• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Doping in XC skiing

Page 211 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
P

ppanther92

May 3, 2015
3,572
2,661
19,180
Visit site
Re:

Oude Geuze said:
Its unfortunate that there will be some collateral damage when banning a nation. There are a couple of ways to do this:

Ban everyone involved in Sochi. Pros: seems fair. Cons: people involved in Russian winter sports at a junior level or “b-tier” as in not selected for the Sochi squad might nevertheless have been involved in the systematic doping but will now be allowed to participate.

Ban anyone Russian. Pros: Punishes Russia and all doping perpetrators, sends a tough message. Cons: Possibly very high collateral damage, will be seen as incredibly unfair by Russian athletes and people. Politically infeasible.

Ban anyone who tested positive. Pros: fair to the athletes. Cons: probably full of false negatives as we know that doping was a systematic, top down, state sponsored affair that included both FSB, high ranking politicians and staff and this you cannot trust a non positive tested athlete to have been clean. Also business as usual for Russia, no extra punishment for conspiracy and fraud.

Any other ideas?
Click to expand...

And as clearly outlined, they are not doing any of these three things. They want to humiliate Russia (probably for political reasons, or maybe cause they are an easy target now) - nothing more, nothing less.

Ban everyone involved in Sochi: why is Lapshin not banned, why is Virolaynen banned?
Ban everyone Russian: why are some athletes allowed to go then and what does it change being Russian? Shouldn't it be more "ban everyone involved in the Russian system", hence also Pichler and Lapshin?
Ban everyone who tested positive: again, why not Lapshin? Why so many others who haven't tested positive?
 
Libertine Seguros

Libertine Seguros

Feb 20, 2010
31,176
10,942
28,180
Visit site
Re:

Oude Geuze said:
Its unfortunate that there will be some collateral damage when banning a nation. There are a couple of ways to do this:

Ban everyone involved in Sochi. Pros: seems fair. Cons: people involved in Russian winter sports at a junior level or “b-tier” as in not selected for the Sochi squad might nevertheless have been involved in the systematic doping but will now be allowed to participate.

Ban anyone Russian. Pros: Punishes Russia and all doping perpetrators, sends a tough message. Cons: Possibly very high collateral damage, will be seen as incredibly unfair by Russian athletes and people. Politically infeasible.

Ban anyone who tested positive. Pros: fair to the athletes. Cons: probably full of false negatives as we know that doping was a systematic, top down, state sponsored affair that included both FSB, high ranking politicians and staff and this you cannot trust a non positive tested athlete to have been clean. Also business as usual for Russia, no extra punishment for conspiracy and fraud.

Any other ideas?
Click to expand...
See, the thing is, I don't actually have too much of a problem with the idea behind what they're doing, it's how they're doing it that's causing the problem, because there seems to be a lack of consistency with regards to who is getting accepted and who is getting denied. If there was a clear communication from the IOC of the rationale behind some of the athletes' applications being denied, there'd be much less talk.

E.g., "we are satisfied with the evidence that the Russians had a doping system at Sochi 2014, but we have been unable to ascertain in full who was involved, therefore we are unable to pass an application from anybody who was at Sochi with the Russian team as we cannot be fully satisfied that they would not have been involved" - rinse and repeat for wider definitions, such as the McLaren Report named athletes, or the entire 2013-14 season, and boom. It makes the rationale fully clear and allows athletes, coaches and fans alike a clear understanding.

But no crystal clear criteria truly fit with the list of athletes approved and rejected, and no rationale has been communicated either publicly or privately with the athletes who are being rejected, and that's the problem. And the case of Lapshin escaping any kind of sanction by switching to another nation makes a mockery of the whole process, as if he somehow becomes innocent just by no longer having a Russian flag next to his name, while Uslugina somehow becomes guilty of involvement in something that happened among the elite team in a year she didn't get off the national calendar, just by having a Russian flag next to hers.

That's what several of us have a problem with.
 
O

Oude Geuze

Apr 3, 2016
400
0
4,280
Visit site
Yah, we’re just circling around now.

Interesting that Putin actually admits to instances of doping in Russian athletes for the first time last night, but denies state doping (obviously). Not much of an admission seeing as that is clearly true for any country, but still!
 
B

BullsFan22

Jun 22, 2010
4,849
621
17,680
Visit site
Let's hope people like Ustiugov, Ahn, and Shipulin, who were not even implicated or named in any report, go to Korea and are able to race.

That said, the IOC, as I posted above, will appeal to the Swiss court. It's obvious that Bach is controlled by someone. In the lead up to the Sochi games, all we heard was how much of a 'puppet' or a 'friend' of Putin he was and how corrupt he is....Then this rhetoric continued on until really these past few months...Now he is appealing...Obviously he knows how to play for different teams.

I'd love to see his salary numbers...
 
python

python

Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
as i posted above, this is a huge humiliation for the ioc DIRECTLY and as a ricochet, an embarrassment to wada and the several sports federations that took the flimsy evidence based on a single criminal source...the source that admitted to designing and distributing dope

i will be waiting for the reason decisions to be published soon to try to take apart the specific reasons that lead to these acquittals. it is especially interesting, b/c cas had already ruled on many of the athletes and their decision were NOT all that favourable to the athletes. i personally followed the case of legkov and read the reasoned decisions of the previous cas panels...they seemed to side with mc laren and wada :rolleyes:

so, a lot to analyze here.

i also found it curious that the 2 panels consisted mainly of german speakers. No anglo-saxons. though some complained of the anglo-saxon prejudice, i will withhold my judgement.

and lastly, the ioc knows they have no chance in the swiss supreme court. but the political bias needs to save the face i guess.
 
ToreBear

ToreBear

Aug 9, 2012
2,223
0
11,480
Visit site
This is going to get interesting. I'm still not sure if they will be allowed into the Olympics. It would be interesting to see what kind of shape they are in though.

To me it looks like the athletes can not be blamed for someone tampering with their test samples outside of their control.

But we will see what comes of all this.
 
python

python

Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
to put the sensational cas acquittal in some sort of technical yet understandable to a layman light, i will very briefly remind the gist of the wada/ioc arguments...

they were ALL based on a single source. the former moscow lab director mr rodchenkov allegations that there was a mass sample swapping.

specifically, that a dirty, not yet tested A-sample of the medal-slated athletes from a special list, was secretly swapped for a clean sample of the said athlete.

pay attention, this is were the entire ioc/wada/rodchenkov case tries to derive its validity. they insisted that an athlete was a part of the conspiracy b/c he/she must have willingly and knowingly provided a clean sample some time BEFORE the swapping. the presence of some scratches on the bottles that were supposedly opened by the secret service was to be added to the 'evidence'.

it is my logical conclusion (based on the limited evidence so far) that the ioc/wada/rodchenkov FAILED to convince 6 of 6 arbitrators that the acquitted athletes knew anything about the alleged swapping much less that there was any evidence of them knowingly providing clean samples in advance.

think about it ! a panel of 6 CAS professional jurors is asked to take for granted a key claim from a single source - a telephone (faceless for security !) voice of someone claiming to be rodchenkov. and nothing else to support the claim no other witnesses, no other documents, no other indirect evidence.

for all intents and purposes, that voice alleged to belong to rodchenkov, per the athletes lawyers, got a huge axe to grind. that is, as a fugitive accused (and self admitted) of selling drugs, he may have had the purpose of blackening his accusers. not an unrealistic assumption for the jurors to consider - his stories could be embellished and self serving. unless, of course, he provided more evidence...which apparently was lacking.

i dont really know what went on in the jurors heads, but given the outcome and my read of the cas previous reason decisions, it is likely my assumption isn't far from reality.
 
ToreBear

ToreBear

Aug 9, 2012
2,223
0
11,480
Visit site
I'm not sure what you mean roundabout. We can't know why some sanctions were upheld until we get the reasoned decision.

Thanks Python!

I would like to add that Rodchenko's credibility was strengthened when it was found that the samples had been tampered with through marks on the bottle as well as a high salt content. The salt was due to the necessity of adding weight to the fake sample so that it was the same as a real sample. One effect IIRC was that this also polluted the sample.

My take on this Judgement is that they are not Questioning Rodchenko's credibility. It's just that the evidence of tampering/ documents etc is not enough to convict individual athletes.
 
B

BullsFan22

Jun 22, 2010
4,849
621
17,680
Visit site
Re:

ToreBear said:
I'm not sure what you mean roundabout. We can't know why some sanctions were upheld until we get the reasoned decision.

Thanks Python!

I would like to add that Rodchenko's credibility was strengthened when it was found that the samples had been tampered with through marks on the bottle as well as a high salt content. The salt was due to the necessity of adding weight to the fake sample so that it was the same as a real sample. One effect IIRC was that this also polluted the sample.

My take on this Judgement is that they are not Questioning Rodchenko's credibility. It's just that the evidence of tampering/ documents etc is not enough to convict individual athletes.
Click to expand...


I thought the NFL season wasn't over yet?
 
roundabout

roundabout

Jun 7, 2010
19,137
3,025
28,180
Visit site
Re:

ToreBear said:
I'm not sure what you mean roundabout. We can't know why some sanctions were upheld until we get the reasoned decision.

Thanks Python!

I would like to add that Rodchenko's credibility was strengthened when it was found that the samples had been tampered with through marks on the bottle as well as a high salt content. The salt was due to the necessity of adding weight to the fake sample so that it was the same as a real sample. One effect IIRC was that this also polluted the sample.

My take on this Judgement is that they are not Questioning Rodchenko's credibility. It's just that the evidence of tampering/ documents etc is not enough to convict individual athletes.
Click to expand...

"it seems"

"possibly"

"one conclusion that could be made"

"some of the names"

I thought that it would be enough to understand that I don't know for certain.

What is known, however, is that at least 3 of the athletes who had the sanction partly upheld had abnormal salt levels and at least 2 had mixed DNA in the samples.

Also, one of the athletes who had the sanction partly upheld, mentioned in an interview that abnormal salt levels was the reason why the ADRV was confirmed.
 
F

Ferminal

Jul 3, 2009
18,948
5
22,485
Visit site
Re:

python said:
to put the sensational cas acquittal in some sort of technical yet understandable to a layman light, i will very briefly remind the gist of the wada/ioc arguments...

they were ALL based on a single source. the former moscow lab director mr rodchenkov allegations that there was a mass sample swapping.

specifically, that a dirty, not yet tested A-sample of the medal-slated athletes from a special list, was secretly swapped for a clean sample of the said athlete.

pay attention, this is were the entire ioc/wada/rodchenkov case tries to derive its validity. they insisted that an athlete was a part of the conspiracy b/c he/she must have willingly and knowingly provided a clean sample some time BEFORE the swapping. the presence of some scratches on the bottles that were supposedly opened by the secret service was to be added to the 'evidence'.

it is my logical conclusion (based on the limited evidence so far) that the ioc/wada/rodchenkov FAILED to convince 6 of 6 arbitrators that the acquitted athletes knew anything about the alleged swapping much less that there was any evidence of them knowingly providing clean samples in advance.

think about it ! a panel of 6 CAS professional jurors is asked to take for granted a key claim from a single source - a telephone (faceless for security !) voice of someone claiming to be rodchenkov. and nothing else to support the claim no other witnesses, no other documents, no other indirect evidence.

for all intents and purposes, that voice alleged to belong to rodchenkov, per the athletes lawyers, got a huge axe to grind. that is, as a fugitive accused (and self admitted) of selling drugs, he may have had the purpose of blackening his accusers. not an unrealistic assumption for the jurors to consider - his stories could be embellished and self serving. unless, of course, he provided more evidence...which apparently was lacking.

i dont really know what went on in the jurors heads, but given the outcome and my read of the cas previous reason decisions, it is likely my assumption isn't far from reality.
Click to expand...

Thanks, haven't followed this one too closely but based on your summary I'm wondering how it ever got this far. Meanwhile, David Walsh is shouting at shadows.

Today's news http://www.sportschau.de/doping/skilanglauf-manipulationsverdacht-100.html

Guessing they are suspicious in an off-score sense? We know you can dope without having a suspicious test so it's suggestive of how the limits are being exceeded by some.
 
Alexandre B.

Alexandre B.

Feb 10, 2015
5,893
743
19,680
Visit site
DVLXHmzX0AAGy_8.jpg

DVLXHm1X0AAdV1w.jpg
 
python

python

Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
a lot of juicy reading....and viewing !

all in advance of the documentaries to be released tonight by the ard and the nrk later next week....Blood doping by the norwegians, swedes, finns, czechs etc exposed naked. several experts talk on camera. the russians are mentioned only occasionally.

as usual, the swedes are self reflective talking at length about their own including one who is almost a certainly a doper (ollson ?) 0n top of the 1st link is a 13-min clip...even if you do not understand scandinavian, check it out.

(swedish)
https://www.svt.se/nyheter/granskning/ug/expert-pekar-ut-svensk-akare-pa-lista-over-misstankt-dopning
(norwegian)
https://www.nrk.no/sport/dopingavsloring-ryster-sverige_-_-det-er-kaldblodig-juks-1.13898877
(english - a pay wall but a post above sheds more light)
https://www.nrk.no/sport/dopingavsloring-ryster-sverige_-_-det-er-kaldblodig-juks-1.13898877
 
python

python

Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Ferminal said:
python said:
to put the sensational cas acquittal in some sort of technical yet understandable to a layman light, i will very briefly remind the gist of the wada/ioc arguments...

they were ALL based on a single source. the former moscow lab director mr rodchenkov allegations that there was a mass sample swapping.

specifically, that a dirty, not yet tested A-sample of the medal-slated athletes from a special list, was secretly swapped for a clean sample of the said athlete.

pay attention, this is were the entire ioc/wada/rodchenkov case tries to derive its validity. they insisted that an athlete was a part of the conspiracy b/c he/she must have willingly and knowingly provided a clean sample some time BEFORE the swapping. the presence of some scratches on the bottles that were supposedly opened by the secret service was to be added to the 'evidence'.

it is my logical conclusion (based on the limited evidence so far) that the ioc/wada/rodchenkov FAILED to convince 6 of 6 arbitrators that the acquitted athletes knew anything about the alleged swapping much less that there was any evidence of them knowingly providing clean samples in advance.

think about it ! a panel of 6 CAS professional jurors is asked to take for granted a key claim from a single source - a telephone (faceless for security !) voice of someone claiming to be rodchenkov. and nothing else to support the claim no other witnesses, no other documents, no other indirect evidence.

for all intents and purposes, that voice alleged to belong to rodchenkov, per the athletes lawyers, got a huge axe to grind. that is, as a fugitive accused (and self admitted) of selling drugs, he may have had the purpose of blackening his accusers. not an unrealistic assumption for the jurors to consider - his stories could be embellished and self serving. unless, of course, he provided more evidence...which apparently was lacking.

i dont really know what went on in the jurors heads, but given the outcome and my read of the cas previous reason decisions, it is likely my assumption isn't far from reality.
Click to expand...

Thanks, haven't followed this one too closely but based on your summary I'm wondering how it ever got this far. Meanwhile, David Walsh is shouting at shadows.

Today's news http://www.sportschau.de/doping/skilanglauf-manipulationsverdacht-100.html

Guessing they are suspicious in an off-score sense? We know you can dope without having a suspicious test so it's suggestive of how the limits are being exceeded by some.
Click to expand...
regarding your 1st question: how did it get so far ?
very briefly... there was a massive wada investigation by a canadian (former cas juror) into the russian state-sponsored doping. the investigation that took well over a year and consisted of 2 parts was based almost exclusively on the evidence provided by the former russian wada lab director who ran away from russian justice to america. a typical case when a fugitive criminal (who knows A LOT) to save his skin unloads on his fellows. no doubt, much of the fugitive said did happen...the russian doping is a fact. but by whom and when was the subject of several CAS panels to unwind. including whether the rodchenkov evidence can be collaborated by the legally valid means. at the end - and i am only summarizing - the wada/ioc over relied on the single source that offered a very low hanging fruit.

as your link suggests - and my post above develops - there were plenty of dopers to go after but the russians are the easiest. including b/c of the political environment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom