The Armitstead doping thread.

[3wheeler]

Leave Lizzie alone She is a Yorkshire lass.. Bit like Beryl Burton. Drinks Yorkshire Tea, Eats Yorkshire Puddings for dinner , and Fat Rascals for Tea. This is the stuff that wins the races.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

The second test wasn't before a big win, it was two weeks after the World Championships.

Correct me on this, please, but wasn't the second strike an admin error, ie a filing failure, not a missed test?

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Re: Re:

Sure, but it seems unlikely that even an unpopular male pro would get as hostile a reception.

You are exaggerating the hostility based on a very small sample: the CN round-up lists just PFP, Katie C, Sari Saarelainen, Valentina Scandolara and Chloe Hosking, plus ex-pros BOD and Jen Copnall. I think you would get at least that many criticising Froome or Sagan or Kittell if they got three strikes and were still reprieved.

I did not exaggerate the hostility - I made no assessment of it except in comparison to (my assessment of) the reception a top male pro might expect from colleagues after a brush with the anti-doping authorities. There are actual top professionals attacking the decision, there are middling professionals doing so and ex-pros too. At the same time, as you note, there are no pros making noises in her defence.

I do not recall this level of criticism from other pros of a high level top male pro after a reprieve from the authorities. Nor do I recall one being apparently without any defender among his colleagues. Perhaps you do?

I have some difficulty remembering any pro going after Kreuziger or Henao after their own reprieves, for instance. Maybe I'm forgetting something and in fact there were pros from various levels of the peloton calling their reprieves disgraceful, but I rather doubt it.

 

[Jagartrott]

Ah, the lovely smell of exceptionalism...

 

[Catwhoorg]

Re: Re:

The second test wasn't before a big win, it was two weeks after the World Championships.

Correct me on this, please, but wasn't the second strike an admin error, ie a filing failure, not a missed test?

Thats was how it was described, but that could just be LA putting a spin on not being in the right place at the right time, which would be a missed test.

 

[samhocking]

When I'm cheating on my wife, not only do I tell her what hotel I'm staying in with my mistress, but i tell her what time I'll be having some sexy time there too. So much more thrilling knowing the difference between getting caught and not getting caught is the discretion of the hotel staff.

I'd recommend it when doping too. Tell UKAD where you are when glowing and really get the full buzz of the chase hanging on an unnecessarily thin knife-edge of either ending your career or continuing it based on some stranger at reception covering your back!

That's a very poor analogy because she wasn't training away on her own, she was at the team hotel for a World Cup race, which included a TTT. She was always going to be at the team hotel, the only issue was the chance of being tested the day before the race at 6am (if microdosed the night before at 11pm). The tester came, phone went to silent...

Perhaps try again...

That's not how whereabouts works. Just because you tell ADAMS where you will be between 5am and 11pm, UKAD can knock on your door anytime they wish. Surrounding your whereabouts will be info about your team, if youre training, what races you are entered in etc etc. Saying where you are at what time in no way means that's when you'll be asked to provide anti-doping samples.

 

[thehog]

When I'm cheating on my wife, not only do I tell her what hotel I'm staying in with my mistress, but i tell her what time I'll be having some sexy time there too. So much more thrilling knowing the difference between getting caught and not getting caught is the discretion of the hotel staff.

I'd recommend it when doping too. Tell UKAD where you are when glowing and really get the full buzz of the chase hanging on an unnecessarily thin knife-edge of either ending your career or continuing it based on some stranger at reception covering your back!

That's a very poor analogy because she wasn't training away on her own, she was at the team hotel for a World Cup race, which included a TTT. She was always going to be at the team hotel, the only issue was the chance of being tested the day before the race at 6am (if microdosed the night before at 11pm). The tester came, phone went to silent...

Perhaps try again...

That's not how whereabouts works. Just because you tell ADAMS where you will be between 5am and 11pm, UKAD can knock on your door anytime they wish. Surrounding your whereabouts will be info about your team, if youre training, what races you are entered in etc etc. Saying where you are at what time in no way means that's when you'll be asked to provide anti-doping samples.

So what does that have to do with a mistress?

At that point she had 3 strikes still up her sleeve, she could dope at 10:59pm the night before knowing she could be clear by 6am, if she felt uncomfortable that she was still glowing she would not answer her phone and take the strike...

 

[PremierAndrew]

Completing the ADAMS identification system is a necessary part of the life of a professional athlete, but the athlete is at liberty to select the time during the day they make themselves available. Also, in the event of life getting in the way, the system does allow for athletes to notify the testing authorities by either by sending a text message or ringing a hotline up to one minute before the one hour window opens and changing it.

When I brought this up with UKAD as too permissive a regime, allowing the drug cheats too much latitude, I was advised that regular late changes to availability would be noted and would then draw more targeted testing on that individual. I hope that is the case.

- Nicole Cooke

There's really not much excuse to miss a test, but once you're on guard having missed one, it's ridiculous to miss another one or in Lizzie's case, even a 3rd. All this within 12 months

 

[yaco]

BC throw S.Yates under the bus but yet protect Armistead.Have previously posted that BA is a joke of an organisation.

 

[yaco]

Am i missing something. Why wasn't this case first heard by an UCI Anti-Doping Tribunal.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re:

Am i missing something. Why wasn't this case first heard by an UCI Anti-Doping Tribunal.

RTFM. It's a UKAD case.

 

[samhocking]

When I'm cheating on my wife, not only do I tell her what hotel I'm staying in with my mistress, but i tell her what time I'll be having some sexy time there too. So much more thrilling knowing the difference between getting caught and not getting caught is the discretion of the hotel staff.

I'd recommend it when doping too. Tell UKAD where you are when glowing and really get the full buzz of the chase hanging on an unnecessarily thin knife-edge of either ending your career or continuing it based on some stranger at reception covering your back!

That's a very poor analogy because she wasn't training away on her own, she was at the team hotel for a World Cup race, which included a TTT. She was always going to be at the team hotel, the only issue was the chance of being tested the day before the race at 6am (if microdosed the night before at 11pm). The tester came, phone went to silent...

Perhaps try again...

That's not how whereabouts works. Just because you tell ADAMS where you will be between 5am and 11pm, UKAD can knock on your door anytime they wish. Surrounding your whereabouts will be info about your team, if youre training, what races you are entered in etc etc. Saying where you are at what time in no way means that's when you'll be asked to provide anti-doping samples.

So what does that have to do with a mistress?

At that point she had 3 strikes still up her sleeve, she could dope at 10:59pm the night before knowing she could be clear by 6am, if she felt uncomfortable that she was still glowing she would not answer her phone and take the strike...

What I'm saying is, if I wanted a mistress (to dope) I wouldn't tell my wife (UKAD) where I would be everytime I wanted to cheat. In other words, if i only have to tell ADAMS where I'll be for 60mins for the next quarter or rather where I'll be for 60mins once every month, 3 months in advance i probably wouldn't tell my wife where I was going to cheat if I didn't really have to.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/retired-olympic-champion-cooke-expresses-opinion-on-armitsteads-case/?utm_content=buffer8747a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Nicole Cooke swims back up from the vasty deep of retirement to offer her views. In not very surprising news, she's not terribly sympathetic to Armitstead.

 

[noddy69]

Re: Re:

The second test wasn't before a big win, it was two weeks after the World Championships.

Correct me on this, please, but wasn't the second strike an admin error, ie a filing failure, not a missed test?

So the first test ..my phone was off and its all your fault...still a missed test
The second test...Filing error, I wasnt where I said Id be...sooo still a missed test
Whats the third test excuse ?

 

[thehog]

When I'm cheating on my wife, not only do I tell her what hotel I'm staying in with my mistress, but i tell her what time I'll be having some sexy time there too. So much more thrilling knowing the difference between getting caught and not getting caught is the discretion of the hotel staff.

I'd recommend it when doping too. Tell UKAD where you are when glowing and really get the full buzz of the chase hanging on an unnecessarily thin knife-edge of either ending your career or continuing it based on some stranger at reception covering your back!

That's a very poor analogy because she wasn't training away on her own, she was at the team hotel for a World Cup race, which included a TTT. She was always going to be at the team hotel, the only issue was the chance of being tested the day before the race at 6am (if microdosed the night before at 11pm). The tester came, phone went to silent...

Perhaps try again...

That's not how whereabouts works. Just because you tell ADAMS where you will be between 5am and 11pm, UKAD can knock on your door anytime they wish. Surrounding your whereabouts will be info about your team, if youre training, what races you are entered in etc etc. Saying where you are at what time in no way means that's when you'll be asked to provide anti-doping samples.

So what does that have to do with a mistress?

At that point she had 3 strikes still up her sleeve, she could dope at 10:59pm the night before knowing she could be clear by 6am, if she felt uncomfortable that she was still glowing she would not answer her phone and take the strike...

What I'm saying is, if I wanted a mistress (to dope) I wouldn't tell my wife (UKAD) where I would be everytime I wanted to cheat. In other words, if i only have to tell ADAMS where I'll be for 60mins for the next quarter or rather where I'll be for 60mins once every month, 3 months in advance i probably wouldn't tell my wife where I was going to cheat if I didn't really have to.

Then I would say you are stupid because you don't understand the actual requirement... you are required to provide "accurate and complete Whereabouts for each day" in a given quarter to be located to a 60 minute time slot.

Each day, down to 60 minute time frame. Not 60 minutes once every 3 months.

Riders are required to provide accurate and complete Whereabouts Filing for each day of the quarter to enable any ADO to locate the Rider for testing, including but not limited to the 60-minute time slot period, or to update the information where necessary to ensure that it remains accurate and complete.

http://www.uci.ch/clean-sport/whereabouts-program/

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Phil Deignan not taking Ferrand-Prevot's comment well.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

So the first test ..my phone was off and its all your fault...still a missed test
The second test...Filing error, I wasnt where I said Id be...sooo still a missed test
Whats the third test excuse ?

One more time: a filing failure is not a missed test. It's a failure to file on time.

 

[samhocking]

My point is Hog, your whereabouts for 60mins 3 times a quarter is not going to be where you would choose to 'glow' if it doesn't have to be when there is 2187 less risky hours to do it instead. Too much weight is given to missed tests in my opinion, if a riders only violation is missed tests. If Armistead is regularly changing whereabouts at last minute, i would be more suspicious of that, than of missed tests at locations her and her team are know to be at months in advance.

 

[Gaul 58]

Re:

Nicole Cooke's response is worth reading. It's almost a work of art for the way it doesn't comment much about LA but still damns her: http://nicolecooke.com/news/

+1

 

[18-Valve. (pithy)]

Re:

Phil Deignan not taking Ferrand-Prevot's comment well.

the now-deleted tweet:

 

[thehog]

Re:

Phil Deignan not taking Ferrand-Prevot's comment well.

What a nong. Having an affair in France is mandatory is it not?

 

[thehog]

Re:

My point is Hog, your whereabouts for 60mins 3 times a quarter is not going to be where you would choose to 'glow' if it doesn't have to be when there is 2187 less risky hours to do it instead. Too much weight is given to missed tests in my opinion, if a riders only violation is missed tests. If Armistead is regularly changing whereabouts at last minute, i would be more suspicious of that, than of missed tests at locations her and her team are know to be at months in advance.

Yes, you microdose at 11pm, everyone knows that. She was attending a race and was probably toping up, if she didn't feel confident thus off went the phone.

Besides, she did change her whereabouts at the last minute for the so called "emergency family situation".

Thus your suspicion is well founded :razz:

 

[yespatterns]

Re:

Phil Deignan not taking Ferrand-Prevot's comment well.

Phil needs to keep his ***-holster shut. Who says you have to have a modicum of intelligence (or class) to be a pro-cyclist?

 

[sniper]

nicole cooks statement has an interesting three line paragraph about UKAD and her asking them to tkghten up the whereabouts system.
Seems they sold her the same crap they sold the british parliament saying they announce testing to athletes because then they can target test the athletes who dont show up at the race.
Ukad, a load of facilitators.

 

[BullsFan22]

This whole thing is confusing the hell out of me. So who is now technically in charge of this? UKAD? WADA? UCI? BC? CAS?

Armitstead missed three tests in a 12 month period, which were supposed to be done by....UKAD? UKAD then reported this to WADA, the UCI, BC or all of the above? Then they had a nice talk and one party wanted to treat this as an anti-doping infraction, while the other(s) didn't? It appears that latter parties saw it as misunderstanding of the whereabouts system that technically needs to be 'tightened up,' and while Armiststead didn't break any rules (according to them), she should have known the whereabouts system better? Sounds like a slap on the wrist, careful careful, we'll take it from here, yes?