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

[python]

It is rigged in a way. The decision is made with limited data, and those who have access to the full data set all work for the prosecution. What if Pellizotti's side was given the full data set and could show forty other instances of riders with profiles just as dodgy as his? What if under cross examination prosecution scientific witness could be forced to explain why Pellizotti's profile warranted a sanction while a similar profile did not? What if Pellizotti's side could take his profile along with the profiles of nine other top ten GT riders, anonomize them, and ask third parties to pick out the one that showed doping?

bro these are good points but we really don't know yet the basis on which cas reached it's decision. the limited technical details that were published (and i've collected as much as there was to grab) are not sufficient. in it's press release cas mentioned that the full ruling is yet to follow.
i will hold my judgment of cas's work until then. but you're correct, biopassport is controversial and will always remain so because of it's nature - trending indirect markers of which there is yet limited knowledge. pechstein's case comes to mind again and again. german haemotologists are still arguing even though cas settled it long ago...

 

[rata de sentina]

Big discussion on the TAS ruling from the Rai tv team in last night's pre-Tirreno show.
Not a happy bunch. Much of their venom was directed at Contador.
They talked about the "great injustice" that Pellizotti had got the boot without failing a test, while Bertie is riding around, winning races, probably doing the Giro, having failed a test.
Much of what Bro Deal has highlighted here, came up in the debate.
Spain also got a special mention, in comparison to Italian efforts.

Who knows what Contador was up to but until he gets his day at CAS they have no right to sook about Pelizotti being hard done by. It's a ridiculous argument because as things stand their circumstances are precisely equal ie both let off the hook by their national organisations.

Anyway, irrespective of the fact that there is a manifestly disproportionate 2 year ban for any infraction no matter how trivial, I personally find it difficult to equate the dubious benefits of femtomolar amounts of clenbuterol with a full program of cynical blood doping. Comparing the two cases in this context is grasping at straws on a myriad of levels.

 

[spalco]

I think that if they are cancelling all his results from May/2009 then his suspension should run from that point as well. Instead he is effectively getting a three year suspension.

This has always been a problem with doping sanctions. There are no standards for when bans start. The authorities just make it up as they go along, and different riders get different sanctions.

I agree there should be clear rules on when the suspension starts, but I have no problem with somewhat lengthening it if a case gets drawn out due to an appeal (assuming the rider loses in the end of course), especially since from a sports perspective those results are worthless anyway.

If I get a traffic ticket, appeal and lose the appeal, it costs me more than if I had paid immediately too.

 

[python]

snip... I have no problem with somewhat lengthening it if a case gets drawn out due to an appeal (assuming the rider loses in the end of course), especially since from a sports perspective those results are worthless anyway.

If I get a traffic ticket, appeal and lose the appeal, it costs me more than if I had paid immediately too.

it's rather obvious from the press release that the additional penalties were imposed not due to the lengthening of the case by the appeal but for other reasons. i dont pass any opinion if the reasons are valid but i don't think your example applies.

rightly or wrongly, the annulment of pelli's race results has to do with when he was judged by the uci to start blood doping. there were reports in the italian media that pelli produced suspicious blood samples as far back as the end of 2008. he then became a target and the final suspicious sample was produced on 2 july 2009.

 

[thehog]

Who knows what Contador was up to but until he gets his day at CAS they have no right to sook about Pelizotti being hard done by. It's a ridiculous argument because as things stand their circumstances are precisely equal ie both let off the hook by their national organisations.

Anyway, irrespective of the fact that there is a manifestly disproportionate 2 year ban for any infraction no matter how trivial, I personally find it difficult to equate the dubious benefits of femtomolar amounts of clenbuterol with a full program of cynical blood doping. Comparing the two cases in this context is grasping at straws on a myriad of levels.

I think Pellizotti has the same problem as Landis. Yes he was doping but not in the way in which he was caught. The unfortunate circumstance is he can’t admit that he was doping to tell the real story as it would sell himself in. I think the other problem is the inconsistency. Pellizotti would obviously know what’s going on in the peloton and with the other riders on Leakygas. It’s the inconsistency that is killing him and the fact that he was singled out knowing full well what every other rider in the top 30 is doing. If the UCI doesn’t appeal the Contador verdict then we can all switch off our TV’s in July. He’s right about one thing… there is nothing you can do. Nothing. Just walk away.

 

[theswordsman]

This was from a article about Caucchioli. I'm not sure what the opposite of a red letter day is, but...

The referees have analyzed all the results in question and listened to the arguments of the parties, in particular those referring to the reliability and all'interpretabilità results. With the help of external experts, the CAS came to the conclusion that the biological passport is a reliable means for discovering indirect actions of doping . And all the objections raised by the rider on that incorrect procedures were followed by several laboratories and would compromise the outcome of the tests were rejected.

http://www.tuttobiciweb.it/index.php?page=news&cod=36750&tp=n

I responded to the Contador conversation, but moved it to his thread. Cheers

 

[Finbouy]

Gutted.. I like Franco, thought he was one of THE DUDES in the Pelo' and I'll be sad to see him leave.. The guys got to earn a living and I'm pretty sure he'll be around in the future dispite his reluctance to be around cycling.

Ciao Franco, I've enjoyed watching you ride.

 

[thehog]

“The decisions announced by CAS yesterday are a major step forward in the anti-doping fight,” it stated. “They confirm the validity of the biological passport as an essential instrument in the fight against doping, which will most certainly become part of the arsenal of other international sporting federations that wish to draw on the UCI’s experience.”

“The decisions also reinforce the UCI’s determination to continue its uncompromising policy of many years in the fight against doping and to continually improve its anti-doping measures.”

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...izotti-claims-hes-quitting.aspx#ixzz1G6N4b7no

 

[ultimobici]

The guys got to earn a living and I'm pretty sure he'll be around in the future dispite his reluctance to be around cycling.

He cou;ld go and get a job stacking shelves at Mercatone Uno then....

 

[frenchfry]

Validation of the passport to sanction dopers is a major step forward in the fight against doping. I still believe the passport does more to limit excessive doping than to eliminate doping altogether, but this is better than nothing. I don't worry too much about sanctioning innocent riders because if the passport results are out of whack either there is doping, or a potential medical problem for which the rider should probably be stopped anyway (similar to the 50% hematocrit rule).

 

[hektoren]

Pellizotti would obviously know what’s going on in the peloton and with the other riders on Leakygas. It’s the inconsistency that is killing him and the fact that he was singled out knowing full well what every other rider in the top 30 is doing.

Unless there's a team-wide program in place, which I sincerely doubt, and unless there's a break with the need-to-know principle re doping practices, across team-boundaries, there's no way Franco would know full well what other riders' practices are. Things just aren't out in the open. It's "get a good doc and keep schtumm". He may suspect, but can't know for sure, and I bet that's just as frustrating. Otherwise, as he's leaving the sport "disillusioned" anyway, there's no reason not to collect the bonus points awarded for "cooperation", like di Luca did.

 

[thehog]

Unless there's a team-wide program in place, which I sincerely doubt, and unless there's a break with the need-to-know principle re doping practices, across team-boundaries, there's no way Franco would know full well what other riders' practices are. Things just aren't out in the open. It's "get a good doc and keep schtumm". He may suspect, but can't know for sure, and I bet that's just as frustrating. Otherwise, as he's leaving the sport "disillusioned" anyway, there's no reason not to collect the bonus points awarded for "cooperation", like di Luca did.

Read between the lines. He’s chance to come clean was 6 months ago not after a failed CAS appeal. Landis styled gut spills don’t gain bonus points. You never ride again – he knows it. Pello’s one chance was to beat the rap or retire. He lost he knew the consequences. In addition yes he does know what everyone else is doing. Just like Landis knew and openly had conversations with other riders. Yes the sport is not as blatant as it used to be but riders still transfuse in a big way. The guys is 32 he’s been around the block a few times and rode during the “doping glory years” - he knows what goes on. To think its any other way is just naive. How many Contador’s, Lance’s, Landis ‘s, Perino’s, Basso’s, Ullrich’s, Ricco's do you need to think anything has changed? Doping still exists just the way in which it is practised is different.

 

[Escarabajo]

Validation of the passport to sanction dopers is a major step forward in the fight against doping. I still believe the passport does more to limit excessive doping than to eliminate doping altogether, but this is better than nothing. I don't worry too much about sanctioning innocent riders because if the passport results are out of whack either there is doping, or a potential medical problem for which the rider should probably be stopped anyway (similar to the 50% hematocrit rule).

+1.

Trying to quote you in case I need it later.

thanks.

 

[frenchfry]

Meanwhile, Ivan "The Thinker" Basso gets onto the 2009 Giro podium, while Mr Human Plasma looks down from the top step.
Leipheimer, whose blood values were pre passport flagged, moves up to 4th.
Truly screwed up. Pro cycling should be renamed wacky races.

This is why it is hard for me to simply ignore the doping issues and enjoy the racing. Until the doping is cleaned up, the results are pretty much irrelevant.

 

[alpine_chav]

This is why it is hard for me to simply ignore the doping issues and enjoy the racing. Until the doping is cleaned up, the results are pretty much irrelevant.

Alternatively we could remove the bikes from the equation and hand out podium places to the competitors who can handle the most dope without croaking it. It would make for gripping TV at the very least.

 

[Escarabajo]

It is rigged in a way. The decision is made with limited data, and those who have access to the full data set all work for the prosecution. What if Pellizotti's side was given the full data set and could show forty other instances of riders with profiles just as dodgy as his? What if under cross examination prosecution scientific witness could be forced to explain why Pellizotti's profile warranted a sanction while a similar profile did not? What if Pellizotti's side could take his profile along with the profiles of nine other top ten GT riders, anonomize them, and ask third parties to pick out the one that showed doping?

The way I see it, any rider accused of violating the Bio Passport codes is almost doomed. And I think you are right. I work in the engineering consulting job and we must keep records of everything we do in case we have to court for any reason. But we can almost find technical support for any calculation or estimation out there that is not set in stone. So it would be near impossible for a scientist to refute it. I feel the same way about the Bio Passport. The scientist can hang to any flaw that they see fit in the rider’s profile. It makes it even easier for guys like Pellizotti that you almost certain that he has been doping (Ferrari, unexpected high results late during his career).

Taking this case from the Brodeal point of view makes the UCI stronger and with more leverage for corruption. I hope is not going to be that way. It is almost like they can pick the Bio Passport of any of the top GC contenders and hang on a technicality and decide on their fate.

Having said that, there are some good points to take from this CAS ruling. First is that there is a high certainty that Pellizotti was doping and deserved a punishment. Second that it puts more pressure on the doping programs of the riders. So pretty much at least it controls the amount of dope that goes in your system. A good example of this could be Contador performances from last year versus the performances from 2009 Tour de France. Quite different. He is still top rider but he has been limited maybe by the amount of blood intake that he should take each time.

Last but not least, I don't agree with the fine. It is enough punishment to be out of work and on top of that you have to pay a fine. That sounds a little harsh and unfair to me
.

 

[MarkvW]

I'm confused

I have understood the following two points to be true, but they may be false.

First: Autologous blood doping is not useful for a racer who races all season long because the withdrwal of blood zaps you and impairs training while you build your blood back up. You can't win while you're building your blood back up.

Second: Homologous blood doping is easy to catch in the middle of a race. (But then why did Vino do it?)

Any insights.

 

[D-Queued]

I have understood the following two points to be true, but they may be false.

First: Autologous blood doping is not useful for a racer who races all season long because the withdrwal of blood zaps you and impairs training while you build your blood back up. You can't win while you're building your blood back up.

Second: Homologous blood doping is easy to catch in the middle of a race. (But then why did Vino do it?)

Any insights.

There are others here who are experts on this subject (Python?), but I will try the informed lay person view - and also try and connect a few dots:

Autologous - use of your own blood
Homologous - use of someone else's blood

Up and until Tyler's famous vanishing twin, there was no viable means of testing for Homologous transfusion.

The interesting thing about the Tyler case was that teammate Perez (*correction) also tested positive at the time. Moreover, we know from Dr. Fuentes' OP files that Tyler was extracting and storing his own blood.

We still don't know whose blood Tyler used (mix-up with Perez*, family member?), and he could have been trying to avoid any performance impact from extracting his own blood.

Autologous transfusion has come back into use since the development and introduction of the EPO test (circa 2000).

Thanks to EPO, however, it is possible to regenerate your own blood faster than you could otherwise.

Up until the Plasticizer test, there was no viable technique for detecting Autologous transfusion. Thus, with EPO scheduling and microdosing, another 'undetectable' doping technique became the 'in' thing: Autologous transfusion.

Also, improved packing and storing techniques, along with transfusion facilitation (Actovegin?), has made blood doping safer and more viable as a Performance Enhancing technique. Unless, of course, you try it at home like Ricco did.

What we know now (thanks to OP records, Floyd's diaries, etc.) is that there is a schedule of extractions and re-infusions throughout the season.

We also know that a classic time for withdrawal is right after the Dauphine. Many a GC contender has had a hot start to the Dauphine, then a strong fade off. Given the pattern before a deposit in the blood bank, it would be interesting to know what the advantage here is.

We know from AC's teammates, and Floyd (and OP?), that the extraction at Dauphine time also involves various other PEDs like Clenbuterol.

So, AC has gone from illustrating what a Madrid Gynecology clinic can do for cycling, to demonstrating that the classic Dauphine cycle is alive and well for the Yellow jersey contenders.

Dave.

 

[thehog]

Not Botero but Perez tested positive at the same tome as Hamilton. The theory going around was that they both got each others blood bag.

There are others here who are experts on this subject (Python?), but I will try the informed lay person view - and also try and connect a few dots:

Autologous - use of your own blood
Homologous - use of someone else's blood

Up and until Tyler's famous vanishing twin, there was no viable means of testing for Homologous transfusion.

The interesting thing about the Tyler case was that teammate Santiabo Botero also tested positive at the time. Moreover, we know from Dr. Fuentes' OP files that Tyler was extracting and storing his own blood.

We still don't know whose blood Tyler used (mix-up with Botero, family member?), and he could have been trying to avoid any performance impact from extracting his own blood.

Autologous transfusion has come back into use since the development and introduction of the EPO test (circa 2000).

Thanks to EPO, however, it is possible to regenerate your own blood faster than you could otherwise.

Up until the Plasticizer test, there was no viable technique for detecting Autologous transfusion. Thus, with EPO scheduling and microdosing, another 'undetectable' doping technique became the 'in' thing: Autologous transfusion.

Also, improved packing and storing techniques, along with transfusion facilitation (Actovegin?), has made blood doping safer and more viable as a Performance Enhancing technique. Unless, of course, you try it at home like Ricco did.

What we know now (thanks to OP records, Floyd's diaries, etc.) is that there is a schedule of extractions and re-infusions throughout the season.

We also know that a classic time for withdrawal is right after the Dauphine. Many a GC contender has had a hot start to the Dauphine, then a strong fade off. Given the pattern before a deposit in the blood bank, it would be interesting to know what the advantage here is.

We know from AC's teammates, and Floyd (and OP?), that the extraction at Dauphine time also involves various other PEDs like Clenbuterol.

So, AC has gone from illustrating what a Madrid Gynecology clinic can do for cycling, to demonstrating that the classic Dauphine cycle is alive and well for the Yellow jersey contenders.

Dave.

 

[D-Queued]

Not Botero but Perez tested positive at the same tome as Hamilton. The theory going around was that they both got each others blood bag.

Fixed!

Dave.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I have understood the following two points to be true, but they may be false.

First: Autologous blood doping is not useful for a racer who races all season long because the withdrwal of blood zaps you and impairs training while you build your blood back up. You can't win while you're building your blood back up.

Second: Homologous blood doping is easy to catch in the middle of a race. (But then why did Vino do it?)

Any insights.

Autologous blood transfusions are primarily used for events where the athlete knows they will be tested - so it does not require many withdrawals.

As for Vino - it was commented at the time that samples were to go to Lausanne lab which could not detect homologous blood doping - but instead were sent to Châtenay-Malabry.

 

[BroDeal]

As for Vino - it was commented at the time that samples were to go to Lausanne lab which could not detect homologous blood doping - but instead were sent to Châtenay-Malabry.

Up 'til that point only Lausanne had the equipment to detect homologous blood doping. The LNDD bought the equipment before the 2007 Tour, and this was not well known. On top of that, there was never any evidence that the UCI was randomly testing riders for homologous transfusions. Hamilton was specifically targeted. Interestingly enough, Astana had also been targeted in 2007. No one other than Hamilton/Perez and Vino/Kash has ever been caught even though it was standard practice for Dr. Fuentes to ask clients for family members who could donate blood.

If I remember the decision on Hamilton right, he had DNA from three or four people in his blood. So his bloog bag did not get switched with Perez'. Also Hamilton's positive may have resulted from the transfusion he did for the Olympics. It is easy to suspect contamination, but what are the chances that multiple contaminant blood sources would all be compatible and not cause an adverse reaction?

 

[D-Queued]

Up 'til that point only Lausanne had the equipment to detect homologous blood doping. The LNDD bought the equipment before the 2007 Tour, and this was not well known. On top of that, there was never any evidence that the UCI was randomly testing riders for homologous transfusions. Hamilton was specifically targeted. Interestingly enough, Astana had also been targeted in 2007. No one other than Hamilton/Perez and Vino/Kash has ever been caught even though it was standard practice for Dr. Fuentes to ask clients for family members who could donate blood.

If I remember the decision on Hamilton right, he had DNA from three or four people in his blood. So his bloog bag did not get switched with Perez'. Also Hamilton's positive may have resulted from the transfusion he did for the Olympics. It is easy to suspect contamination, but what are the chances that multiple contaminant blood sources would all be compatible and not cause an adverse reaction?

Tyler has many doppelgangers.

BTW - Not only was Tyler specifically targetted, he was even warned about it. And, still did it.

The collective intelligence of all the vanishing twins and their host is measured on the Twinkie scale.

(yes, yes, I know. Tyler is such a nice guy, and he looks honest)

Dave.

 

[therealtimshady]

surely it would be easy to detect homologous blood doping and there might be different blood types (eg A, and AB) and different DNA in it.

but the auto one is impossible unless the heamocrit level is too high

 

[Merckx index]

If I remember the decision on Hamilton right, he had DNA from three or four people in his blood. So his bloog bag did not get switched with Perez'. Also Hamilton's positive may have resulted from the transfusion he did for the Olympics. It is easy to suspect contamination, but what are the chances that multiple contaminant blood sources would all be compatible and not cause an adverse reaction?

I don’t recall any official announcement that Tyler had DNA from multiple sources in his blood, though there were all kinds of rumors and speculation occurring then. Even if he did, I don’t see what relevance it would have to the Perez situation. The speculation was not that the bags were switched, but cross-contaminated--that Tyler put his blood in a bag that had previously contained Perez‘ blood, and which had not been either discarded or washed out after use. If the amount of contamination was low, it would not cause an adverse reaction, but could still be picked up in a DNA test. Also, one of the peculiarities of the Hamilton case was that one of the blood antigens that tested positive for HBT was in much lower than predicted amounts, which might be consistent with contamination.

surely it would be easy to detect homologous blood doping and there might be different blood types (eg A, and AB) and different DNA in it.

but the auto one is impossible unless the heamocrit level is too high

There is a test for autologous doping, though it’s rarely used. It involves breathing carbon monoxide, and riders are understandably upset about having to do that any time near a race. Basically, the test measures total hemoglobin, which is unaffected by dilution efforts. Supposedly they have been working on a new one, but haven't heard much lately.