Olympics Doping Thread

[BullsFan22]

Just take a look at the medal table for swimming. The US has more medals than the 2-6 nations combined. Katie Ledecky just crushed the 800m freestyle. This sort of domination makes the East Germans look like schoolboys/schoolgirls.

In East Germany eventually the schoolgirls became schoolboys...

Of course, which goes to show how far doping has improving, both in terms of performance and health. Having said that, while not many women in Rio showcase mustaches and hairy armpits, they do look rather big. I understand that swimming is still a young person sport, that in quite a few cases the top swimmers are not even 20 or 21 and that most swimmers top out by no later than 25, so their physical development also tops out by that time, the women slightly younger, I think, but some teenagers and women's top swimmers are built pretty strongly and I dare say they look masculine.

 

[yespatterns]

Oh olymipics, you legit. Ummm, uhhh, can someone please remind me what my 12 year old self would think when this *** is going on?

 

[ferryman]

Just take a look at the medal table for swimming. The US has more medals than the 2-6 nations combined. Katie Ledecky just crushed the 800m freestyle. This sort of domination makes the East Germans look like schoolboys/schoolgirls.

In East Germany eventually the schoolgirls became schoolboys...

Big Jan U says differently.. mind you, that said, he did like cake and have big boobs

 

[Alexandre B.]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/olympic-games-french-confounded-by-british-success-in-team-sprint/
Hilarious commentary section.

They are sh*t for four years, Callum Skinner is sh*t period, Worlds are less important than training sessions. And they obliterate the field.

 

[kwikki]

Poor old French.

It's never their fault.

Of course when the French broke the world record in the Team Sprint in 2012 London it definitely wasn't doping.

Oh no.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/olympic-games-french-confounded-by-british-success-in-team-sprint/
Hilarious commentary section.

They are sh*t for four years, Callum Skinner is sh*t period, Worlds are less important than training sessions. And they obliterate the field.

Hugo Haak, Dutch track cyclist who just missed selection for the Olympic team pursuit team, said pretty much the same thing on TV. His disbelief was really obvious and quite interesting to see.

 

[Alexandre B.]

Re:

Poor old French.

It's never their fault.

Of course when the French broke the world record in the Team Sprint in 2012 London it definitely wasn't doping.

Oh no.

Did I write we were clean?

 

[wrinklyvet]

Re: Re:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/olympic-games-french-confounded-by-british-success-in-team-sprint/
Hilarious commentary section.

They are sh*t for four years, Callum Skinner is sh*t period, Worlds are less important than training sessions. And they obliterate the field.

Hugo Haak, Dutch track cyclist who just missed selection for the Olympic team pursuit team, said pretty much the same thing on TV. His disbelief was really obvious and quite interesting to see.

Of course, we should take great note of a Dutchman who just missed selection. What did he think about the Aussies so nearly taking the win until they were overtaken just before the finish. Did he express disbelief that they were so good as well? Or do only the Brits come in for this type of insinuation?

 

[King Of Molehill]

http://cyclingmagazine.ca/sections/...st-kleber-ramos-da-silva-testes-positive-epo/

First CERA positive.

 

[Brullnux]

Re: Re:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/olympic-games-french-confounded-by-british-success-in-team-sprint/
Hilarious commentary section.

They are sh*t for four years, Callum Skinner is sh*t period, Worlds are less important than training sessions. And they obliterate the field.

Hugo Haak, Dutch track cyclist who just missed selection for the Olympic team pursuit team, said pretty much the same thing on TV. His disbelief was really obvious and quite interesting to see.

Of course, we should take great note of a Dutchman who just missed selection. What did he think about the Aussies so nearly taking the win until they were overtaken just before the finish. Did he express disbelief that they were so good as well? Or do only the Brits come in for this type of insinuation?

No because Australians tend to be good all four years, not just for one race. The team pursuit is different because GB have been decent for the past 4 years, but breaking so many world records on a slower track is laughable really. Especially with the technical errors they made last night. They could've easily won by 2+ seconds.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Re: Re:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/olympic-games-french-confounded-by-british-success-in-team-sprint/
Hilarious commentary section.

They are sh*t for four years, Callum Skinner is sh*t period, Worlds are less important than training sessions. And they obliterate the field.

Hugo Haak, Dutch track cyclist who just missed selection for the Olympic team pursuit team, said pretty much the same thing on TV. His disbelief was really obvious and quite interesting to see.

Of course, we should take great note of a Dutchman who just missed selection. What did he think about the Aussies so nearly taking the win until they were overtaken just before the finish. Did he express disbelief that they were so good as well? Or do only the Brits come in for this type of insinuation?

No because Australians tend to be good all four years, not just for one race. The team pursuit is different because GB have been decent for the past 4 years, but breaking so many world records on a slower track is laughable really. Especially with the technical errors they made last night. They could've easily won by 2+ seconds.

I don't argue with the comment about there having been technical errors - both teams did that. But you could say that the Aussies were good for four years but not really good enough when it counted. Even they should accept the efforts that were put in to beat them and that is was planned for over a long period. The Olympics mean so much more to the British public than the Worlds and everyone should now know that. Nobody cares too much about the poor performances at other times - if it makes us underdogs that is even a good thing!

Don't under-estimate the influence of Wiggins over the last year or thereabouts as well as his own contribution. I am not saying they won't do well without him - he's pretty much done enough now - but besides his own pace he lifts the team.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

CERA, very interesting. Is it just Kleber being old school or is there something new afoot? It's just that because it has an extremely long half-life (and also in some networks because Emanuele Sella talked), CERA became more or less useless as soon as we knew it was detectable, and so after 2008 there are very few CERA positives (Danilo di Luca in the 2009 Giro, and it's widely thought that the Liberty Seguros "EPO variant" positives in 2009 were CERA too) because it was much harder to get away with than the much shorter-lasting and easier to obtain first-gen EPO. However, we did see Darbo (2nd gen EPO) make a comeback a year or two ago, albeit with the likes of Luca Benedetti; it will be interesting to see if that was simply as it's now much easier to get hold of so athletes on lower budgets are going for it, or if there's something else that has meant it is now harder to pick up and has therefore come back into fashion.

 

[What_What]

Just take a look at the medal table for swimming. The US has more medals than the 2-6 nations combined. Katie Ledecky just crushed the 800m freestyle. This sort of domination makes the East Germans look like schoolboys/schoolgirls.

In East Germany eventually the schoolgirls became schoolboys...

A bit like Katie Ledecky then... if anyone looks like they've just been released from the laboratory it's her.

 

[The Hegelian]

How to explain the plunging team pursuit times? I remember the record getting smashed at the worlds in about '93 - not sure why, but the time always stuck in my head: 4.03something.

Now it's 3.50something. The game of teams pursuit was to find milliseconds. Sub 4 minutes looked basically impossible; like running sub 9 seconds for the 100 metre sprint. The limits of physiology.


By '93 all the aero stuff was already there - aero bars et al. I don't see how technical advances could explain such massive reductions in time. Aero bars etc would explain some big shifts from '80's into '90's.

That leaves us with what? The old sports science chestnut?? Or just: everyone is innately more talented now?? Or somehow funding itself equates to massive shavings off the WR?

 

[Billie]

Re:

How to explain the plunging team pursuit times? I remember the record getting smashed at the worlds in about '93 - not sure why, but the time always stuck in my head: 4.03something.

Now it's 3.50something. The game of teams pursuit was to find milliseconds. Sub 4 minutes looked basically impossible; like running sub 9 seconds for the 100 metre sprint. The limits of physiology.


By '93 all the aero stuff was already there - aero bars et al. I don't see how technical advances could explain such massive reductions in time. Aero bars etc would explain some big shifts from '80's into '90's.

Still loads of technical+scientifical advancement. Not only in bikes etc but also in the track itself

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Of course, we should take great note of a Dutchman who just missed selection.

Yes, of course. He raced against them and even beat them. It's clear other teams and riders know British Cycling have a special *something* but they don't know what it is.

 

[kwikki]

Re: Re:

Of course, we should take great note of a Dutchman who just missed selection.

Yes, of course. He raced against them and even beat them. It's clear other teams and riders know British Cycling have a special *something* but they don't know what it is.

Looks like the Kiwis have it too. 1/10th of a second difference.

It's bizarre how whatever Team GB have they only seem to be willing to give it to certain riders. Didn't give it to any of the men and womens road teams, didn't give it to Froome for the TT. What about women's team sprint???

When you actually look at the whole picture rather than just cherry pick to suit a prejudice, things look a little different.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re: Re:

How to explain the plunging team pursuit times? I remember the record getting smashed at the worlds in about '93 - not sure why, but the time always stuck in my head: 4.03something.

Now it's 3.50something. The game of teams pursuit was to find milliseconds. Sub 4 minutes looked basically impossible; like running sub 9 seconds for the 100 metre sprint. The limits of physiology.


By '93 all the aero stuff was already there - aero bars et al. I don't see how technical advances could explain such massive reductions in time. Aero bars etc would explain some big shifts from '80's into '90's.

Still loads of technical+scientifical advancement. Not only in bikes etc but also in the track itself

Yeah, I don't think its comparable to such a straightforward discipline as 100 metre sprint, neither is swimming. Much more scientific than the 100 metre sprint, both those disciplines.

 

[snccdcno]

Re: Re:

Of course, we should take great note of a Dutchman who just missed selection.

Yes, of course. He raced against them and even beat them. It's clear other teams and riders know British Cycling have a special *something* but they don't know what it is.

Looks like the Kiwis have it too. 1/10th of a second difference.

Obfuscation, it's clearly about the improvement made from recent championships which is obviously more notable from the GB team as has already been said in a reply to you which you ignored of course.

 

[kwikki]

"It's all about" whatever aspect you cherry pick to suit your argument.

If they had been on top form for 4 years you'd be whining on about how they suspiciously peak for four years.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Re: Re:

Of course, we should take great note of a Dutchman who just missed selection.

Yes, of course. He raced against them and even beat them. It's clear other teams and riders know British Cycling have a special *something* but they don't know what it is.

Looks like the Kiwis have it too. 1/10th of a second difference.

Classic Joachim obfuscation, it's clearly about the improvement made from recent championships which is obviously more notable from the GB team as has already been said in a reply to you which you ignored of course.

I thought it a fair comment. It's sad that when anybody posts a point they think relevant but that some posters don't, they call it obfuscation.

 

[Brullnux]

Re:

"It's all about" whatever aspect you cherry pick to suit your argument.

If they had been on top form for 4 years you'd be whining on about how they suspiciously peak for four years.

Not if they'd been 2nd or 3rd for 4 years. If they'd been winning every race a la Ledecky then it'd be suspicious; if they'd been doing *** and finishing 5-8th for 4 years then set a new OR then it's suspicious, do you see where I'm coming from? They had shown nothing, nothing at all then win with an OR. If they'd won with a bad time then it'd be the fault of the others but the OR is the key point.

 

[kwikki]

Re: Re:

"It's all about" whatever aspect you cherry pick to suit your argument.

If they had been on top form for 4 years you'd be whining on about how they suspiciously peak for four years.

Not if they'd been 2nd or 3rd for 4 years. If they'd been winning every race a la Ledecky then it'd be suspicious; if they'd been doing **** and finishing 5-8th for 4 years then set a new OR then it's suspicious, do you see where I'm coming from? They had shown nothing, nothing at all then win with an OR. If they'd won with a bad time then it'd be the fault of the others but the OR is the key point.

I get your point entirely, and I would accept it but for the rest of the context. This being that WC are not a priority. Why would they work themselves into the ground for something that they don't care about?

Nobody can hold that kind of form consistently.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Re: Re:

"It's all about" whatever aspect you cherry pick to suit your argument.

If they had been on top form for 4 years you'd be whining on about how they suspiciously peak for four years.

Not if they'd been 2nd or 3rd for 4 years. If they'd been winning every race a la Ledecky then it'd be suspicious; if they'd been doing **** and finishing 5-8th for 4 years then set a new OR then it's suspicious, do you see where I'm coming from? They had shown nothing, nothing at all then win with an OR. If they'd won with a bad time then it'd be the fault of the others but the OR is the key point.

Unusual perhaps, but who wants to be on form all the time? I think you accept that and the judgement about how to fill in the 4-year wait is for others to make. Tricky to pick up an Olympic record between Olympics of course, so bettter not to try. The Olympics are the British target, no doubt about it, and it's where success produces the funding for another Olympic 4-year cycle.

 

[domination]

As per usual the Brits have success on the track and the same old baseless accusations start.

Like the road team, there's not been slight shred of evidence to warrant the accusations, other than incredible and unprecedented success. Success that is now ongoing for 10+ years.

I'd proffer a suggestion that 1) the advent of lottery funding, 2) the building of a national cycling centre and 3) the building of a backroom team who brought innovation to cycling in the late 90s may actually offer some kind of explanation for the latter day success.

Though all in all I get great joy from the collective nashing of teeth at Team GB's success. Long may it reign.