and the tests are not "good" enough (I assume this is based on a vast knowledge of physiology maybe they should work as anti-doping consultants to help these poor stupid PhD's design better tests).
If someone - anyone - is caught it just goes to show everyone is cheating.
That's why I will never click on this pointless subforum again - have fun.
keen_but_slow said:He's been on the same media training course I have. Very important during Q&A that you only ever say positive things that you believe to be true. If you say anything you do not believe, then your body language will give you away and without knowing why, you will be perceived as untrustworthy.
However, if you tell yourself something for long enough, then it gets easier. The great Marc Salem (look him up, or go to one of his shows) was asked about O.J. Simpson and said that, at the initial trial, when he said "not guilty", his blink was one of the longest ever. But more recently, when interviewed, there's no hint that he's lying - he believes what he's saying.
So, regardless of the rights and wrongs of it, my semi-educated guess is that Contador (young, not very bright, not very press-savvy) is still staying on script. LAS on the other hand has seen pretty much every pretender to his throne get caught out, he believes he's acted fairly (the playing field is level) and he believes it is his meticulous preparation and unprecedented economics (a whole team built to help him win one race) that has been behind his achievements (I hate him, but I still think this statement holds) - he probably believes he's in the right and can say anything he likes with confidence.
In which regard, he will do well in politics. Alberto had better stick to riding his bike.
cromagnon said:Readin the posts here the general attitude seems to be -
If someone you don't like for reasons of race or anything else wins - he must be a cheater.
If more people aren't caught it's because the cheats are a step ahead of the tests and the tests are not "good" enough (I assume this is based on a vast knowledge of physiology maybe they should work as anti-doping consultants to help these poor stupid PhD's design better tests).
If someone - anyone - is caught it just goes to show everyone is cheating.
That's why I will never click on this pointless subforum again - have fun.
Armstrongfan789 said:After the TDF I have noticed that Contador is a fabulous rider when it comes to all round riding. He is very good on mountains and a very good rider for time trials. I do not like him that much but i guess he will have to do. Also he did not have to ride away from Klodin, his team mate on one of the mountain stages. If he kept him with him then astana would have gone 1,2,3 for the yellow jersey clasifications. He would not dop but i would keep a eye out for him.