Is Philippe Gilbert Doping?

[red_flanders]

Re:

@Red_Flanders
Landis "direct testimony" talks about 2007. Even if we assume he was in the know in 2010, he would at best only have knowlege of the passport up to that point, and it has since changed as described previously.

If you believe things are the same despite me pointing out differences I can't help you.

I don't think you're reading what I wrote. I rather pointedly acknowledge that things have likely changed.

And as I said, it would strain credulity to imagine that doctors and teams aren't just as ahead of the game now as they were then. We know for a fact they knew how to beat it then. You're not explaining, in any way, how they would be at some disadvantage now.

Ask yourself, how did the doctors know the details of the passport BEFORE it came out? Dig around the internet on that for a bit. Then ask, what has changed since then? The answer is nothing. Nothing structural, team doctors still have access to the same information now as then, and have had a decade to refine technique and use other drugs.

The passport gives the appearance of stopping doping. It does not stop doping. It may have started with good intentions, there are certainly those with good intentions working on it. And they should continue, as it does put a lid on doping, which is a very good thing.

However, busting top riders from the top teams is against the financial interests of the UCI now as it was then. There is no change in the incentives, so to imagine there is change in behavior is amazing. As long as the body which promotes the sport, which realizes huge financial rewards for doing so, is in charge of policing the sport there will be no change.

If it's all cleaner now, why are speeds the fastest they have been on this side of the passport, this year?

Indeed.

Way back in the day, the first time all the same questions came up on internet forums, the answer tended to be "aerodynamics", "better roads", "better training", and "better nutrition".

 

[frisenfruitig]

It seems like you're just wasting your time trying to have a discussion with Torebear tbh. I don't know if he's trolling or actually believes the hogwash he's spouting but either way it's a waste of time. He has apparently somehow convinced himself the sport is clean now despite the fact that we're still seeing alien performances on a regular basis. I'm sure the guys from the full blown EPO/blood doping era like Armstrong and Riis feel like dumb asses now that they realize they could have performed at the same level on water and bread.

 

[Dan2016]

Re:

<snip>

So we know that teams and doctors not only knew how to beat it, but knew how before it came out. They knew this because the doctors were informed on the implementation details...at the very least. To imagine that 5-10 years later they aren't able to beat the passport strains credulity. There is no evidence of which I'm aware or which you have presented which alters this equation. It did change the way riders doped and there has been no change in the passport such that these techniques are no longer effective. Even if there were new details on how the passport has been administered (and I assume there are as has been suggested above), one would have to show that teams, doctors and riders had not figured out a way to circumvent these new passport implementation details. History tells us this is a fantasy.

<snip>

And one can not prove a negative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proving_a_negative

Hello ToreBear, I've been reading this with interest. I took the liberty of highlighting what I thought were the relevant bits in that Floyd Landis quote, not the small bit you highlighted previously to try and support your ''can't prove a negative'' argument. I don't mean that adversarialy by the way. The ''can't prove a negative'' argument isn't really applicable here IMO. Red's argument is borne out by the evidence. Pro cycling has been rife with doping and there's not much to suggest it's any ''cleaner'' now. Floyd Landis was making it very clear in the quote above that he agreed with this. In his words ''To imagine that 5-10 years later they aren't able to beat the passport strains credulity''.

In my opinion Red was correct when he/she said,

You are taking assumptions and suppositions and constructing a theory of what's happening from them. These are theories with no evidence to back them up. It comes across as hoping these things are true. All evidence overwhelmingly suggests they are not.

 

[red_flanders]

Thanks, and obviously I'm not asking anyone to prove a negative. I'm asking someone to explain how changes to the passport, specifically, prevent the same doctors from circumventing the modified passport. We know they used to and we know they either got the info beforehand or had a direct hand in developing the passport.

So the specific question is, for any change in the passport, why is this change something which can't be circumvented?

The notion that "research tends to improve things" is so vague as to be irrelevant. There need to be specifics to make a reasonable argument. This is hardly an ask to prove a negative. It's an ask to speak from an informed point of view when making very specific claims.

 

[Netserk]

An easy counterargument is that while "research tends to improve things", "things" can be on both sides of the table. Sure, anti-doping tools get better. So do the doping ones...

It really is a non-argument.

 

[Nicko.]

Re:

It seems like you're just wasting your time trying to have a discussion with Torebear tbh. I don't know if he's trolling or actually believes the hogwash he's spouting but either way it's a waste of time. He has apparently somehow convinced himself the sport is clean now despite the fact that we're still seeing alien performances on a regular basis. I'm sure the guys from the full blown EPO/blood doping era like Armstrong and Riis feel like dumb asses now that they realize they could have performed at the same level on water and bread.

ToreBear has geneterated a lot of anger in the XC-skiing thread, using the same kind of "alternative reasoning". He got no support from anyone about anything when trying to defend the norwegian dominance in the most VO2max-driven sport during the EPO era

When the top two XC skiers of Norway got busted for doping last year, he couldn't handle the cognitive dissonance and went silent for a long time. Now he's managed to suppress those facts and is back in full swing... arguing alternative facts in a different dimension, never adressing the core issues head on...

 

[Netserk]

You know, there are other possibilities of doping progress than a "magical potion". Like better knowledge of how to manipulate the passport.

 

[Saint Unix]

Re:

@netserk
I'we adressed that earlier. As for this year, thats news to me.

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...

As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....

@frisenfruitig
Didn't we have this discussion a few pages back? I think we did.

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

@Nicko.
If you haven't noticed. Saying someone is not doping in the clinic is like saying the earth is not flat to the Roman Inquisition.

It takes time to explain to the religious that they might have a wrong world view. Time I don't have, or am willing to spend when there are other things I would rather be doing.

How do you explain the rank amateur British journalist who used EPO every other day for six weeks with no red flags over 14 tests? That was in 2015.

If he could do it, the pros were doing it then and are doing it now. The amount of blind leaps of faith and mental gymnastics required to assume the contrary is pretty significant. For starters we would have to assume that something miraculous has happened to the tests in the last two years that has made it impossible to dope and/or that all athletes and doctors in every endurance sport out there (and we know endurance sports have been riddled with doping for as long as they have existed) have suddenly developed a conscience and decided to never cheat again, and both would require that the now former dopers like Valverde, to take one we know used to dope, suffer a significant blow to their performances that I certainly haven't seen. In fact I've seen the exact opposite in Thomas, Froome, Wiggins and Porte. Not exactly good news for the already highly unlikely "theory" of clean athletes.

 

[Dan2016]

Re:

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

Can you provide evidence for this please?

You've said this a few times now and I haven't seen evidence to support it. I wasn't aware any pharmaceutical companies were doing this, and if they are, it's very interesting.

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re: Re:

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

Can you provide evidence for this please?

You've said this a few times now and I haven't seen evidence to support it. I wasn't aware any pharmaceutical companies were doing this, and if they are, it's very interesting.

They *can* be if the drug can't be monitored directly. But they don't do it for anti-doping reasons! If they did, someone would just manufacture without markers and rake in the dough. Amgen Tour of California...

Lance got popped by the passport!?

John Swanson

 

[yaco]

Re: Re:

@netserk
I'we adressed that earlier. As for this year, thats news to me.

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...

As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....

@frisenfruitig
Didn't we have this discussion a few pages back? I think we did.

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

@Nicko.
If you haven't noticed. Saying someone is not doping in the clinic is like saying the earth is not flat to the Roman Inquisition.

It takes time to explain to the religious that they might have a wrong world view. Time I don't have, or am willing to spend when there are other things I would rather be doing.

Why does no one participate on this forum anymore? Oh, now I remember. It sucks because of people like this.

The forum exists because we are discussing a subject of issue - It's like any forum that mixes the good and the bad - Plenty of good info and mature discussion of different points of view in this forum - We don't need one-sided arguments.

 

[This Charming Man]

Re:

@netserk
I'we adressed that earlier. As for this year, thats news to me.

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...

As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....

@frisenfruitig
Didn't we have this discussion a few pages back? I think we did.

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

@Nicko.
If you haven't noticed. Saying someone is not doping in the clinic is like saying the earth is not flat to the Roman Inquisition.

It takes time to explain to the religious that they might have a wrong world view. Time I don't have, or am willing to spend when there are other things I would rather be doing.

I am sorry to disagree. Putting markers in medicines, would assume that they would be used for nefarious purposes!

 

[This Charming Man]

Re:

Hypothesis:
the fact that Gilbert wins BIG then drops out of the next race
is a sign that those who control cycling are have a group of favoured riders
who are free to dope/motor but only to win their allotted races.

This makes cycling more attractive to the causal punter
- since races can be "manipulated" to guarantee:
1) entertaining finishes &
2) reliable stars - with higher degree of recognition
- making it simpler to sell as an online betting sport.

it leaves me (a non-punter) with a undertone of being manipulated.

Agreed, this is how pro sports are manipulated

 

[Dan2016]

Re: Re:

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

Can you provide evidence for this please?

You've said this a few times now and I haven't seen evidence to support it. I wasn't aware any pharmaceutical companies were doing this, and if they are, it's very interesting.

They *can* be if the drug can't be monitored directly. But they don't do it for anti-doping reasons! If they did, someone would just manufacture without markers and rake in the dough. Amgen Tour of California...

Lance got popped by the passport!?

John Swanson

Thanks John.

I thought that was the case but wondered if I'd missed something. As you say, *if* it's ever done, it is never for anti-doping reasons. I had a memory of this idea being mooted a few years ago and the pharmaceutical giants flat-out rejected it. A quick google gave me this as some confirmation of the situation:

https://thinksteroids.com/news/roche-denies-planting-secret-molecule-in-mircera/

 

[fmk_RoI]

Paul Kimmage in today's Sindo leaves little doubt where he stands on the PhilGil question. Link later.

 

[The Hitch]

I remember when ToreBear joined the forum in 2012, not neccesarily posting that much in Clinic threads, I immediately could tell that this was not a rational individual. Looks like my instinct was right.

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Re:

I remember when ToreBear joined the forum in 2012, not necessarily posting that much in Clinic threads, I immediately could tell that this was not a rational individual. Looks like my instinct was right.

Yes, but ball
not man

 

[spetsa]

Re: Re:

@netserk
I'we adressed that earlier. As for this year, thats news to me.

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...

As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....

@frisenfruitig
Didn't we have this discussion a few pages back? I think we did.

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

@Nicko.
If you haven't noticed. Saying someone is not doping in the clinic is like saying the earth is not flat to the Roman Inquisition.

It takes time to explain to the religious that they might have a wrong world view. Time I don't have, or am willing to spend when there are other things I would rather be doing.

Why does no one participate on this forum anymore? Oh, now I remember. It sucks because of people like this.

The forum exists because we are discussing a subject of issue - It's like any forum that mixes the good and the bad - Plenty of good info and mature discussion of different points of view in this forum - We don't need one-sided arguments.

I must have missed the good info part of the "argument"

 

[BullsFan22]

Re:

I remember when ToreBear joined the forum in 2012, not neccesarily posting that much in Clinic threads, I immediately could tell that this was not a rational individual. Looks like my instinct was right.

It's hard to reason with him. I am not surprised though, it's not easy to reason with many Norwegians when it comes to doping in xc skiing and particularly when it relates to Norwegian skiers. "Everyone but Norwegians dopes." If a non Norwegian wins a race it's because he/she was doping. If a Norwegian wins a race it's because they worked hard, had better equipment, better training, more research, a better diet, better culture, there's a lot of Norwegian clubs and skiers, it's a national pastime.....you get the idea. Most Norwegians I've come across come up with virtually the same reasons I mentioned above.

 

[red_flanders]

Re:

@netserk

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...

The issue is that none of that explains how doctors don't have the same information (likely a lot more) and haven't devised ways of circumventing it. You have shown a link which explains there are changes since the first implementations. What you have not explained is why these changes mean anything to stopping doping

As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....

Lance was not busted by the passport. You sort of have a point here in that Lance's blood values clearly showed manipulation when USADA used them in the reasoned decision as part of their evidence against him, but you're totally wrong to say Lance was "popped by the passport in 2010". His blood values were well within passport parameters. To imagine he and his team didn't know what those parameters were, and what they could get away with is unreasonable. As you say he had the doctors he needed. They did exactly what they were trying to do, dope within the parameters of the passport. They solved the problem they were trying to solve. That USADA came along and used the info in ways they had not imagined does not change the fact that he beat the passport and that they knew exactly how to do so.

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

As mentioned above you have produced no evidence of blood markers in drugs actually being used to detect doping, and if you provided evidence of blood markers I missed it.

The real problem is what you need to show is that ALL PED's have markers which can be used to detect doping. Because in 2 minutes I can find Russian or Chinese EPO on the web and I'm willing to bet they're not marked. The reality is that there is exactly zero chance that ALL easily available sources of PED's are trackable. As such, this line of argument is at a dead end.

Again, beyond this you need to show how the passport can detect drugs like EPO which have a very short detection window when used in small doses. They clear before the morning window opens. As such, they are not detectable, markers or no (and "No is the answer) and will not be picked up. So they're irrelevant to the passport.

What is the record for sanctions by the passport? How many riders since its inception? That's rhetorical.

 

[yaco]

Re: Re:

@netserk
I'we adressed that earlier. As for this year, thats news to me.

@Red_Flanders
I assume knowledge is gained through reading the passport documentation i'we referenced previosly...

As for how easy it was to beat before: Landis got caught when the testing was even simpler. When Landis said how easy it was to fool the passport in may of 2010, he apearently did'nt send the memo to Lance Armstrong who got popped by the passport in 2010.....

And Lance was the one who had the most resources and best doctors....

@frisenfruitig
Didn't we have this discussion a few pages back? I think we did.

@Red Flanders and Netserk
Drugs under development are inserted with markers. It much more difficult and costly to dope now because now you have to develop a hole new class of doping without the help of any of the major Pharmaceuticals.

But I'm sure they'we still found some new magical potion that everyone at the top uses without anyone else knowing about it or even having a clue it exists. Except for the team managers, director sportifs, doctors who administer, doctors who researched the drugs and the dealers....

@Nicko.
If you haven't noticed. Saying someone is not doping in the clinic is like saying the earth is not flat to the Roman Inquisition.

It takes time to explain to the religious that they might have a wrong world view. Time I don't have, or am willing to spend when there are other things I would rather be doing.

Why does no one participate on this forum anymore? Oh, now I remember. It sucks because of people like this.

The forum exists because we are discussing a subject of issue - It's like any forum that mixes the good and the bad - Plenty of good info and mature discussion of different points of view in this forum - We don't need one-sided arguments.

I must have missed the good info part of the "argument"

And your post validates my post.

 

[yaco]

Think ABP violations for cyclists is in the 20's - Believe athletics is around 80.

 

[GraftPunk]

Re:

You know, there are other possibilities of doping progress than a "magical potion". Like better knowledge of how to manipulate the passport.

Don't forget good old palm greasing.

 

[ToreBear]

@spetsa

Why does no one participate on this forum anymore? Oh, now I remember. It sucks because of people like this.

I think you are right about that.


So here we go again, round 2:
@netserk
But there is no indication that anyone has found any better way to fool the passport. But according to you there must be because? because someone always know better? because the dopers are always ahead? because you feels it?

@Saint Unix
I wrote about this in a series of posts earlier in this thread. I suggest you read them.

@Dan2016
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2013/may/31/epo-cycling-generation-doping-cheats
It's technically not a marker. It's a process where pharmaceutical companies identify drugs with potential for doping abuse and cooperate with Wada/AD bodies to develop signatures. As in identify aspects of the product that can be used for later identification.
My memory has registered this as a marker. Though it's a lot more complex than that, I think marker is a good shortand.
Here is more information:
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/pharmaceutical-industry

@sciensiscool
As far as I can remember, the statute of limitations were extended in part due to his 2010 passport positive. Anyway, the point is about his passport showing him doping. Or rather that there was 1 in a millionth bla bla...

@The Hitch
I seem to remember being involved with you in a thread about Purito. I remember I was about to explain to you the concept of Modus ponens, but having been previously warned by someone else on this forum about you, I felt it was better to leave it alone since you would likely take it as a personal insult that a lowly forum user could ever know more than the great Hitch.

@Buffalo soldier:
I'we seen this argument before, but have yet to be shown any link containing any such accusations. In Norway it's considered bad sportsmanship to accuse someone of doping. And that is especially true if they beat you. And it is also considered to be bad for performance to think others are beating you by cheating, since that leads to energy leakage and negative thoughts. If it's in reference to something I have written the same applies. Looking at the doping thread, it's not Norway or Norwegians which seem to accuse winners of doping.

@Red_Flanders
How people don't know something is kind of hard to argue. How about you try with you tell me how people do know how to do something rather than expecting me to tell me how they don't know something?

EPO was developed in the 70-80s Long before markers(cooperation). Aditionally it's endogenuous to the body. Thats why I indicated that it was still the best method to dope known to me.
And I don't see how I can explain any better than I already have in my previous posts.

How about you do some reading and learn something new?
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/questions-answers/epo-detection#item-628

As for the rhetorical question. It seems to indicate that my posts are not understood or internalized by you.

 

[spetsa]

Re:

@spetsa

Why does no one participate on this forum anymore? Oh, now I remember. It sucks because of people like this.

I think you are right about that.


So here we go again, round 2:
@netserk
But there is no indication that anyone has found any better way to fool the passport. But according to you there must be because? because someone always know better? because the dopers are always ahead? because you feels it?

@Saint Unix
I wrote about this in a series of posts earlier in this thread. I suggest you read them.

@Dan2016
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2013/may/31/epo-cycling-generation-doping-cheats
It's technically not a marker. It's a process where pharmaceutical companies identify drugs with potential for doping abuse and cooperate with Wada/AD bodies to develop signatures. As in identify aspects of the product that can be used for later identification.
My memory has registered this as a marker. Though it's a lot more complex than that, I think marker is a good shortand.
Here is more information:
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/pharmaceutical-industry

@sciensiscool
As far as I can remember, the statute of limitations were extended in part due to his 2010 passport positive. Anyway, the point is about his passport showing him doping. Or rather that there was 1 in a millionth bla bla...

@The Hitch
I seem to remember being involved with you in a thread about Purito. I remember I was about to explain to you the concept of Modus ponens, but having been previously warned by someone else on this forum about you, I felt it was better to leave it alone since you would likely take it as a personal insult that a lowly forum user could ever know more than the great Hitch.

@Buffalo soldier:
I'we seen this argument before, but have yet to be shown any link containing any such accusations. In Norway it's considered bad sportsmanship to accuse someone of doping. And that is especially true if they beat you. And it is also considered to be bad for performance to think others are beating you by cheating, since that leads to energy leakage and negative thoughts. If it's in reference to something I have written the same applies. Looking at the doping thread, it's not Norway or Norwegians which seem to accuse winners of doping.

@Red_Flanders
How people don't know something is kind of hard to argue. How about you try with you tell me how people do know how to do something rather than expecting me to tell me how they don't know something?

EPO was developed in the 70-80s Long before markers(cooperation). Aditionally it's endogenuous to the body. Thats why I indicated that it was still the best method to dope known to me.
And I don't see how I can explain any better than I already have in my previous posts.

How about you do some reading and learn something new?
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/questions-answers/epo-detection#item-628

As for the rhetorical question. It seems to indicate that my posts are not understood or internalized by you.

The links you provided, in no way support your claims. Nice try.