• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Significant paper on doping - New Pathways conference at Wold Championships

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 24, 2010
101
0
0
Visit site
bianchigirl said:
If the answer lay in reducing the length and difficulty of stages then why do 100 metre runners dope? Sad fact is there'll always be people who want to win at any cost and who'll use any means to do it.

That would be more relevant if cycling had actually tried to limit doping, and still discovered the odd cheater. The fact is, it did virtually nothing for 50-100 years. This years tour is the first with evidence that the doping was limited. In 2008, the Tv cameras got riders bolting across fields to avoid the first ever chaperones program. Woa. There's a sophisticated doping program: Run!

We should not be shrugging "people will cheat" until we've actually tried to limit it. And we're only just trying to do that now. It will take a while to change attitudes, thanks to the pathetic anti-doping efforts of the last 30 odd years.
 
Sep 13, 2010
546
0
0
Visit site
bianchigirl said:
If the answer lay in reducing the length and difficulty of stages then why do 100 metre runners dope? Sad fact is there'll always be people who want to win at any cost and who'll use any means to do it.

Strickly speaking, that's comparing apples and oranges. Making grand tours longer is more comparable to e.g. requiring an under 9.5" 100 m result to even qualify. It isn't as much about winning as it is about being able to complete such a task sans PEDs. That was the main criticism of that silly Tour of America proposal couple of years ago.
 
Aug 24, 2010
101
0
0
Visit site
Oldman said:
Flicker had a "radical" idea to reduce the length and type of Tour stages. The reality is he is at least part right.
The gradual increase of doping by the rank and file riders allowed them to attend more races and perform to the level demanded by their DS. The 80's was even a more play or NO PAY era and I'm guessing you did what was necessary to get to the next race.
Now every GT is a must for Pro Tour teams and sponsors and middle sized squads looking to increase sponsorship. What's a pro going to do? If he's great enough to be protected he might have a choice in races and volume and might be able to do it cleanly. Domestiques are going to be challenged. Maybe the Rider's Union force the UCI to limit race days or something insane like that. There are plenty of pros to make the races so they shouldn't lack in attendance. Based on Schecklet and his other teammates from Saxo they weren't taking Tour of California or the Vuelta seriously; let some new rider get the shot.

The original problem was an increase in doping because of lack of enforcement. Fewer race days without enforcement would just increase the pressure to perform on the counting days.

Wouldn't it be easier, more acceptable to fans, better for the the sports traditions to just do the obvious anti-doping measures that cycling omitted for so many years? Now that we have WADA monitoring the tour, the WADA code, chaperones, the passport, and serious penalities, lo and behold, the Tour this year was cleaner. Plenty exciting too.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
For Bianchi: If the answer lay in reducing the length and difficulty of stages then why do 100 metre runners dope? Sad fact is there'll always be people who want to win at any cost and who'll use any means to do it.

Noted-but that's for contenders in a 100 meter. A domestique doesn't exist in that sport and those riders constitute 90% of the peleton. The point was to take some load off of the slaves of the trade.

mtb Dad said:
The original problem was an increase in doping because of lack of enforcement. Fewer race days without enforcement would just increase the pressure to perform on the counting days.

If the riders don't want to dope this is their best avenue of response. You can't race from February to October without limiting the number of days. This would be the tool to keep the DS in line because it would be the rule. If the riders still dope ban them and the DS.

Wouldn't it be easier, more acceptable to fans, better for the the sports traditions to just do the obvious anti-doping measures that cycling omitted for so many years? Now that we have WADA monitoring the tour, the WADA code, chaperones, the passport, and serious penalities, lo and behold, the Tour this year was cleaner. Plenty exciting too.

Granted but we're also talking about a long term fix, not just the response d'jour; which you saw this year. It's all worth consideration.
 
Nov 2, 2009
1,112
0
0
Visit site
Barrus said:
I do need to say that this reminds me of a story of a certain rider (I no longer know which rider it was) but he always came to an agreement with the other riders he was up the road with. He would let the other rider win, if he would get a monetary reward. But they needed to make it realistic, so he would sprint along. Sometimes he made these agreements with several riders in the same race. At the finish line he did his best to win, that way he would either get the victory, or a monetary reward, in any case he would always "win".

Allan Peiper says he used to do this. I imagine there are others too.
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
Visit site
Spare Tyre said:
Allan Peiper says he used to do this. I imagine there are others too.

Yeah, that's probably true, especially as I am almost certain I didn't hear the story about Allan Peiper :p
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
Barrus said:
Yeah, that's probably true, especially as I am almost certain I didn't hear the story about Allan Peiper :p

I think that was a line he would draw from his published stories. He reported about a GT stage where he was starting to feel stressed and working hard and Claudia Chiappucci was riding alongside, looking at Peiper's labors. He pointed at his pulse monitor and said "128" or something similar while Alan was posting zone 4 numbers. Peiper didn't elaborate further, hoping anyone paying attention would understand as this was in the 90's when Claudia thought he was the sh*t. Peiper retired the next season not wanting to take the next step.
 
Sep 21, 2010
40
0
0
Visit site
Nul points for Mr Gerrans

"First time poster, long time lurker. Love your show!"

There's an article on the Sydney Morning Herald from Rupert Guinness. Rupert is one of the only Australian cycling journalists it would seem who is prepared to question things.

Simon Gerrans isn't exactly covering himself in glory:
Asked if he hoped Landis did not make an appearance at the world titles themselves, Gerrans said: ''Totally … I hope they get him at Customs and send him back where he came from.''

Still, between, Rupert and the fact that this conference still looks set to go ahead with Landis present, Australians interested in tacking the sport's issues have something to be pleased about thankfully
 
Darryl Webster said:
Race fixing is unfortunatly very commen.

As a first year pro in 88 I was involved in a "fix" in the GP Of Wales.
I hadnt intended to but was given little choice in the matter by my DS.
It went like this: I got in two man break, once the break was established and staying away till the end looked likely my DS came alongside and gave the ultimatum.
" Make sure your going to win or sit on"..in effect what he was telling me was I had to make the arrangement or the break was over.
My companion in the break( a top Amatuer riding in Great Britain colours) , fortunatly for me, was understanding of my predicement and agreed that we`d make the "sprint" look the part and so we continued to work together rather than both be pulled back.
In a real sprint ( my prefered choice) it might have gone iether way but in the position I was placed by my DS that choice was prety much removed.
Ok, it wasnt a big event by GT standards but it illustrates the kinda situation DS`s put riders in.
Not proud but thats the evil that is pro racing.
Fixing is almost as big a problem as doping.

That's a great insight, thanks Darryl.

Cycling is quite unique in that you can discuss the result whilst the game is playing out, and not only two or a group of riders, but also people in the cars.

I'm not sure of many other sports where it would be as easy to get a mutual agreement to fix the result.

At least there's not big betting in cycling so not to prompt cricket or tennis style scandals.

GoneWithTailWind said:
"First time poster, long time lurker. Love your show!"

There's an article on the Sydney Morning Herald from Rupert Guinness. Rupert is one of the only Australian cycling journalists it would seem who is prepared to question things.

Simon Gerrans isn't exactly covering himself in glory:


Still, between, Rupert and the fact that this conference still looks set to go ahead with Landis present, Australians interested in tacking the sport's issues have something to be pleased about thankfully

Welcome!

Gerrans is very chummy with Lance and Co. that kind of reaction is expected.

Of course Rupert is in the same boat, so it's good for him to report Simon's comments as a way to represent his own opinion on the matter. Although it seems like his tone has changed a bit since a few months ago.
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Visit site
There doesn't seem to be a live stream as the Crikey article promised, but as ACF pointed out, they are doing videos. Someone is also live tweeting the conference with continuous updates at:

http://twitter.com/newcyclingpath

I'm not sure what kind of coverage this is going to get in the end. Media were only allowed in if they were willing to participate in the conference both days like everyone else.

One of the early tweets said that there were seats available.
 
Thanks, Sassi highlighted the huge role of managers and "You shouldn't dope" vs "You shouldn't get caught" and "Make sure you are prepared for the race". Managers need to send clear signals about their anti-doping position.

Nice tweet - There are more books about Lance Armstrong in Australian bookshops than books on Australian's and local races.

That was Ken Mansell talking about the risks of ignoring the domestic scene when Australians are so dominant abroad.

Paul Hayes discussed the issues about the IOC having power over WADA whose sponsors want a "clean product".

The panel discussion should be on now.
 
Jul 29, 2010
70
0
0
Visit site
Hi Floyd!

scaled.php
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Visit site
Thor is furious that Landis would be at an anti-doping conference.

http://www.tv2sporten.no/sykkel/raser-mot-landisdeltagelse-3299260.html

I hope there will be video from the Biological Passport Forum. Two tweets caught my interest. One was Ashenden saying that if a sample is taken at altitude, it should be marked that way or it presents problems.

Another was that since people micro dose to keep their values within limits, the Passport system might encourage those people to continue doping because if they stop, their values will change. Just reading between the lines there - you might have a guy wanting to dope for one or two big races, but he'd have to keep manipulating his values because there's a comparison made. I guess some guys might even have to do something in the off season just to make the numbers look right.

Also - "There is 1 in 1000 likelihood that your blood value will exceed thresholds if you don't dope."
 
Jun 16, 2009
3,035
0
0
Visit site
Well, another way to look at it is that someone might have been doping and then want to quit. (for whatever reason but lets just say guilt in this example)

They can't stop taking the stuff or their profile will catch them out.

So... once a doper always a doper.... a bit like an addiction without an actual addiction.

That said, its like having the first cigarette - sure you can argue years later that its an addiction and you can't quit, but what the ___ were you thinking having the first cigarette?

Hopefully this conference and others like it can answer that question.
 
Interesting quotes

"If you want to have respect from both sides, whether it be from athletes to anti-doping agencies or anti-doping agencies to the athletes then things needs to be transparent," Landis said.

"Athletes are expected to tell the UCI and anti-doping agencies where they are at all times, they are expected to be available and to be honest about everything and yet we have a case where anti-doping agencies and the UCI in this case with biological passports are quite secretive about certain things.

"If there's ever going to be a system that's at least as good as it can get there has to be respect on both sides and in my opinion science shouldn't hide things."
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
Ferminal said:
Interesting quotes

"If you want to have respect from both sides, whether it be from athletes to anti-doping agencies or anti-doping agencies to the athletes then things needs to be transparent," Landis said.

"Athletes are expected to tell the UCI and anti-doping agencies where they are at all times, they are expected to be available and to be honest about everything and yet we have a case where anti-doping agencies and the UCI in this case with biological passports are quite secretive about certain things.

"If there's ever going to be a system that's at least as good as it can get there has to be respect on both sides and in my opinion science shouldn't hide things."

The UCI has to be in disarray as the buzz about selective use of the bio-passport gets repeated. Landis' quote suggests much without getting to specifics but it's obvious that the control of information provided the UCI with bargaining power on all fronts. Whether they will get caught misusing the information or they actually change the way they do business is my question of the day. The old promoter-becomes UCI official is a model made for corruption.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Visit site
Ferminal said:
Interesting quotes

"If you want to have respect from both sides, whether it be from athletes to anti-doping agencies or anti-doping agencies to the athletes then things needs to be transparent," Landis said.

"Athletes are expected to tell the UCI and anti-doping agencies where they are at all times, they are expected to be available and to be honest about everything and yet we have a case where anti-doping agencies and the UCI in this case with biological passports are quite secretive about certain things.

"If there's ever going to be a system that's at least as good as it can get there has to be respect on both sides and in my opinion science shouldn't hide things."

Wow, pretty heavy stuff. Must have impressed the 30 people in the room.

Dopers need to be more truthful...
Anti-Doping Agencies need to be more open and transparent.
Why can't we all just get along?

Maybe we will get to the point where dopers can promise not to dope, and the Anti-Doping Agencies can just close up shop. Its a wonderful sport, it really is.
 
Polish said:
Wow, pretty heavy stuff. Must have impressed the 30 people in the room.

The number of people in the room doesn't matter: in a court of law there are only 12.

Two or three bloggers or wire service reporters means more than a stadium full of passive onlookers.

The fact that it is being heard here in this forum and others like it, by people literally all around the planet means the message is getting out.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Visit site
A couple of interesting points that I have gleaned from theswordsman's updates from Mr Ashenden:

Ashenden recently completed a study in which he injected subjects intravenously twice weekly with microdoses of EPO over a period of three months, then ran their blood values through the biological passport software. "Not one of them failed," he said.

Then Ashenden admits that

"There is 1 in 1000 likelihood that your blood value will exceed thresholds if you don't dope."

So, if a rider does NOT want to get busted for doping, would it make sense to microdose instead of trying to ride clean? Seems the odds are better.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
Polish said:
A couple of interesting points that I have gleaned from theswordsman's updates from Mr Ashenden:



Then Ashenden admits that



So, if a rider does NOT want to get busted for doping, would it make sense to microdose instead of trying to ride clean? Seems the odds are better.

For those that are doping, perhaps. It would also be a risky and expensive longterm strategy to be taking IV drugs from a black market source that frequently. The Doc or someone else will come screaming in with a request for a specific study but the point Ashenden makes is another reason to strip the UCI of their police duties for PEDs.