Oh dear Valverde!

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 27, 2010
970
0
0
Krebs cycle said:
http://www.dopeology.org/statistics/people/

goto incidents by nationality.

There is nothing racist whatsoever about stating a plain fact that doping culture in pro cycling is the most ingrained and accepted in Italy, Spain, France and Belgium.
No it most definitly does NOT show that. People need to stop abusing statistics in here :mad: It shows most Italians has been caught. Take for instance Denmark, 40 incidents, not too bad right? Wrong, you need to take in the amount of proffesional cyclists active in that era to have any idea of where doping were worst. If Spain had more than 10 times the amount of proff cyclists than Denmark over the time period Denmark would be more dopey than Spain (or just better at catching the crooks). Don't infer meanings into numbers that are not there! (and you even claim to be a scientist in here from time to time)
 
I've never come on to ***** about a cyclist before but I've had enough. As far as I'm concerned Valverde is the vilest scumbag in the Peloton. 100% unrepentant, arrogant, doper. He has told you, the fans, that he doesn't not want a clean sport. Anyone who still thinks he's great is a moron. He is spitting on you and laughing in your face as you lap it up.
 
Ney the Viking said:
No it most definitly does NOT show that. People need to stop abusing statistics in here :mad: It shows most Italians has been caught. Take for instance Denmark, 40 incidents, not too bad right? Wrong, you need to take in the amount of proffesional cyclists active in that era to have any idea of where doping were worst. If Spain had more than 10 times the amount of proff cyclists than Denmark over the time period Denmark would be more dopey than Spain (or just better at catching the crooks). Don't infer meanings into numbers that are not there! (and you even claim to be a scientist in here from time to time)
Yeah, statistics like that would only be valuable if we could have faith in a) the testing being effective and b) the national federations being impartial and committed to fighting doping. If a) isn't true, then it's a crapshoot and if b) isn't true it even turns around the result and makes those countries that do want to fight doping look worse than the ones who don't care.
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
Krebs cycle said:
goto incidents by nationality.

There is nothing racist whatsoever about stating a plain fact that doping culture in pro cycling is the most ingrained and accepted in Italy, Spain, France and Belgium.
Perhaps not racist, but certainly statistically illiterate. For example, how many pro riders are there in the 'old world' cycling nations, as opposed to, say Americans? A more telling comparison would be to look at what percentage of French pro riders have been busted for doping in the last 10 years as opposed to the percentage of American pro riders who have been busted for doping in that time.

In the wider sporting population I would say that doping is almost certainly most widely accepted in the USA, as films such as Bigger , Stronger, Faster ("Steroids are as American as apple pie") point out. Doping per say isn't even illegal in the USA, unlike most European countries, as long as you get your dope from a qualified doctor you are in clear, unless of course you fall foul of the governing body of a sport. Outside did an article on this some years ago called 'Drug Test', noting:

Dr. Jones was an intense guy with a Great Moments in Cheater History wiry build, close-cropped dark hair, and Al Pacino's restless energy. He ran a small, boutique operation: high service, high price. (I ended up spending around $7,500 for drugs in my eight-month program.) Dr. Jones knew what I was up to and agreed to help me try the drugs in a safe manner. What he did for me - supplying drugs solely for the purpose of increasing my athletic prowess - is not illegal, but it would certainly be frowned on by many of his colleagues. For that matter, many of them disapprove of the whole notion of anti-aging medicine, believing these drugs should be used only to fight specific maladies, not the natural process of aging.

But that doesn't bother Dr. Jones. He takes anti-aging drugs himself, and in his rapid-fire style, he told me he wasn't in the "sickness" business, as he described the work of ordinary doctors. He was in the "improvement" business.
The non-medical use of drugs for 'improvement' purposes, including increasing sporting ability is big business in the US, with over 15 million Americans taking human growth hormones alone.
 
Jun 15, 2009
835
0
0
happytramp said:
I've never come on to ***** about a cyclist before but I've had enough. As far as I'm concerned Valverde is the vilest scumbag in the Peloton. 100% unrepentant, arrogant, doper. He has told you, the fans, that he doesn't not want a clean sport. Anyone who still thinks he's great is a moron. He is spitting on you and laughing in your face as you lap it up.
Couldn't agree more!
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
spalco said:
Yeah, statistics like that would only be valuable if we could have faith in a) the testing being effective and b) the national federations being impartial and committed to fighting doping. If a) isn't true, then it's a crapshoot and if b) isn't true it even turns around the result and makes those countries that do want to fight doping look worse than the ones who don't care.
As the 'Dopeology' page itself says:

The trend is ostensibly skewed against Italy, Spain and France, but this is also indicative of the increased disclosure caused by large-scale police investigations in those countries.
 
Jul 14, 2012
111
0
0
Is there a petition in offing anywhere, something along the lines of

"for the love of god please, we just want a clean sport and not you petulant harmful whining"
 
Krebs cycle said:
http://www.dopeology.org/statistics/people/

goto incidents by nationality.

There is nothing racist whatsoever about stating a plain fact that doping culture in pro cycling is the most ingrained and accepted in Italy, Spain, France and Belgium.
Your interpretation is not correct, as stated by others already.
- There are much more procyclist from Italy, Spain, France and Belgium.
- As numbers in your link start from 1980, it does not take account changes what have taken place.

It is clear that French teams are cleanest teams in peloton, attitude and reactions from French riders to doping (or to Armstrong) are clearly different compared to Spanish for example.
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
P.s It also looks as though the raw data Dopeology uses for its figures is unreliable. For example, the totals by nation are aggregates of the figures for individuals. However, even the briefest consideration shows that the 'incidents per person' these totals are based on are widely inaccurate and inconsistent.

For example, Ullrich is listed as having 12 incidents against his name, which also includes such things as appeals. With Gaumont, each admission of using a specific substance is recorded as being a separate incident, and so forth. However, Armstrong is listed as only having 9 incidents against his name, with whole rafts of incidents being gathered together into one count, as with the USADA investigation leading to his permanent ban.

'Garbage in, garbage out' as they say. :)
 
trompe le monde said:
I don't know what to think. Not that Valverde can ever be pointed to as a model citizen of the peloton, but the defence of Armstrong by Valverde, Samu, and Indurain is simply too much. I'm dumbfounded.

Is the stench of cheating through pharmaceutical enhancement in cycling that commonplace that it has become the accepted norm? I think that's one way to explain away why Valverde and others have come to Pharmstrong's defence, they maybe don't see it as that big a deal.

Again, I'm dumbfounded.
If you want to solve the problem then i much rather have the reaction of Valverde as a start then the 'oh my i cannot believe that Lance did that, i have never seen anything, but luckily times are different right now'-response we get from many others.

Imo it's time that all involved acknowledge that there is a structural doping regime in cycling by riders, supported or at least 'allowed' by teams and UCI which was known by all decision makers in cycling, and most if not all decision makers in cycling have a history in it.

What i see in Valverde's statement is him saying: i'm not a hypocrit, i and many others were doped and everybody knew it so i'm not going to throw Armstrong under the train for him winning by using dope'.

What is missing (and i don't blame Valverde for that since it is not his position) is:
1.) everybody else being open about it
2.) adding the question: ok, how are we going to solve this

Imo if cycling wants to get out of this mess then we need something different then everybody distancing themselves from Armstrong and continuing with business as usual. I don't believe for a second that cycling is clean right now, and 'only' getting rid of Armstrong isn't going to solve that, much more is needed.
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
spalco said:
"Garbage" is a strong word imo, the numbers aren't wrong necessarily, but they have to be interpreted correctly.
No 'Garbage' is the right word. For example, Gaumont has 4 'incidents' against his name, each relating to a different substance he admitted to using. By the same criteria Armstrong should have an additional 5 'incidents' against his name, one for each substance he admitted to using in the famous 'hospital room incident'.

The individual rider files might contain some interesting data, but the aggregate figures are hopelessly flawed.

Anyhow, I agree that Valverde is a dick, in case we are wandering off the topic a little too much!
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Makes looking back at this years Vuelta prove that nothing has changed.

3 Spaniards, 2 ex dopers, sprinting up mtfs at the end of stages.

Clean era my a@se:mad:
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Von Mises said:
Your interpretation is not correct, as stated by others already.
- There are much more procyclist from Italy, Spain, France and Belgium.
- As numbers in your link start from 1980, it does not take account changes what have taken place.
Agreed. The graph does not show:

* % of riders "caught" of all from that nation racing vs absolute numbers
* time of nation in the sport of cycling.
* state effort at curbing doping - which is not illegal in the US, for instance
* severity or implication of incident
* where the incident occurred

It also excludes, for instance, all the track or MTB incidents, for which Australia alone would have a few...
 
May 2, 2010
1,692
0
0
Benotti69 said:
Makes looking back at this years Vuelta prove that nothing has changed.

3 Spaniards, 2 ex dopers, sprinting up mtfs at the end of stages.

Clean era my a@se:mad:
Ex dopers????
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
needs to get a refund on his hair transplant.

The plugs have fallen out. It was like he was in the Chantenbray lab and his follicles were a whack-em-mole game
 
Robert21 said:
P.s It also looks as though the raw data Dopeology uses for its figures is unreliable. For example, the totals by nation are aggregates of the figures for individuals. However, even the briefest consideration shows that the 'incidents per person' these totals are based on are widely inaccurate and inconsistent.

For example, Ullrich is listed as having 12 incidents against his name, which also includes such things as appeals. With Gaumont, each admission of using a specific substance is recorded as being a separate incident, and so forth. However, Armstrong is listed as only having 9 incidents against his name, with whole rafts of incidents being gathered together into one count, as with the USADA investigation leading to his permanent ban.

'Garbage in, garbage out' as they say. :)
Congratulations for the massive effort you have contributed to the understanding of the history of doping. You could have left a quick reply via the website to help me improve the data - as many people have kindly done - but instead you criticise my work as garbage here.

It is true that some records like the Gaumont spread need to be cleaned up and they will be in due course. It may surprise you, but Dopeology is not my day job. Gaumont's case was one of the first to be logged, while I was still developing the business rules for the data.

A doping-related incident is just that: it does not just mean a positive test. It describes any sort of recorded incident related to doping and does not contain any notion of right or wrong. If you think the figures (garbage) are unfair to any individual then you are bringing your own morality to the equation, which is fine of course.

Finally, it is a live dataset and it can and does change on a daily basis. I make absolutely no claim to accuracy and I seek no recompense for the work I do. Caveat emptor.

I think on balance most people who visit Dopeology do not consider it garbage. I look forward to seeing your better alternative solution online very soon.
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
L'arriviste said:
Congratulations for the massive effort you have contributed to the understanding of the history of doping. You could have left a quick reply via the website to help me improve the data - as many people have kindly done - but instead you criticise my work as garbage here.
And how would that have corrected the misinterpretation of your flawed data right here, where it is being discussed? In fact I was thinking of going over you data properly and sending some suggestions in due course. I guess there is no need now.

L'arriviste said:
It is true that some records like the Gaumont spread need to be cleaned up and they will be in due course.
Glad to see that you agree with my points. I look forward to seeing the corrected data.

L'arriviste said:
A doping-related incident is just that: it does not just mean a positive test. It describes any sort of recorded incident related to doping and does not contain any notion of right or wrong.
Might I respectfully suggest that you look for a better metric? I feel that adding all the 'recorded incidents' associated with Armstrong might be rather a big job. :)

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/index-of-lance-armstrong-doping-allegations-over-the-years

L'arriviste said:
If you think the figures (garbage) are unfair to any individual then you are bringing your own morality to the equation, which is fine of course.
Not at all, there is no 'moral' aspect to my pointing out the inaccuracy and inconsistency of your figures. :)

L'arriviste said:
I think on balance most people who visit Dopeology do not consider it garbage.
A consensus of posters here seem to think it is seriously flawed in the way it presents its summary statistics. Will you be taking issue with them too?
 
Oct 13, 2009
10
0
0
With the recent several quotes from Spanish riders seeming to unreservedly supporting Lance Armstrong, I have started to wonder if perhaps they don't really understand the body of evidence that has been presented against Armstrong. That perhaps a lot of this material has not been translated into Spanish and they don't quite get the scope of the issue. While most English background cyclists seem to have come around to castigating Armstrong since the USADA reasoned decision has been released, such seems not to be the case in Spain. Yes, I am sure that these cyclists were, and probably still are, dopers too. But other doping cyclists have since come out against Armstrong. So, I wonder if this is merely a communication issue? Do we know the state of reportage of the whole case against Armstrong in the Spanish press, both mainstream and cycling specific? What about cycling websites and blogs?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
thrawn said:
Ex dopers????
I used the term 'ex' very liberally, in the sense 'proven' to have doped. I have no doubts they continue to dope.

Rodriguez is imo another doper.
 
Apr 29, 2011
105
0
0
Benotti69 said:
I used the term 'ex' very liberally, in the sense 'proven' to have doped. I have no doubts they continue to dope.

Rodriguez is imo another doper.
Why not start a new thread: Name a clean rider from Spain? Do you know anyone?
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Benotti69 said:
I used the term 'ex' very liberally, in the sense 'proven' to have doped. I have no doubts they continue to dope.

Rodriguez is imo another doper.
tous dope


pointy end tous dope is 2 win
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS