Dekker's Positive

Page 8 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 29, 2009
428
0
0
issoisso said:
That's pretty weird. Last time I checked silence-lotto.be it said Wegelius was at hand on the spot :confused:

Oh well. Not the first time they'd be wrong :p
Yep, they do seem to not know the whereabouts of their riders quite often... problem is it happens in the race too.:eek:
 
Apr 11, 2009
2,250
0
0
powderpuff said:
whereabouts of their riders quite often... problem is it happens in the race too.:eek:
LOL, I'm waiting for the no-radio day in the Tour--and am hoping for hurricane force winds, too--and Rabo or CSC decides to break up the peleton.

Where's Alberto, etc.. Where's everybody then?? Maybe we'll have a race then rather than car-controlled procession :D
 
Amsterhammer said:
...and throws around terms and statistics that are (almost certainly) incomprehensible to more than a very small handful of people who read or post here, the classic 'baffle 'em with bull****' approach. He should be posting that stuff on some sort of scientific forum, or one limited to professionals in the doping business, not on a general cycling forum frequented by 'ordinary' cyclists or fans.

Moreover, someone who 'goes off the deep end' (only) 'every other post' is an authority to be listened to? Where I come from, you make your case without going off the deep end, or you don't make it at all.
The 'ignore' option is your friend. Of course, you still see the posts if someone quotes them.
 
Mar 19, 2009
2,811
0
0
Dutchie typing here.

Dekker is making himself look very guilty and dirty.
"I have a letter that confirm my blood values were within limits!".
Sure, your hematocrit was below 50%, but that doesn't make it OK to top it off.
Is he really this naive, or so bad a cheater? Who knows, maybe he is the least professional rabo at doping, and only for that reason was caught.

At least when Lotz was caught for plain EPO, he just immediately admitted it, and started his 2 year ban without waiting for a ruling.

UCI should get suspected dopers in the bio passport project to sign a declaration that over the past years, they never took any dope and would wager for a 10-year ban or worse. Quite a legal problem, declaring on paper you didn't, and then they get your 2007 sample and run it through updated tests. Wish you had completed an education?
2 years ban, that's just a gentle pat on the shoulder. "You do what you have to, to be a good racer".
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,657
0
0
Dekker_Tifosi said:
Team doctor Geert Leinders (Rabobank) quit his job at Rabobank. Saying that the last 1.5 years (start 2008) he didn't feel 'happy' with the new magament and new rules..

I wonder what was going on at Rabobank before 2008.
I feel pretty bad for you, you have found out your fav rider is a cheat. I would be gutted as well.
 
Not only that, what's worse is he never apoligized or letting know anything about how and why in the days after against me or other editors of his website. We worked our *sses off for nothing for his website for 2,5 years. I defended him all the time against all rumours and accusations.

And now he remains silent, he could have proven he was still a good person despite dope usage by admitting and apoligizing. But instead of that he has gone into hiding and trying to wurm his way out like Landis. So not only is he a dissapointment as a cyclist (cheat) but he is also a dissapointment as a person. And to think I thought I knew the guy after 2,5years working with him.
 
Mar 10, 2009
7,279
0
0
Dekker_Tifosi said:
Team doctor Geert Leinders (Rabobank) quit his job at Rabobank. Saying that the last 1.5 years (start 2008) he didn't feel 'happy' with the new magament and new rules..

I wonder what was going on at Rabobank before 2008.
Wonder if he was one of the ones that worked closely with Dekker, Rasmussen (Boogerd). I mean they have mulitple doctors, right? Perhaps they are cleaing up the pigsty at Rabobank, based on more recent evidence...
 
Dekker Tifosi:
You have my deepest sympathy. I've seen so many fans of riders such as Ullrich and Basso, simply disappear from the sport, because they were completely shattered, inside.

I have great respect for the fact that you are able to accept things for what they are.
You are right to do so.
A stark contrast to those who continue to defend cheats such as Landis, by spouting his conspiracy theory rubbish.
Denial is a key ingredient, in which this doping culture thrives.
 
I will never defend a doper. There is no excuse for a positive epo test. He should not wonder why an old test has been retested neither should he cry that it's unfair. Samples can be retested up to 8 years. He should stop whining, admit, and go into hard training for the coming 2 years. And think of the consequences and the pain he put other people, including his own family, through.
 
Dekker_Tifosi said:
I will never defend a doper. There is no excuse for a positive epo test. He should not wonder why an old test has been retested neither should he cry that it's unfair. Samples can be retested up to 8 years. He should stop whining, admit, and go into hard training for the coming 2 years. And think of the consequences and the pain he put other people, including his own family, through.
I feel sorry for you. At least you are not in denial. You are a good person.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Dekker_Tifosi said:
I will never defend a doper. There is no excuse for a positive epo test. He should not wonder why an old test has been retested neither should he cry that it's unfair. Samples can be retested up to 8 years. He should stop whining, admit, and go into hard training for the coming 2 years. And think of the consequences and the pain he put other people, including his own family, through.
If your going to move about the sport at all at the top (or work for the management, riders) your basically conversing with dope using riders. Believe me, they cannot keep up with the pack and be competitive at that level without some doping. If their in the top 50 at this point they are likely blood doping with their own blood. The pace is just too incredible, Gesink dopes the same as Dekker did. The teams all likely have systematic programs, whether it be team run or clinic run by doctors. Blood doping still gives the biggest bang by far and based on all the epo positives we get nothing has changed much.

The most important thing with autologous blood doping now that epo is so well tested for, is being able to store their blood properly in a special solution and deep freeze it at -80 C to minimize cell death and eliminate the need for epo to keep rectics up when they transfuse... When they blood dope from a period of weeks or months the body shuts down red cell production. Lance/Contador/Levi/Astana, Saxo Bank, all have this I think... It appears to me many of the teams have not figured this out yet.

Cheers. :)
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,657
0
0
BigBoat said:
If your going to move about the sport at all at the top (or work for the management, riders) your basically conversing with dope using riders. Believe me, they cannot keep up with the pack and be competitive at that level without some doping. If their in the top 50 at this point they are likely blood doping with their own blood. The pace is just too incredible, Gesink dopes the same as Dekker did. The teams all likely have systematic programs, whether it be team run or clinic run by doctors. Blood doping still gives the biggest bang by far and based on all the epo positives we get nothing has changed much.

The most important thing with autologous blood doping now that epo is so well tested for, is being able to store their blood properly in a special solution and deep freeze it at -80 C to minimize cell death and eliminate the need for epo to keep rectics up when they transfuse... When they blood dope from a period of weeks or months the body shuts down red cell production. Lance/Contador/Levi/Astana, Saxo Bank, all have this I think... It appears to me many of the teams have not figured this out yet.

Cheers. :)
you would know who cheats and who doesn't. You would also know who is using what:rolleyes:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Dekker_Tifosi said:
I will never defend a doper. There is no excuse for a positive epo test. He should not wonder why an old test has been retested neither should he cry that it's unfair. Samples can be retested up to 8 years. He should stop whining, admit, and go into hard training for the coming 2 years. And think of the consequences and the pain he put other people, including his own family, through.
I have to say that I am impressed with your posts. I feel badly that it was someone who you were not only a fan of, but someone you worked with. He doesn't owe any of us an apology, but he does owe you one.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
0
0
I do not believe the UCI when they say this was the result of the bio passport. They appear to be chocking up every doping infraction to the passport but there does not appear to be much that is new. In the aftermath of the 2007 TdF there were stories that several samples showed use of Dynepo. I would be willing to bet that one of those samples belonged to Dekker. He would seem to be a very convenient target to take down and attribute it to the passport. I would like to see a major rider taken down with no past history.

It also looks to me like the UCI intends to prosecute Dekker using the passport. The EPO positive will be used to back up the results, putting Dekker in an inconvenient position of denying the passport results while the positive makes his arguments laughable. We saw the same thing with the Landis case where Landis' other B samples were tested for exogenous testosterone. The samples came up positive. The positives could not be used to support the case against Landis, which of course brings up the question of why they were tested in the first place, but they served to discredit Landis and serve as cover for the final decision.
 
Mar 13, 2009
683
0
0
Very good point Brodeal, especially given the that a number of the said 2007 tests were already suspicious. All they had to do is retrospectively test all the results marked as 'questionable' with the new test and then attribute this to the passport. Obviously all the testing thresholds that wouldn't hold up scientifically no longer apply. Very handy timing given Kohl's remarks.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
0
0
There is a pretty simple and devious solution out of this for Dekker. He should hire Vrijman to defend him using the same logic the UCI signed off on when it refused to do anything about the six EPO positives in Armstrong's retrospectively tested urine samples. Vrijman could even write a second Vrijman report using the first one as a template.

:)
 
Oh I am certain it's not because of the blood passport. Because Dekker has only been controlled 3 times out of competition in 2008 and 2009 together!! That means he could not have been a target. Even in the races he didn't get picked for random testing much.

However, it's good for PR to say it's because of the blood passport ;) Not that it changes anything, it just means the UCI is lying to us as much as dopers are.
Why are we even fans of the sport, why will I be sitting in front of the TV today? Well.. because I simply like cycling.. it's just too bad it's ****ed up
 
Jun 3, 2009
287
0
0
Of course it is very upsetting to find out the person you admire is not what you thought and has been misleading everybody. Worse if you know them personally. It may be different in Dekker_Tifosi case but the reason alot of people do like certain riders is due to the results they get. It goes without saying that those results may be directly attributed to what they were deceiving people about.

Riding style, situations they have been in, percieved personal traits etc also contribute to if you like them but without the results you may not know about them or they may not even get a ride.

It is fairly ironic that the underlying reason that they can become admired is the reason they are then found to be such a disappointment.

I do agree that if they come clean about everything they did and know it goes along way to making amends. Especially if it helps break down any systematic doping. It also makes it worse if they deny and/or they try to get off on a technicality (but they do have a lot to loose).
 
Jun 10, 2009
606
0
0
jackhammer111 said:
Umm.. that is disingenuous.

Protocols NOW exist to properly account for long term storage of samples.

The old protocols of the 99 samples only assured 3 years.

Not saying he didn't dope. Just trying to keep it real.
Seriously, if that is 'keeping it real', you are the master of disingenuity. While the old protocols may have only "assured" 3 years shelf life, that's in no way the same thing as saying the shelf life was limited to 3 years.

I'm not suggesting I know details about WADA/UCI sample storage protocols, but I do know this isn't rocket science. Storage below -70 celsius should be plenty, even for biologically active samples. Even more moderate temps like -40C are probably OK.

Back in my days as a lab rat I extracted RNA (which is way, WAY, WAY more prone to degradation than proteins [like EPO] or DNA [from evil twins like TH's]) from tissue samples that had been stored in freezers at -70C for up to a decade.

If EPO were in blood or urine samples in '99, it would still be those samples now unless someone turned the freezers off over summer.

FWIW, we also had a 250g jar of pure testosterone in the cupboard in my lab, which had been around since before it was a restricted substance. We couldn't put it in the safe with the newer restricted substances, because if it had been admitted to auditors that we had it, we probably wouldn't have been allowed to keep it [and we needed it for our research] :eek: I wonder if it's still there, and if not, whether it was handed in for destruction or sold at the local gym...
[edit] the point of which was to say some stuff lasts forever even out of the fridge[/edit]
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
BroDeal said:
There is a pretty simple and devious solution out of this for Dekker. He should hire Vrijman to defend him using the same logic the UCI signed off on when it refused to do anything about the six EPO positives in Armstrong's retrospectively tested urine samples. Vrijman could even write a second Vrijman report using the first one as a template.

:)
lol

good one Bro.

Vrijmen in duplicate.

Only matter of time for triplicate.

Best profit margin too, 30k of fees, for pressing the button print, and changing Armstrong to Ceccho's prodigy.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Dekker_Tifosi said:
Oh I am certain it's not because of the blood passport. Because Dekker has only been controlled 3 times out of competition in 2008 and 2009 together!! That means he could not have been a target. Even in the races he didn't get picked for random testing much.

However, it's good for PR to say it's because of the blood passport ;) Not that it changes anything, it just means the UCI is lying to us as much as dopers are.
Why are we even fans of the sport, why will I be sitting in front of the TV today? Well.. because I simply like cycling.. it's just too bad it's ****ed up
Thats nearly slander, against Dekker.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY