Doping in XC skiing

Page 168 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
justyna twitted that she is awaiting the fis and wada reaction...while she went for more popcorn.

i will be surprised if the fis appealed. otoh, the wada likely will, b/c for them it's a principal question of the strict liability principle. she has to get 2 years at least.

the amount of whining in the norge media is beyond readable...
 
Jan 3, 2016
300
0
0
Re:

python said:
justyna twitted that she is awaiting the fis and wada reaction...while she went for more popcorn.

i will be surprised if the fis appealed. otoh, the wada likely will, b/c for them it's a principal question of the strict liability principle. she has to get 2 years at least.

the amount of whining in the norge media is beyond readable...
It all boils down to a one season ban, if it stands. This seems very lenient in comparison with similar cases, but, as you say, if you're reading the Norwegian media it's all terrible. It will be very interesting to see who appeals. Maybe Johaug won't even be suspended at all...http://www.dagbladet.no/sport/det-finnes-ikke-grunnlag-for-utestengelse-i-denne-saken/65383196
 
Oct 22, 2016
36
0
0
Re:

spalco said:
14 months seems absurd. Can someone explain the legal theory how the norwegian doping authority arrived at that number?
Very interested in this as well. Is the whole suggestion available somewhere?

More than a year but short enough to give her time to prepare for the olympics. The Sundby case was a joke, a three month ban to be served off season. This feels very tailored as well.
 
Oct 22, 2016
36
0
0
Re: Re:

sida_mot said:
spalco said:
14 months seems absurd. Can someone explain the legal theory how the norwegian doping authority arrived at that number?
Very interested in this as well. Is the whole suggestion available somewhere?

More than a year but short enough to give her time to prepare for the olympics. The Sundby case was a joke, a three month ban to be served off season. This feels very tailored as well.
OK found it here: http://antidoping.no/om-antidoping-norge/nyheter/patalenemndens-vedtak-i-sak-mot-therese-johaug/

only available in Norwegian as far as I can tell. Peculiar that the reasoning about the low dose that was so clearly communicated by ADNO early on didn't make it to this proposal.
 
Re: Re:

BullsFan22 said:
spalco said:
14 months seems absurd. Can someone explain the legal theory how the norwegian doping authority arrived at that number?

Simple. They want to let her compete in the Olympics.
And tour de ski. If I understand this right, AdN proposed ban begins in 18th Oct when she was provisionally suspended and ends 18th Dec 2017. So she can make it to TdS that season too.

I too think, and hope, that wada appeals because of strict Iiability. I mean what's the point for the organisaation if it does not?
 
Re: Re:

meat puppet said:
BullsFan22 said:
spalco said:
14 months seems absurd. Can someone explain the legal theory how the norwegian doping authority arrived at that number?

Simple. They want to let her compete in the Olympics.
And tour de ski. If I understand this right, AdN proposed ban begins in 18th Oct when she was provisionally suspended and ends 18th Dec 2017. So she can make it to TdS that season too.

I too think, and hope, that wada appeals because of strict Iiability. I mean what's the point for the organisaation if it does not?

I think they need to go to the standard procedure here, a banned substance (a strong steroid in this case), taken over 11 days (if I am not mistaken), not reading the instructions, the doctor suggesting she take it, him also not reading the instructions....meaning...standard 2 year suspension for a banned substance.

We can talk about how this wasn't a mistake, but even if it somehow was (I don't buy the excuses and I strongly feel that it was blatant use), how could the Norwegians say that this is too harsh?!?
 
If stupidity can in anyway be use as leverage to get a lower ban, you'll see stupid athletes and stupid doctors. And it's nothing new. It's been rewarded with legendary careers.
Authorities need to focus on facts, not factor in whether new levels of stupidity were observed in the unvoluntary self administration of doping. Stupidity should be an aggrevating circumstance. Explain how it can NOT be? 4 years, if not more for the lying. For my favorite ski darling TJ. I know she's dirty.
Lying should be aggrevating as well. Makes a mockery of all matters AD. Does the sport even need someone like that back?
 
Jul 28, 2011
135
0
8,830
Re:

Cloxxki said:
If stupidity can in anyway be use as leverage to get a lower ban, you'll see stupid athletes and stupid doctors. And it's nothing new. It's been rewarded with legendary careers.
Authorities need to focus on facts, not factor in whether new levels of stupidity were observed in the unvoluntary self administration of doping. Stupidity should be an aggrevating circumstance. Explain how it can NOT be? 4 years, if not more for the lying. For my favorite ski darling TJ. I know she's dirty.
Lying should be aggrevating as well. Makes a mockery of all matters AD. Does the sport even need someone like that back?
I know you've been calling MB out for years. Let me ask you who is a more blatant mockery: Muscles Bjørgen or the Energizer Bunny? haha
 
May 23, 2010
526
0
0
Here are the relevant sections from the WADA code:
10.2.1 The period of Ineligibility shall be four years where ... The anti-doping rule violation involves a Specified Substance and the Anti-Doping Organization can establish that the anti-doping rule violation was intentional.

10.2.2 If Article 10.2.1 does not apply, the period of Ineligibility shall be two years.

10.5.2. If an Athlete ... establishes ... that he or she bears No Significant Fault or Negligence, then ... the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be reduced ... but the reduced period of Ineligibility may not be less than one-half of the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable.
The 14-month suspension means that ADNO believes Johaug "bears no significant fault or negligence".

The inability to see the word "DOPING" on the packaging is not considered significant negligence (at the very least)?
 
Re: Re:

V3R1T4S said:
Cloxxki said:
If stupidity can in anyway be use as leverage to get a lower ban, you'll see stupid athletes and stupid doctors. And it's nothing new. It's been rewarded with legendary careers.
Authorities need to focus on facts, not factor in whether new levels of stupidity were observed in the unvoluntary self administration of doping. Stupidity should be an aggrevating circumstance. Explain how it can NOT be? 4 years, if not more for the lying. For my favorite ski darling TJ. I know she's dirty.
Lying should be aggrevating as well. Makes a mockery of all matters AD. Does the sport even need someone like that back?
I know you've been calling MB out for years. Let me ask you who is a more blatant mockery: Muscles Bjørgen or the Energizer Bunny? haha
It's shifting. At least MB has the decency to not get caught, or bribe all the right people. She didn't make it to this situation, and here Johaug gets to lose some credit.
The type of skiing Johaug does, I think, is possible. If we don't look at the 5% advantage over the world #2 of the day. This part has gotten crazy last season, obviously. But her physique and the way she performs relatively between sprint, distance, and climbing, seems right.
Bjoergen being a powerlifter/bodybuilders on skis, winning 30k's at the very highest level even if there are minutes of climbing in there, makes a mockery of sport physiology. Sprinter slash bodybuilder becomes 30k winner against skinny girls...cannot be accepted without dropping at least 30 IQ points.
Johaug's shaky case just exposes the way this team operates. They are hanging on for dear life on the one had, but on the other hand up the arrogance by just sticking to their practices. The vaporizer cabin inside the waxing truck is not even denied. The mockery is multi-level, and national. And this is just the part we get to see displayed out in the open. No insinuations necessary. In cycling, there was so much we didn't know, beyond anyone's expectations...
 
Re: Re:

Cloxxki said:
V3R1T4S said:
Cloxxki said:
If stupidity can in anyway be use as leverage to get a lower ban, you'll see stupid athletes and stupid doctors. And it's nothing new. It's been rewarded with legendary careers.
Authorities need to focus on facts, not factor in whether new levels of stupidity were observed in the unvoluntary self administration of doping. Stupidity should be an aggrevating circumstance. Explain how it can NOT be? 4 years, if not more for the lying. For my favorite ski darling TJ. I know she's dirty.
Lying should be aggrevating as well. Makes a mockery of all matters AD. Does the sport even need someone like that back?
I know you've been calling MB out for years. Let me ask you who is a more blatant mockery: Muscles Bjørgen or the Energizer Bunny? haha
It's shifting. At least MB has the decency to not get caught, or bribe all the right people. She didn't make it to this situation, and here Johaug gets to lose some credit.
The type of skiing Johaug does, I think, is possible. If we don't look at the 5% advantage over the world #2 of the day. This part has gotten crazy last season, obviously. But her physique and the way she performs relatively between sprint, distance, and climbing, seems right.
Bjoergen being a powerlifter/bodybuilders on skis, winning 30k's at the very highest level even if there are minutes of climbing in there, makes a mockery of sport physiology. Sprinter slash bodybuilder becomes 30k winner against skinny girls...cannot be accepted without dropping at least 30 IQ points.
Johaug's shaky case just exposes the way this team operates. They are hanging on for dear life on the one had, but on the other hand up the arrogance by just sticking to their practices. The vaporizer cabin inside the waxing truck is not even denied. The mockery is multi-level, and national. And this is just the part we get to see displayed out in the open. No insinuations necessary. In cycling, there was so much we didn't know, beyond anyone's expectations...

I respect that you are still sticking with that opinion and that general argument. I have no real problems with that, but it's also interesting how quickly Johaug burst onto the scene in 2007, as an 18 year old unknown. After having some results the previous season at the junior level (though not enough to even qualify her for the world juniors in 2006), she really exploded in 2007, in Sapporo especially, when she, Kuitunen and Steira broke away from the pack in the 30k classic. I don't need to go into great detail of her career exploits, but her burst onto the scene may be even more sudden than Bjoergen. Though Bjoergen qualified and had mediocre results at World Juniors and it took her until she was 22/23 to really blossom. Like you mentioned and have mentioned many times in the past in this forum, Bjoergen's physique and her career starting as primarily a sprinter and then amazingly being able to last (with relative ease) in longer distance races is suspicious to say the least.

However, Johaug's technique and her cartoon-like tempo and general crushing of the field the last couple seasons is not something to take lightly. Yes, she's all skin and bone, but that tempo, the technique, the widespread use of asthma meds by non-asthmatic Norwegians, the past regarding high blood values, the trailer where they go inside to 'nebulize,' etc, etc.

Johann Muehlegg is, excuse me for saying this, a mix between Bjoergen and Johaug. He's muscular like Bjoergen (obviously much more so), and his technique, short strides and high frequency stabs are eerily similar to Johaug.
 
Re: Re:

BullsFan22 said:
Johann Muehlegg is, excuse me for saying this, a mix between Bjoergen and Johaug. He's muscular like Bjoergen (obviously much more so), and his technique, short strides and high frequency stabs are eerily similar to Johaug.
You call that technique, what Mühlegg did on skis? :p
 
Re: Re:

kingjr said:
BullsFan22 said:
Johann Muehlegg is, excuse me for saying this, a mix between Bjoergen and Johaug. He's muscular like Bjoergen (obviously much more so), and his technique, short strides and high frequency stabs are eerily similar to Johaug.
You call that technique, what Mühlegg did on skis? :p

He skied the same way when he was with Germany. He won World Juniors while with the unified Germany (he's from Garmisch or close to it in Bavaria). At least he had some potential as a youngster. Wonder what sort of doping he was doing while in Germany. Or perhaps he didn't dope before moving to Spain?
 
Re: Re:

BullsFan22 said:
He skied the same way when he was with Germany. He won World Juniors while with the unified Germany (he's from Garmisch or close to it in Bavaria). At least he had some potential as a youngster. Wonder what sort of doping he was doing while in Germany. Or perhaps he didn't dope before moving to Spain?
Maybe he was on the juice as a Junior already. The guy is a complete loon.
 
Re: Re:

BullsFan22 said:
I respect that you are still sticking with that opinion and that general argument. I have no real problems with that, but it's also interesting how quickly Johaug burst onto the scene in 2007, as an 18 year old unknown. After having some results the previous season at the junior level (though not enough to even qualify her for the world juniors in 2006), she really exploded in 2007, in Sapporo especially, when she, Kuitunen and Steira broke away from the pack in the 30k classic. I don't need to go into great detail of her career exploits, but her burst onto the scene may be even more sudden than Bjoergen. Though Bjoergen qualified and had mediocre results at World Juniors and it took her until she was 22/23 to really blossom. Like you mentioned and have mentioned many times in the past in this forum, Bjoergen's physique and her career starting as primarily a sprinter and then amazingly being able to last (with relative ease) in longer distance races is suspicious to say the least.

However, Johaug's technique and her cartoon-like tempo and general crushing of the field the last couple seasons is not something to take lightly. Yes, she's all skin and bone, but that tempo, the technique, the widespread use of asthma meds by non-asthmatic Norwegians, the past regarding high blood values, the trailer where they go inside to 'nebulize,' etc, etc.

Johann Muehlegg is, excuse me for saying this, a mix between Bjoergen and Johaug. He's muscular like Bjoergen (obviously much more so), and his technique, short strides and high frequency stabs are eerily similar to Johaug.
I'm fairly on board with Cloxxki's point on this one. The issue with Bjørgen is that she succeeds and dominates in formats that people with her physical profile simply shouldn't. Johaug does not succeed in the formats that don't physically suit her, however her dominance and performance in the ones that do suit her are a red flag in and of themselves.

If you like, Bjørgen is like watching a former track cyclist demolishing everybody in the mountains - we have seen this in recent years, and the attention it has attracted in the Clinic is well-known - whereas Johaug is like watching a lightweight mountain goat who is physically built perfectly to climb mountains, but with an inefficient style - think of an Escartín or a Mancebo - breaking power meters à la Pantani. You still baulk at it, just that you baulk at it for different reasons. While everybody expected Therese to dominate the distance events last year, some of the performances were ridiculous. I think at Lahti she attacked after less than a kilometre with only Weng able to follow her for a couple of kilometres before just skiing away from everybody.

Also, as somebody who rails against the continual shortening of races and proliferation of sprints, it's also bad for the sport, because there's even less reason for a skier to want to be a distance specialist if every single distance race is a matter of measuring how many minutes behind Johaug you can finish.
 
Feb 15, 2015
158
0
2,680
Womens XC skiing has extremely short distances – it's unfair to compare it to cycling and mountain stages. It's more like the 30k compare to cyclocross – and that's a sport we definitely know is clean ;)
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
danielovichdk2 The Clinic 3

ASK THE COMMUNITY