Pellizotti been given a 2 year ban [was - prematurely- Pellizotti acquitted !]

[Frosty]

Basically correct. Gavia at Podium Cafe reports:

According to Eugenio Capodacqua, the rider's data from the Giro d'Italia and the Tour de France in 2009 raised questions. Pellizotti's blood values went slowly up in one case, but stayed the same in the other. Under normal circumstances, current scientific theory holds that a rider's blood values should drop over the course of a three week grand tour. The Tribunal ruled that these anamolies did not offer sufficient proof of doping to sanction Pellizotti.

Is that correct? I remember the original reports saying it was a sample taken between the Giro and the Tour and the cyclingnews report says this too

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-could-appeal-pellizotti-case

'The irregularities dated back to a sample taken after he placed second in the 2009 Giro d'Italia and before the 2009 Tour de France, where Pellizotti won the mountains classification and was voted most aggressive rider.'

If that is true, then the values within one or both of the GTs mentioned are not the main values that have aroused suspicion although those values may have come under suspicion too.

At the end of the day, four riders have been banned due to the biological passport so it can help fight against doping although whether these were the biggest dopers or not is something we'll never know (i know what many on here would say though). Maybe people are better at arguing against it now or something although the other cases ended up being resolved this year. Perhaps more likely is that some of the riders and doctors have realised what the limits are and they know what they can do to get round it, ie micro-dosing, although whether this gives the same effect or a significantly lower amount is something we dont know.

Is there any news on the Rosendo case?

Be nice to see the data from the various cases although maybe that would just help other people know what the limits of provability are. I imagine at least some people will find out anyway though...

 

[Merckx index]

'The irregularities dated back to a sample taken after he placed second in the 2009 Giro d'Italia and before the 2009 Tour de France, where Pellizotti won the mountains classification and was voted most aggressive rider.'

Not sure there is a discrepancy. The sample referred to above could have been taken at the end of the Giro. If it was being argued that the parameters should not have been stable, there would have had to be a comparison between multiple samples over the course of the GT. The idea being that the sample at the end of the Giro should show lower values of certain parameters, not the same values as earlier ones.

I don't see how a sample taken between GTs would have any relevance, since in this case the argument was not that there was sudden rise in certain values, but that there was not an expected fall.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

That's sort of my point in regards to the uselessness of the biopass.

What in the hell are they looking for? Strictly oddly high values? Massive discepancy between testing sessions? Bizarrely consistent test values?

To me, the biopass has always sounded like a tool that would result in riders doping MORE. Not necessarily more in volume, but more in terms of frequency. I can easily see a rider being called for a random OOC test, and HAVE to make sure his HC values are high enough to justify the existing HC values in the passport.

Microdosing for the masses! Brought to you by the geniuses at the UCI. Yup, they care...

 

[scribe]

That's sort of my point in regards to the uselessness of the biopass.

What in the hell are they looking for? Strictly oddly high values? Massive discepancy between testing sessions? Bizarrely consistent test values?

To me, the biopass has always sounded like a tool that would result in riders doping MORE. Not necessarily more in volume, but more in terms of frequency. I can easily see a rider being called for a random OOC test, and HAVE to make sure his HC values are high enough to justify the existing HC values in the passport.

Microdosing for the masses! Brought to you by the geniuses at the UCI. Yup, they care...

What would you do to cap the doping?

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

What would you do to cap the doping?

Throw a bunch of money at Ashenden and his crew to keep trying to find cutting edge testing protocols, ensure that the DEHP test is solidified within WADA and the IOC, do everything we can to get the UCI out of the anti-doping game, and finally instill a zero-tollerance policy.

After that, a rider tests pos, he gets canned for five years.

This has been proven to not be a game of small measures. Something drastic needs to be done. It's been over a decade of finding excuses of why NOT to nail riders. That needs to change.

Harsh measures will destroy cycling? Our governing overlords have been eating this corpse from the inside out for too long. Gut the UCI, or atleast declaw them. That's what I would do.

 

[scribe]

Throw a bunch of money at Ashenden and his crew to keep trying to find cutting edge testing protocols, ensure that the DEHP test is solidified within WADA and the IOC, do everything we can to get the UCI out of the anti-doping game, and finally instill a zero-tollerance policy.

After that, a rider tests pos, he gets canned for five years.

This has been proven to not be a game of small measures. Something drastic needs to be done. It's been over a decade of finding excuses of why NOT to nail riders. That needs to change.

Harsh measures will destroy cycling? Our governing overlords have been eating this corpse from the inside out for too long. Gut the UCI, or atleast declaw them. That's what I would do.

Ashedon is running around trying to demonstrate how doping was being done 6 years ago. Tomorrow is coming fast. If he's the best you got, that aint gonna cut it.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Ashedon is running around trying to demonstrate how doping was being done 6 years ago. Tomorrow is coming fast. If he's the best you got, that aint gonna cut it.

He's running around trying to TELL people what was going on six years ago, while the cycling fan-world has had their heads up their collective as*es for the last decade. Another legacy of Lance via American fandom.

You can be sure that he (as well as his lab) is not content with the old-school doping stories, and are doing whatever they can (thankfully we DON'T know - leaks and all) to stem the tide of doping in sport.

Nice that you pointed out ONE factor of my answer... What you got, chatty?

 

[scribe]

He's running around trying to TELL people what was going on six years ago, while the cycling fan-world has had their heads up their collective as*es for the last decade. Another legacy of Lance via American fandom.

You can be sure that he (as well as his lab) is not content with the old-school doping stories, and are doing whatever they can (thankfully we DON'T know - leaks and all) to stem the tide of doping in sport.

Nice that you pointed out ONE factor of my answer... What you got, chatty?

No. He is running around trying to demonstrate what WAS going on as far back as 6 years ago, if not longer. What took him so long, and how is he going to save us going forward? He's not. He exposed the '99 samples while working on a different study. That's pretty much his resume.

What have I got? I am willing to accept the fact they are doing what they can. You wont find me complaining about how the biopassport is a farce. It is an effort toward the right direction, as there is no silver bullet.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

No. He is running around trying to demonstrate what WAS going on as far back as 6 years ago, if not longer. What took him so long, and how is he going to save us going forward? He's not. He exposed the '99 samples while working on a different study. That's pretty much his resume.

What have I got? I am willing to accept the fact they are doing what they can. You wont find me complaining about how the biopassport is a farce. It is an effort toward the right direction, as there is no silver bullet.

Apart from a weak attempt to keep dopers from turning their blood into catsup/ketchup, what has the biopass done?

As to Ashenden, I don't think the question is 'what's taken him so long' but rather 'why has it taken the cycling world so long to listen to him'. He's been working on this (functional EPO testing) for long time, and was spouting off long before it was chic.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Back to the 'what have you got to fix it?' question. I know bagging on Ashenden's not going to do sh*t...

 

[hrotha]

Have you seen Hamilton's program? I doubt riders now are doping more or more often than before the biopassport. At least if riders feel they have to keep their values consistent, they can make mistakes, and if they don't, at least doping might be enough of a hassle one or two riders won't bother. And at any rate it can still be used to target suspicious riders with extra tests (and more hassle for those riders).

 

[scribe]

Apart from a weak attempt to keep dopers from turning their blood into catsup/ketchup, what has the biopass done?

As to Ashenden, I don't think the question is 'what's taken him so long' but rather 'why has it taken the cycling world so long to listen to him'. He's been working on this (functional EPO testing) for long time, and was spouting off long before it was chic.

Let's see. EPO was in use in the early 90's. Ashenden was figuring out Armstrong's '99 samples how many years after the fact?

Sorry this doesn't suit your view of the world. But it simply illustrates there is no quick fix to this problem when the best in the business is consistently 6 years behind. In the interim, we should be glad at minimum that guys aren't dying from this crap like before while we wait for some cheats to make mistakes along the way. That's all I got, and that aint too bad.

 

[roundabout]

Back to the 'what have you got to fix it?' question.

"borrow" Ferrari's hdd/notes

 

[scribe]

"borrow" Ferrari's hdd/notes

That might actually be useful. Why not hire the big wig doctors for double what they can make in the street?

The govt hires the best computer hackers all the time to design security measures.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Let's see. EPO was in use in the early 90's. Ashenden was figuring out Armstrong's '99 samples how many years after the fact?

Sorry this doesn't suit your view of the world. But it simply illustrates there is no quick fix to this problem when the best in the business is consistently 6 years behind. In the interim, we should be glad at minimum that guys aren't dying from this crap like before while we wait for some cheats to make mistakes along the way. That's all I got, and that aint too bad.

Ashenden was fine-tuning the EPO in the ealry 90s. I know he was taking samples for 'unofficial' testing well before the '90 Olys, and coming up with results. The fact that it would take official governing bodies YEARS to admit that his test was efficient doesn't say that he's behind the times, but rather that those governing bodies don't really care to catch people.

Perhaps get those governing bodies out of the testing game?

I'm certainly not willing to wait for 'some cheats to make mistakes along the way', or to wait for other 'tards to exclude themselves. This is a sport worth saving, and as long as there are clean kids racing bikes to express their physiological talent I'll rail against doping. The clean riders of the world need to be able to play as well...

If that's all you got, it is too bad. And sad for cycling...

 

[scribe]

Ashenden was fine-tuning the EPO in the ealry 90s. I know he was taking samples for 'unofficial' testing well before the '90 Olys, and coming up with results. The fact that it would take official governing bodies YEARS to admit that his test was efficient doesn't say that he's behind the times, but rather that those governing bodies don't really care to catch people.

Perhaps get those governing bodies out of the testing game?

I'm certainly not willing to wait for 'some cheats to make mistakes along the way', or to wait for other 'tards to exclude themselves. This is a sport worth saving, and as long as there are clean kids racing bikes to express their physiological talent I'll rail against doping. The clean riders of the world need to be able to play as well...

If that's all you got, it is too bad. And sad for cycling...

I hope you don't think he was working on tests too far before this '90's Olympics.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Let's see. EPO was in use in the early 90's. Ashenden was figuring out Armstrong's '99 samples how many years after the fact?

Sorry this doesn't suit your view of the world. But it simply illustrates there is no quick fix to this problem when the best in the business is consistently 6 years behind. In the interim, we should be glad at minimum that guys aren't dying from this crap like before while we wait for some cheats to make mistakes along the way. That's all I got, and that aint too bad.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, scribe.

To answer your question - none.
He was asked for his opinion on Armstrongs samples during the SCA case and for an interview, thats it.

You're also ignoring that even when all 9 members of the panel agree on sending a case forward for sanction that the UCI may not agree.
I have said it before - the Biological passport is a drug test by committee.

 

[hrotha]

Hmm, JMBeaushrimp, no one here's saying Ashenden shouldn't be supported or that the UCI shouldn't leave the anti-doping management to an independent agency. No one here's saying it's OK if people dope or that we shouldn't attempt to catch them. What we're saying is: 1) the biopassport is not a panacea, but it's useful and a step in the right direction, and 2) doping doctors will probably always be ahead of anti-doping doctors, simply because they have more resources at their disposal, and this won't change no matter how much support Ashenden gets, because the likes of Fuentes and Ferrari make insane amounts of money.

The only solution is police action, but that's beyond cycling's capabilities and responsibilities. We have to work with what we have, including the biopassport.

 

[scribe]

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, scribe.

To answer your question - none.
He was asked for his opinion on Armstrongs samples during the SCA case and for an interview, thats it.

You're also ignoring that even when all 9 members of the panel agree on sending a case forward for sanction that the UCI may not agree.
I have said it before - the Biological passport is a drug test by committee.

I hope he had something figured out by that time. Isn't that what I said? Let's not dilute comments too far.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I hope he had something figured out by that time. Isn't that what I said? Let's not dilute comments too far.

Again - Ashenden had nothing to do with the original testing in 1999 - which is what you are suggesting.

Also - to your point about having a 'ferrari' like character involved in anti-doing.
Well, CONI actually did do just that. They were funding Dr. Conconi to do research on 'amateurs' to bring in a test for EPO back in the early '90s.
But instead Conconi was using the EPO to fuel the Carrera team - not surprisingly Conconi did not find a test for EPO.

 

[Oldman]

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, scribe.

To answer your question - none.
He was asked for his opinion on Armstrongs samples during the SCA case and for an interview, thats it.

You're also ignoring that even when all 9 members of the panel agree on sending a case forward for sanction that the UCI may not agree.
I have said it before - the Biological passport is a drug test by committee.

That seems to be what Pellazoti's finding out now.

 

[scribe]

Again - Ashenden had nothing to do with the original testing in 1999 - which is what you are suggesting.

Also - to your point about having a 'ferrari' like character involved in anti-doing.
Well, CONI actually did do just that. They were funding Dr. Conconi to do research on 'amateurs' to bring in a test for EPO back in the early '90s.
But instead Conconi was using the EPO to fuel the Carrera team - not surprisingly Conconi did not find a test for EPO.

Inference is withdrawn, not so intended, counselor.

Besides, I wanna hear more about this '90's Olympics.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Inference is withdrawn, not so intended, counselor.

Besides, I wanna hear more about this '90's Olympics.

Hmm, well - for a start, there was no Olympic's in 1990.

The earliest I remember Ashenden speaking about cycling was in 1997, with the introduction of the 50% HCT rule - but even then he was part of AIS until 2001 (IIRC).

 

[stephens]

I forget, was Ashenden "asked for his opinion about the '99 samples," or was he a paid expert witness of a company trying to save itself millions of dollars?

 

[AussieGoddess]

That's sort of my point in regards to the uselessness of the biopass.

What in the hell are they looking for? Strictly oddly high values? Massive discepancy between testing sessions? Bizarrely consistent test values?

To me, the biopass has always sounded like a tool that would result in riders doping MORE. Not necessarily more in volume, but more in terms of frequency. I can easily see a rider being called for a random OOC test, and HAVE to make sure his HC values are high enough to justify the existing HC values in the passport.

Microdosing for the masses! Brought to you by the geniuses at the UCI. Yup, they care...

Its certainly an interesting result.

I guess that means they are not going to review or take on Armstrong over his massive discrepancies in his biopassport for 09. He published them, a few experts raised their eyebrows so they were discreetly removed (or changed ROFL).

Sad day for cycling. The cheaters win again.