Kristoff

Page 13 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 5, 2015
165
0
0
Re: Re:

Martin said:
the sceptic said:
I love that norwegians always complain about how dirty russians are in XC skiing
Perhaps they only forgot their closer neighbour Finland. A whole A-team of XC skiers was caught doping some 10 years ago. That was really a sad story.
The Russians.. The Fins, The italians & the austrians...

However, that is a few years back... The results the last few years suggests this is changing..
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Re:

SeriousSam said:
Ørn (how to you pronounce that btw, empty set-rn? :)) isn't naive when he says that. He knows full well it's nonsense, but he knows it's the sort of nonsense naive people love to hear. Hard, genuine, honest and honourable work, grit, and the right nationality overcoming the dirty foreign cheating cheaters. Wouldn't we love that to be true? We would. So easy to confuse wishful thinking with reality.
I agree.

In fact it's straight out of and a direct extrapolation of Dave Brailsford's, "Non-doped performances will soon beat doped performances" farcical claim.
 
Apr 10, 2015
4
0
0
Been reading this thread and others for the last days and there is a lot of minor and major unaccuracys here(excuse my english, i am as you will soon understand norwegian). I don`t have the blueprint for the whole story, but maybe a part of info that should be thrown in.

Since xc skiing is brought in to the mix as to explain norwegian doping there should follow some more info.
Norway was not performing too good in the 80s, even in our national sport of Xc skiing
In the early 90 this changed and its easy to say that has to be a result of doping(epo etc). But the norwegians developed a special machine for grinding patterns in the sole of the skies in the early 90s. This gave us a giant advantage(some say 30-6seconds pr 10km). The other nations followed suite, but this took years to copy. In the last 30 years we have been dominating xc skiing in a big way, but when you look at the athletes that have been caught doping - in general they have gone from mediocre + to being able to win races(Muhlegg, Botwinov etc) or from good(top 10 in the world) to being dominating in the world championships or olympics. The norwegians have been much more linear.
If the norwegians dope all the time and are "protected" by the FIS, how can Muhlegg and others dope and suddenly beat them to a pulp?
To me that does not make quite sense. We probably have more xc skiers than all ther nations put togheter, the biggest budget for training/developping equipment and according to you doping and protection and still we have had major periods were other nations have been better than us.........then there doing a poor job of it. And as mentioned by someone else in an earlier post, the use skies and that plays a major part. And noway spend more on the knowledge of products to use under the skies/the stiffnes of skies and the pattern in the sole than many other nations has as a total budget. Not fair, and the ski federation is looking into limiting the differences(how many testers you can employ etc)

So what about Alex Kristoff then.......I still belive he is clean. Am i in doubt yes to be honest, a small % of me ....especially since he is with Katusha. But as mentioed several times in this forum. Not one team has a spotless record, every team has a doctor linked to something or a director that`s been with a dodgy team in his career. So everybodys guilty by associtation in this sport.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re: Re:

maltiv said:
Benotti69 said:
A clean Kristoff can win 3 in a row against dopers?

Wake up! FFS!!!!
Notorius dopers like Debuscchere, Greipel and Theuns.
The whole peloton dopes, duh!

Since when did everyone decide that no more doping. Must have missed that huge change in the sport!!!
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
According to Kristoff's step-dad/trainer/doctor u only get placebo effect from PEDs, except extreme EPO use.

Cortisone, steroids, growth hormones is waste of money for cyclist. How would he know if he has not already tried them out on cyclists!!!

There is the voice of doping.

..and i thought the 'Brits dont dope...' thread had some ostriches but jeez these Norwegians are giving even Armstrong fans a run for their money!!!!
 
Apr 10, 2015
4
0
0
Re:

the sceptic said:
No one believes the stone grinded skies excuse except for norwegians.
That`s a joke. Even me as a guy just doing some ski races for fun can feel enourmous difference. Poor skies/wrong structure is like gliding along with a feeling of glue under the skies.
 
Apr 5, 2015
16
0
0
You can be as sceptical as you like, but doubting the importance of innovation on ski gliding is just silly. The importance of good ski's towards the races weather and snow type by far supercedes the importance of equipment in cycling - and many, many other sports as well.
 
Feb 15, 2015
158
0
2,680
Re: Re:

Mrnicknor said:
the sceptic said:
No one believes the stone grinded skies excuse except for norwegians.
That`s a joke. Even me as a guy just doing some ski races for fun can feel enourmous difference. Poor skies/wrong structure is like gliding along with a feeling of glue under the skies.
Doping in XC skiing thread >>>>
(been through the stone grinding multiple times)

Btw: Can't believe the journalist in the Aftenposten article from 2013 didn't reply this when Ørn said he used to use injections on his riders: "What did you inject?"

Christiansen in VG seem to be the only Norwegian journalist with a slight knowledge of doping and the guts to ask people about it. Sadly it seems like he doesn't choose (or are allowed) to do more on the subject.
 
Apr 10, 2015
4
0
0
Re: Re:

kosmonaut said:
Mrnicknor said:
the sceptic said:
No one believes the stone grinded skies excuse except for norwegians.
That`s a joke. Even me as a guy just doing some ski races for fun can feel enourmous difference. Poor skies/wrong structure is like gliding along with a feeling of glue under the skies.
Doping in XC skiing thread >>>>
(been through the stone grinding multiple times)

Btw: Can't believe the journalist in the Aftenposten article from 2013 didn't reply this when Ørn said he used to use injections on his riders: "What did you inject?"

Christiansen in VG seem to be the only Norwegian journalist with a slight knowledge of doping and the guts to ask people about it. Sadly it seems like he doesn't choose (or are allowed) to do more on the subject.
I can totaly agree that the amount of critical journalism about this topic in Norway is a bit lacking. Guesss it will always be easier to attack over the border the inside......

Christiansen and a coworker of him, Stenwig i think, defenitly have a more critical/realistic view on this than most norwegian journalist. Would be interessting to hear what he had to say about this topics off the record so to say.

But still, the number off top athletes testing positive in norway is quite small and the " social price" of beeing caught is high. A russian skier got caught, they named a school after him in his home town the year later....
When Kjærgaard finally admitted his sins, the pressure on him was so big i honestly thought he might to something drastic.

I certainly understand that the "country x moral is better" argument is useless, but there is a big difference in how the viewers and fans react towards doping. In some countries the attidue is "tough luck", "name of the game". It`s not like that in Norway. But i am bias of course, and since we never had a festina scandal or puerto case here we really don"t know how the reactions would be. Kjærgaard was an easy target in such sense.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
olhell said:
Kristoff and Ørn talks about the doping allegations:

http://www.aftenposten.no/100Sport/sykk ... 7033_1.snd
i must say, reading that interview, these two (Orn and Kristoff) score a lot lower on my BS-meter than most of the Sky PR.
They aren't insulting the brain with lame marginal gains crap, nor are they talking the 'never tested positive' talk. Haven't heard them complain about anonymous wankers on the internet either.
They both sound pretty balanced, along the lines of "yeah, it sucks that people think we're doping, but hey, such is life".
 
Jun 30, 2014
7,060
0
0
Re: Re:

Mrnicknor said:
kosmonaut said:
Mrnicknor said:
the sceptic said:
No one believes the stone grinded skies excuse except for norwegians.
That`s a joke. Even me as a guy just doing some ski races for fun can feel enourmous difference. Poor skies/wrong structure is like gliding along with a feeling of glue under the skies.
Doping in XC skiing thread >>>>
(been through the stone grinding multiple times)

Btw: Can't believe the journalist in the Aftenposten article from 2013 didn't reply this when Ørn said he used to use injections on his riders: "What did you inject?"

Christiansen in VG seem to be the only Norwegian journalist with a slight knowledge of doping and the guts to ask people about it. Sadly it seems like he doesn't choose (or are allowed) to do more on the subject.
I can totaly agree that the amount of critical journalism about this topic in Norway is a bit lacking. Guesss it will always be easier to attack over the border the inside......

Christiansen and a coworker of him, Stenwig i think, defenitly have a more critical/realistic view on this than most norwegian journalist. Would be interessting to hear what he had to say about this topics off the record so to say.

But still, the number off top athletes testing positive in norway is quite small and the " social price" of beeing caught is high. A russian skier got caught, they named a school after him in his home town the year later....
When Kjærgaard finally admitted his sins, the pressure on him was so big i honestly thought he might to something drastic.

I certainly understand that the "country x moral is better" argument is useless, but there is a big difference in how the viewers and fans react towards doping. In some countries the attidue is "tough luck", "name of the game". It`s not like that in Norway. But i am bias of course, and since we never had a festina scandal or puerto case here we really don"t know how the reactions would be. Kjærgaard was an easy target in such sense.
The big difference is the fact that you never had a big scandal, most people despise dopers, their attitude towards them can change after a big scandals that makes them realize how widespread doping really is, many become cycnics and start thinking that it's just part of the game.
You can't say that one country has much higher moral standarts, big doping scandals in you own country or scandals that involve your best athletes really change people's perspective and attitude towards doping in specific sports.
 
neineinei said:
The country with 48% blood doping is Russia.
Did you get that from the ARD documentary?

FoxxyBrown1111 said:
ToreBear said:
Any more questions you want me to answer dearest Foxy?
No questions... just common sense:
1.) If much money is on stake, the country doesn´t matter. No ethics advantage, and what the heck else... The "1% country" could be very much Germany because it´s no secret OOC testing is more prevalent than let´s say in Kenya. So have Germans higher ethics? Ofc not. Just fear baby, fear...
2.) Poor country > poor dope technique > more suspicious samples... Rich country/athlets > sophisticated dope techniques (see LA, Horner, MLB, NHL, AFL, what the hell) > less suspicius samples
3.) Norway has how many riders in the (cycling) testing pool? 50? Now compare that with Italy or France > less caught doesn´t mean less doping. It´s about percentages & math baby... :cool:
Sorry for responding so late, the clinic moves to fast for me. :)
1) Fear or ethics I don't think really matters for our purposes. Whether you don't steal because you are afraid to get caught, or don't think it's ethically correct to steal, it really doesn't matter which it easy. If it's fear, it's about your view of the risk of getting caught and it's consequences. Thats also a decision that is heavily influenced by those around you, I.e. your club culture, your family culture or your countries culture.

2. What about rich country with poor antidoping systems? That would mean cheaper doping program and more money on hookers and blow while those in rich countries with good AD systems might have to use the money for blow and hookers for doping programs. That is also dependent on countries.

3. Yep, but still I think you would find countries with higher percentages of doping, like the above study did.

Ps. If neineinei's info is correct, Russia is not exactly a poor country in my eyes. :cool:
 
Re: Re:

Berzin said:

I might be able to help you. Here is a study called "Attitudes towards use of performance-enhancing substances and body modification techniques. A comparison between elite athletes and the general population"
by Gunnar Breivik*, Dag Vidar Hanstad and Sigmund Loland
Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway

[url=http://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/170627/Breivik%20SportSoc%202009.pdf?sequence=1]http://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/bitstream/ ... sequence=1


I think this is a free link, but with research papers it might require a bit of googling or using google scholar or something.

It's a big article, but here is a quote from a part in the discussion section:
It is also worth noting that there is such a marked difference in reported attitudes
towards hypoxic rooms compared to EPO. Both means lead to an increase in red blood
cells and improved endurance capacity. However, the anti-doping bodies permit the use of
one technology and not the other. This is mainly due to the more invasive character of EPO
treatment. EPO, anabolic steroids and amphetamines are accepted by a very small
percentage in the population, and there seems to be zero tolerance among athletes.
Obviously, strong normative attitudes on rule- and law-conformity shine through, not only
among athletes but also in the population.The zero tolerance reported by athletes is particularly interesting. Athletes are under a double pressure. They are totally dependent upon their performance and performance-
enhancing technologies can be crucially effective. On the other hand, some of the most
effective substances and technological means are banned, and athletes are often
considered role models. One hypothesis is that in this dilemma situation, a zero tolerance
attitude is clarifying. Most athletes choose simply to exclude the doping possibility and do
not spend energy considering it. Again, it seems as if the strict and clearly articulated
public Norwegian anti-doping attitude has a strong regulating effect.
36 A
˚ dne Søndra˚l,
Olympic champion in speed skating and former IOC-member (2002–06) characterizes the
Norwegian attitude to doping: ‘Getting caught in doping is the second-worst crime a
Norwegian can commit. In my opinion, only child abuse disgust people more. Doping is a
high treason against the nation.’ 37
The study includes 236 elite athletes and 428 from the regular population. Whether this is better or worse than in other countries is unknown to me at this time.
 
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
maltiv said:
Benotti69 said:
A clean Kristoff can win 3 in a row against dopers?

Wake up! FFS!!!!
Notorius dopers like Debuscchere, Greipel and Theuns.
The whole peloton dopes, duh!

Since when did everyone decide that no more doping. Must have missed that huge change in the sport!!!
Merely saying - everyone must dope therefore everyone dopes is a silly argument. It's one thing to argue that sport is dirty but to simply put down everyone with this flawed formula, helps no one.

What do you think it adds to the discussion to simply repeat as fact that 100% of cyclists are doping?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
Benotti69 said:
maltiv said:
Benotti69 said:
A clean Kristoff can win 3 in a row against dopers?

Wake up! FFS!!!!
Notorius dopers like Debuscchere, Greipel and Theuns.
The whole peloton dopes, duh!

Since when did everyone decide that no more doping. Must have missed that huge change in the sport!!!
Merely saying - everyone must dope therefore everyone dopes is a silly argument. It's one thing to argue that sport is dirty but to simply put down everyone with this flawed formula, helps no one.

What do you think it adds to the discussion to simply repeat as fact that 100% of cyclists are doping?
I call it a reality check, Hitch old sport. :)

Can you point to an athlete who is happy to be riding amongst the flotsam and jetsam of doping while they struggle along on bread and water?
 
Do you think all dopers started doping from day 1? Or could there be some young in-the-future-dopers out there who have not yet started?

I take it that you think Bassons was completely clean. How has it gotten worse from his time to now that it is impossible for any other rider to be clean as he was?
 
Apr 6, 2015
119
0
0
Re:

manafana said:
so everyone is doping now?
There is certainly a high percentage who are doping. The question is, can cycling survive another huge scandal ? And, in this sport no one is above suspicion. It may all end in tears, yet again.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY