• 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!

The dope testing system: who's fooling who?

Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Who, for crying out loud, is keeping up and running this ridiculously ineffective testing system?

On a daily basis, we hear riders spelling out how often they have been/are being tested.

Apparently it's a huge job provider, with testers traveling the world to retrieve out-of-competition urine and blood samples.
Would too many positives mean a loss of jobs?

Recall Landis, Jaksche, Kohl, they've all stressed how ineffective the system is. they've been tested without being caught, despite being maximally doped. In other words, we dispose of major evidence (also from the 90s) of how ineffective the testing is.

Are the riders/teams/teamdoctors really outsmarting the testing system?
Why isn't the UCI trying harder to make the testing more effective (= less testing, more positives)?

Who's keeping up appearances? Is it all a UCI-internal affaire?
Does the WADA have a corrupt wing?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
sniper said:
Who, for crying out loud, is keeping up and running this ridiculously ineffective testing system?

On a daily basis, we hear riders spelling out how often they have been/are being tested.

How can this ineffective, highly frequent testing be explained, let alone be justified? Apparently it's a huge job provider, but is that all there is to it?

Recall Landis, Jaksche, Kohl, they've all stressed how often they've been tested without being caught, despite being maximally doped.

Are the riders/teams/teamdoctors really outsmarting the testing system? Or is the UCI silently tolerating doping practices, and meanwhile increasing the number of tests in order to keep the critics at distance?

So who's keeping up appearances? Is it all a UCI-internal affaire?
Does the WADA have a corrupt wing?
Quite simply as long as the International Federations (ie the individual sporting federations) of each sport are responsible for anti-doping there will always be a difficulty.

Much like doping, anti-doping is evolving - now there is assistance from many outside government and law agencies and WADA are overseeing the implementation of rules and judgments.
 
The Truth is Out There.

sniper said:
Who, for crying out loud, is keeping up and running this ridiculously ineffective testing system?

On a daily basis, we hear riders spelling out how often they have been/are being tested.

Apparently it's a huge job provider, with testers traveling the world to retrieve out-of-competition urine and blood samples.
Would too many positives mean a loss of jobs?

Recall Landis, Jaksche, Kohl, they've all stressed how ineffective the system is. they've been tested without being caught, despite being maximally doped. In other words, we dispose of major evidence (also from the 90s) of how ineffective the testing is.

Are the riders/teams/teamdoctors really outsmarting the testing system?
Why isn't the UCI trying harder to make the testing more effective (= less testing, more positives)?

Who's keeping up appearances? Is it all a UCI-internal affaire?
Does the WADA have a corrupt wing?

It is a vast conspiracy--everyone is involved. No one can be trusted. But the truth is out there!
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Visit site
The Pat McQuaid part of the UCI is more concerned with the image than the results. They've conjured up the Biological Passport system, with teams kicking in big bucks, so that they can make the claim that they're doing more than other sports (which could possibly be true). They took samples for ages before they were willing to actually try to punish anyone, saying they were making the system legally air tight to face the early challenges.

They claim there was a problem with Pelizotti at the 2009 TdF, but apparently didn't bother testing him in the months following. Then they tried to ban him, and failed. The New Cycling Pathways paper went into great detail about why the Passport can't legally be used to punish riders. The Italian system came to pretty much the same conclusion. Caucchioli is before CAS now. The UCI has left Pelizotti in Limbo since October waiting to decide if they'll appeal.

The Passport system will fail as long as the cyclists involved can afford decent lawyers. What irks me is the number of test samples that are for the Bio Passport only, and aren't tested for EPO or HGH or whatever. They spend the money to send a tester to where an athlete is training, but they aren't willing to spend a bit more for a test that could come up positive. They'd rather have thirty readings that are only under their control and aren't seen by anyone - there are no positives for labs to leak, just data typed into software.

The riders who have the resources and desire to cheat will continue to be ahead of the testers. Remember the U23 Lithuanian riders a couple of years ago who had a whole regimen of microdoses that would keep them from testing hot. Then there's Frei, who said he only tested positive because he hadn't drunk a liter of water between his evening microdose of EPO and the early morning test. There's still blood transfusions, and while some people high five over a possible plasticizers test, I doubt that the plastic blood bags that the Red Cross can afford to buy by the thousands is really the only type of container possible to store blood.

But the UCI isn't doing what's possible. I'm not looking up the quote again, but a UCI official said after the Tour a few years ago that there were more positives because there was more testing, and made it sound like that was a bad thing. The AFLD was serious about the fight, so politics were used to lock them out before and during the Tour. A close look at the WADA/AMA Independent Observer Report will show how few tests were actually for a substance. There was one highly suspect rider who wasn't controlled. They talked about people in the team hotels watching the parking lot from behind curtains looking for tester vehicles to appear.

If it wasn't for the German press being leaked the Contador positive, the UCI could have said the Tour was completely clean, and they only planned to store the TdF samples for three months, so it would have stayed clean. But there's no one to call them on it. They're too powerful. The cycling press won't say anything. And race organizers don't want more positives and bad press. So clean riders would like to see doping go away, and a portion of the fans, but the push isn't really there. Which is why we're dependent on police, customs, Interpol, etc. to bust the supply chain for all sports and hope cycling is affected.
 
theswordsman said:
The Pat McQuaid part of the UCI is more concerned with the image than the results. ....

\What irks me is the number of test samples that are for the Bio Passport only, and aren't tested for EPO or HGH or whatever. ... They'd rather have thirty readings that are only under their control and aren't seen by anyone - there are no positives for labs to leak, just data typed into software.

...

But the UCI isn't doing what's possible. ...

A close look at the WADA/AMA Independent Observer Report will show how few tests were actually for a substance. There was one highly suspect rider who wasn't controlled. They talked about people in the team hotels watching the parking lot from behind curtains looking for tester vehicles to appear.

....

The line about making the Passport system legally bulletproof is BS.

Loopholes only get closed after after being tested in the courts/ADA hearings.

The WADA IO Report following this year's Tour was a severe indictment of the UCI.

There is only one organization to blame here. It is and always has been the UCI. They have the authority and financial capabilities to do something about it (as confirmed by the IO report).

They choose not to.

Dave.
 
sniper said:
Are the riders/teams/teamdoctors really outsmarting the testing system?
yes-they have, they are & they will--as long as the desire of cheating is within the mind of the riders-there is always a way to cheat.
sniper said:
Why isn't the UCI trying harder to make the testing more effective (= less testing, more positives)?
because isn't in favor of cycling at all. the less positives they produce, the more is the cover-up for the rest of the cheaters to maintain a doping regimen leveled & allowed by the farce called the Bio passport. of course there is the "political" factor-in which some riders can test positive and yet get "protection/immunity" from any punishment at all....
sniper said:
Who's keeping up appearances? Is it all a UCI-internal affaire?-Does the WADA have a corrupt wing?
UCI. its ridiculous how McQuaid & UCI can keep a straight face with all the nasty details emerging day by day on their dirty record of bribing, extortion, & misconduct.
WADA just sets the rules-and they might have a mole inside doing the dirty too, but not so evident than Pat & Co.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Visit site
People assume that every society, municipality, governmental entity, etc has some kind of organized system that just "takes care of things". And that is somewhat true. But different systems are more organized and vigilant than others. Others have structures that are so weak that they can be easily exploited by persons adept at doing such exploitation. And eventually, all such weaknesses will be discovered by those able TO exploit them.

The UCI is a system that might not be easily compromised, but for those who have the means, they can do so. Others without such means (or without such inclination) can't. But most people go about their everyday lives thinking that just results usually happen in regards to the cases we see.

August Busch IV (of Budweiser fame) can drunkenly wreck his Corvette, kill a girl and then walk free. Two years later, he can lead cops on a high-speed chase after almost killing two vice detectives, and walk free again. A girl can die of a drug overdose in his mansion, he discovers her body, spends 40 minutes getting his story straight before having an assistant call an ambulance, and he'll walk free again. Because he has the means to do so.

Every system has weaknesses. Some people can be bought with a suitcase full of currency. Some can be bought by the simple smile and wink from a buxom young woman driving her car too quickly.

Those who understand the nuances of the systems they're dealing with can make things go their way when needed. Some can't.

Sometimes we have TDF winners who get caught doping and the case "goes away". Sometimes we have TDF winners who get caught, don't know how to navigate certain systems, and they get tossed under the bus.

And that's what we have here. Some people see and understand systems, and others are strong cyclists who are simple "suckers" when it comes to politics and understanding systems.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Visit site
hfer07 said:
yes-they have, they are & they will--as long as the desire of cheating is within the mind of the riders-there is always a way to cheat.

because isn't in favor of cycling at all. the less positives they produce, the more is the cover-up for the rest of the cheaters to maintain a doping regimen leveled & allowed by the farce called the Bio passport. of course there is the "political" factor-in which some riders can test positive and yet get "protection/immunity" from any punishment at all....

UCI. its ridiculous how McQuaid & UCI can keep a straight face with all the nasty details emerging day by day on their dirty record of bribing, extortion, & misconduct.
WADA just sets the rules-and they might have a mole inside doing the dirty too, but not so evident than Pat & Co.


How do you think one becomes a Pat McQuaid? Being nice guys and "getting elected"? He was hand-picked by Verbruggen, and the world federations were told how it was gonna go down. And they elected him, according to the plan. Yet they all had the "right" to vote otherwise.

It's called deal making.

horsetrading.jpg
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Guess I opened this thread to express some astonishment regarding the FARCE that UCI doping testing really is.
Of course, that statement is pretty much a no-brainer, and indeed I'm understanding that we've learned to live with it already. Not much we can do about it anyway.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Visit site
sniper said:
Guess I opened this thread to express some astonishment regarding the FARCE that UCI doping testing really is.
Of course, that statement is pretty much a no-brainer, and indeed I'm understanding that we've learned to live with it already. Not much we can do about it anyway.

The UCI is an enclosed, wholly-independent entity that people perceive to be a representative system that is accountable to them. And it's anything BUT that.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Anyway, I should refine: I'm not saying that doping testing in other branches of sports is any better. Just that the UCI is doing such a lousy job at keeping up appearances. I mean, it is so obviously a farce. There is evidence lying all over the place showing that major league dopers are not being caught.
In other sports, say soccer, doping testing is probably much more of a farce, but at least there they manage to keep up appearances and manage to make it look as if nobody's doping.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
BotanyBay said:
The UCI is an enclosed, wholly-independent entity that people perceive to be a representative system that is accountable to them. And it's anything BUT that.

True.
Though I'd like to refine: I'm not saying that doping testing in other branches of sports is any better. Just that the UCI is doing such a lousy job at keeping up appearances. I mean, it is so plane for everybody to see that it's a farce. There is evidence lying all over the place showing that major league dopers are not being caught.
In other sports, say soccer, doping testing is probably much more of a farce, but at least there they manage to keep up appearances and manage to make it look as if nobody's doping
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Visit site
The pro sports leagues not joined at the hip with the IOC are not accountable to WADA, so they can mange the public perception 100%. The public thinks that they're rooting-out steroids and doping, but they're not. They've created a brilliant farce

The UCI has to deal with WADA. As soon as they're able to penetrate it and gain some control (they already have influence), most people will think the UCI is doing a fine job. Just wait long enough!

McQuaid is either going to succeed at managing WADA, or he'll break ranks with the IOC (and thus, WADA) when he feels that he doesn't need them for their media connections anymore. Once McQuaid learns to do deals with the world's TV networks by himself, the sport will get "very clean".
 
Oct 8, 2010
450
0
0
Visit site
sniper said:
Who, for crying out loud, is keeping up and running this ridiculously ineffective testing system?

On a daily basis, we hear riders spelling out how often they have been/are being tested.

Apparently it's a huge job provider, with testers traveling the world to retrieve out-of-competition urine and blood samples.
Would too many positives mean a loss of jobs?

Recall Landis, Jaksche, Kohl, they've all stressed how ineffective the system is. they've been tested without being caught, despite being maximally doped. In other words, we dispose of major evidence (also from the 90s) of how ineffective the testing is.

If it's so "ineffective" as you say, how come those guys got caught?
 
Nov 24, 2010
263
1
0
Visit site
MarkvW said:
U.C.I.
It is a French abbreviation.
Lance won the TdF in France.
McQuaid is NOT french!

Can you see the conspiracy now?
The truth is out there!

Follow the money . . .

Call me ignorant if you want to - I dont get the hint. I guess Botany is on the same wave length as you. Please extrapolate! cheers
 
Nov 9, 2010
295
0
0
Visit site
TERMINATOR said:
If it's so "ineffective" as you say, how come those guys got caught?

Landis, dont know how he tested positive for testosterone. Either he had testosterone put in with his blooddoping programme or the UCI planted a positive test to harm the ASO.

Jaksche never tested positive but was identified by the investigators in the Puerto case. As soon as he song the whistleblower song, the UCI put him on the blacklist.

Kohl was tested positive for CERA because he didnt knew they had made a test for it.
 
Aug 12, 2010
63
0
0
Visit site
UCI deserves a LITTLE credit

I appreciate the perspectives presented in this thread. The temptation with doping in cycling, if viewed in isolation, is sometimes "how could they?" The broader perspective is that given the opportunity, many people will seek a short cut or a competitive advantage, particularly if threat of conviction/punishment is low. Take it out of the sports realm: How many people cheat on taxes? Violate traffic laws? Massage the truth to get a promotion? Perceived or actual benefit is viewed higher than "playing by the rules."

The UCI, while sticking their heads in the sand at times, is miles ahead of the major North American sports and FIFA about doping. It doesn't excuse the "donations" and other questionable antics, but at least doping is acknowledged and discussed. I thought of Mr. Fuentes rumours/allegations about Spanish soccer success during his most recent legal troubles and wonder what will come of it. Most sports organizations aren't ready for the truth.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
pleyser said:
The UCI, while sticking their heads in the sand at times, is miles ahead of the major North American sports and FIFA about doping. It doesn't excuse the "donations" and other questionable antics, but at least doping is acknowledged and discussed. I thought of Mr. Fuentes rumours/allegations about Spanish soccer success during his most recent legal troubles and wonder what will come of it. Most sports organizations aren't ready for the truth.

TERMINATOR said:
If it's so "ineffective" as you say, how come those guys got caught?

biopass said:
Landis, dont know how he tested positive for testosterone. Either he had testosterone put in with his blooddoping programme or the UCI planted a positive test to harm the ASO.

Jaksche never tested positive but was identified by the investigators in the Puerto case. As soon as he song the whistleblower song, the UCI put him on the blacklist.

Kohl was tested positive for CERA because he didnt knew they had made a test for it.

But the question is, why is the UCI doing such a bad job in covering up doping practices?
Other sports agencies may stink several times harder than the UCI, but they don't smell as bad...
Although, admittedly, the FIFA and UEFA smell bad, but more in terms of financial corruption.
and as I said earlier, doping in soccer is probably as heavy as in cycling, if not heavier, but at least the corresponding authorities manage to keep up appearances and to keep the crowd ignorant and the media at distance (regarding dope that is). Why is the UCI failing so conspicuously in that respect? Or is that a good sign?
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Visit site
pleyser said:
I appreciate the perspectives presented in this thread. The temptation with doping in cycling, if viewed in isolation, is sometimes "how could they?" The broader perspective is that given the opportunity, many people will seek a short cut or a competitive advantage, particularly if threat of conviction/punishment is low. Take it out of the sports realm: How many people cheat on taxes? Violate traffic laws? Massage the truth to get a promotion? Perceived or actual benefit is viewed higher than "playing by the rules."

The UCI, while sticking their heads in the sand at times, is miles ahead of the major North American sports and FIFA about doping. It doesn't excuse the "donations" and other questionable antics, but at least doping is acknowledged and discussed. I thought of Mr. Fuentes rumours/allegations about Spanish soccer success during his most recent legal troubles and wonder what will come of it. Most sports organizations aren't ready for the truth.

There is a horrible dichotomy happening here. They are not only the police, but they are the drug lord as well. They are the enablers and the promoters of the drug problem. They know that doping has created champions who raise the profile of the sport, so they enable it. Meanwhile, to keep up appearances, they also "fight" it. So it becomes a sport of cronyism and politics.

The UCI does not stick it's head in the sand. They are charlatans.
 
Nov 9, 2010
295
0
0
Visit site
sniper said:
But the question is, why is the UCI doing such a bad job in covering up doping practices?
Other sports agencies may stink several times harder than the UCI, but they don't smell as bad...
Although, admittedly, the FIFA and UEFA smell bad, but more in terms of financial corruption.
and as I said earlier, doping in soccer is probably as heavy as in cycling, if not heavier, but at least the corresponding authorities manage to keep up appearances and to keep the crowd ignorant and the media at distance (regarding dope that is). Why is the UCI failing so conspicuously in that respect? Or is that a good sign?

Its really a conflict of interrest. Should the UCI promote the sport 100% or cleaning the sport 100%? The UCI is trying to do both. In doing so the UCI is failing to do both 100%.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Visit site
biopass said:
Its really a conflict of interrest. Should the UCI promote the sport 100% or cleaning the sport 100%? The UCI is trying to do both. In doing so the UCI is failing to do both 100%.

And this makes it ripe for extracting $ out of it for personal gain, as McQuaid does (and Verbruggen did).
 
Give it time...While other major professional organizations are more corrupt, it is because there is an order of magnitude greater amount of money there. There just isnt the events and cash flow involved in cycling for us to see the bs created in FIFA, North American, and other pro sports. We love the spectacle that cycling is, but while the roads are lined with spectators, they are not with money. When you view any other sporting event you can picture dollar signs above each head in the stadium. They spend money on tickets, merchandise, food, parking etc. From prior research, 6 day racing was very corrupt, because you created the same situation with a dollar sign above everyones head, and people looking to remove as many of those dollars in any way possible.

You nearly need to think of Pro sports as a circus. We sure have the clowns, the performers, and a variety of weird people. But there is a seedy underworld of criminals, grifters, con men and others that want to bring the show to you, and take all your money in the process. If you have a better circus, you draw more bucks, so bring on the bearded lady, the elephant man, the cancer survivor or the little guy struggling to be one of the great ones, and they all get exploited in the same way.
 

TRENDING THREADS