Interesting interview about doping

[Race Radio]

http://competitorradio.competitor.com/2010/04/mark-zeigler/

Mark Zeigler is a writer for the San Diego Tribune. One of the better writers on doping. Interesting interview with him about the structure of the sport.

 

[bicing]

http://competitorradio.competitor.com/2010/04/mark-zeigler/

Mark Zeigler is a writer for the San Diego Tribune. One of the better writers on doping. Interesting interview with him about the structure of the sport.

Good interview, really gets good around the 21 minute mark. Makes it sound like doping is impossible to beat, ever. That's a shame... But as sports fans it has to be a reality we must all accept I guess.

 

[JPM London]

Thanks for link RR... Need to sit down and listen to it at some point soon. Care to spill his main points?

 

[Race Radio]

Thanks for link RR... Need to sit down and listen to it at some point soon. Care to spill his main points?

He talks about the weakness of the various governing bodies in the past, testing, and why some use DHEA

 

[python]

dont know if it's an endorsement, but the guy knows his shyt.

certainly a damian ressiot in america.

 

[Jonathan]

dont know if it's an endorsement, but the guy knows his shyt.

certainly a damian ressiot in america.

What did you think of his ideas about testing being done by teams?

 

[python]

What did you think of his ideas about testing being done by teams?

he clearly said a step in the right direction.

i paid more attention to his talk about lances team mates. if the guy can recite from memory all his teammates by name, the circumstances around it etc he knows (or suspects) more.

'cleaner is good enough for cycling'

'there are hundreds of designer steroids out there'

'listen to joe papp'

'doping now is probably not a team effort'

etc etc

he is also well versed in the science and time line of tests introduction. testing...he's an encyclopedia of doping knowledge. id only fault him for small inaccuracies in his factual knowledge (like the 'hundreds and hundreds of designer steroids' coz the total number biochemically possible is only about 500)

 

[Jonathan]

he clearly said a step in the right direction.

"I still have problems with a team testing its' own athletes, because there's just too much of a conflict of interest. I think you need to turn that over to an independent agency."

"The step in the right direction" was that it's great if a team manages to nail one of its own athletes, but "the passport is a better way to go". The "step" was referring to the independent agencies. His message is clear when he says "We need more independent testing."

 

[python]

"I still have problems with a team testing its' own athletes, because there's just too much of a conflict of interest. I think you need to turn that over to an independent agency."

"The step in the right direction" was that it's great if a team manages to nail one of its own athletes, but "the passport is a better way to go". The "step" was referring to the independent agencies. His message is clear when he says "We need more independent testing."

by now i know very well that you have hearing and perception filters and able to condense a 45 minute invaluable broadly-subjected interview on doping to your own small agenda's.

that's why from now on you posts will receive the lowest priority on my reading list - too narrow and small minded. good-buy, jonathan.

 

[Jonathan]

Zeigler argues that, in spit of issues with doping agencies, there should be more independent testing. Anti-doping programs done by teams principally bring up conflicts of interest, even if they do result in doping practices being brought to light.

So while the Floyd Landis hearing brought some problems to light, the agencies are moving in the right direction. In that regard, Zeigler talks about the biopassport, which he calls "a better way to go" compared to the team programs.

The reason Zeigler gives for this is interesting, and something that will only be beneficial over a larger amount of time. With the passport, athletes can be tested from a very young age, and any anomalies can be traced over several years. Once an athlete starts a large doping program, this should be visible on the passport. What Zeigler does not mention, but I think it's implied, is that teams cannot do this: they do not, as a rule, monitor riders from the age of 16 - although it does happen. To see long-term trends in all riders, you need an organization that stands above and outside the teams.

He does state, if I understand correctly, that fighting doping requires that all parties - teams and agencies - share a common goal: a cleaner sport. That seems obvious, but it does imply that not all teams are equally concerned about doping, something I have read earlier in an interview with Patrick Lefevere.