USADA-Armstrong Phase II

[Galic Ho]

Agreed.

Is there a single sport in existence that is run well, and clean-ish?

Surfing. But they do have recreational drug problems. No doping per se that I have ever heard of.

 

[Microchip]

2004 positives ? Did I miss something?

Yes, 2005 too. It was mentioned some posts ago. Facts are yet to come out.

 

[Microchip]

Originally Posted by the big ring
Agreed.

Is there a single sport in existence that is run well, and clean-ish?

Surfing. But they do have recreational drug problems. No doping per se that I have ever heard of.

Chess, I think?

 

[the big ring]

Surfing. But they do have recreational drug problems. No doping per se that I have ever heard of.

International too.

The reason I am asking is we need a template that works. The current cycling one is broken and IMO beyond repair. Need a replacement.

This is not just about the doping, it's also managing competition, qualification, remuneration, etc.

 

[the big ring]

Chess, I think?

Chess players dope

http://www.spiegel.de/international...-the-great-chess-doping-scandal-a-595819.html

No one could convince Ivanchuk to provide a small amount of urine for the test. And because refusal is treated as a positive test result, he is now considered guilty of doping and could be barred from professional chess for two years.

 

[jackwolf]

Chess players dope

http://www.spiegel.de/international...-the-great-chess-doping-scandal-a-595819.html

"Letters of protest were issued, and players are accusing bureaucrats in the world of championship chess of destroying the game, because, as they insist everyone should know, doping provides no benefits in chess."

 

[Microchip]

Chess players dope

http://www.spiegel.de/international...-the-great-chess-doping-scandal-a-595819.html

Well !!! There must be no sport in any form or fashion that is clean. Not even if they make Snakes & Ladders and Ludo an official sport !

 

[the big ring]

"Letters of protest were issued, and players are accusing bureaucrats in the world of championship chess of destroying the game, because, as they insist everyone should know, doping provides no benefits in chess."

As you provided a quote and no opinion, I am not sure if you agree or disagree, but it's natural players will say it provides no benefit.

Even JV says the ABP means you get hardly any benefit now.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2359

30.04.2005 – In an effort to become an official Olympic sport FIDE has instated drug testing for chess. But what exactly are the authorities testing for? What legal or illegal substance could a player take in order to enhance his or her performance in a game of chess? The Washington Times has some startling revelations.

and goes on to list the concentration drugs players could use to enhance their game.

If society is any indication, I'd say extrapolating to people who can make money from enhanced concentration is a given. And here's the societal take on this style of drug:

Still the general public is quite obsessed with enhancement drugs and therapies. According to the scientific journal Nature, Americans spend $1 billion a year on dietary supplements claiming to boost brain power alone. The demand exists, and medical science as well as the pharmaceutical industry is trying to keep up.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

The reality is, if there is money involved, there will be cheating.

A wheelchair bound curler was popped for drugs in the Winter Paralympics. What on earth could a wheelchair bound curler be taking? And why?

Probably weed.

I have two buddies in chairs, and they've both found that weed is the only thing that manages their spasms without turning them into narcotic junkies, or having to deal with the horrid side-effects of the pharma stuff that's legal.

Why the IOC tests for weed is beyond me, unless you look at the US drug laws as being a benchmark.

Until that was solidified, as a DS I'd encourage the team to smoke dope, rather than drink booze, if they wanted a "night off".

The system is broken.

 

[barn yard]

Why the IOC tests for weed is beyond me, unless you look at the US drug laws as being a benchmark.

i have raced on the road with people who smoked a lot of weed

it is not dissimilar to racing around drunk people, ie a bad idea

 

[LauraLyn]

Forget about who won during these years. They were all losers and deservedly so.

They all had the option of leaving. They stayed and doped. No winners.

Yes. This is the position I advocated before the decision against Lance was made by USADA.

The FFC statement last week was very good and should be followed: "A Dark Era". This would be a fitting legacy for Armstrong and his "7 tour wins".

 

[rhubroma]

Citing the same French TV source (France 2) as CN, la Gazzetta dello Sport reports today that journalist Nicolas Geay recieved exclusive info from Tygart that USADA has possession of 38 blood samples of Armstrong, collected from in competition and surprise random tests between October 16 2008 and April 30 2012, which were found positive for prohibitive substances.

USADA had the intention of using them (provided by the UCI) in the Armstrong case, had he gone to arbitration. It is not known whether or not the UCI has ever provided Armstrong blood samples in the period betweem 99-05, when the Texan had his Tour streak.

 

[python]

Citing the same French TV source (France 2) as CN, la Gazzetta dello Sport reports today that journalist Nicolas Geay recieved exclusive info from Tygart that USADA has possession of 38 blood samples of Armstrong, collected from in competition and surprise random tests between October 16 2008 and April 30 2012, which were found positive for prohibitive substances.

USADA had the intention of using them (provided by the UCI) in the Armstrong case, had he gone to arbitration. It is not known whether or not the UCI has ever provided Armstrong blood samples in the period betweem 99-05, when the Texan had his Tour streak.

to the bolded. this is hardly the news.

we had a lively discussion about it in this dedicated thread.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=17811

whether something new was found in those 38 samples would inded be very interesting but, as i mentioned many times, unfortunately blood samples collected for biopassport are discarded due to short shelf life.

only blood samples collected specifically for detecting other doping substaces (like hgh for ex) - not biopassport - can be stored for a long period of time b/c they deal with blood plasma that can be frozen...

 

[LauraLyn]

Citing the same French TV source (France 2) as CN, la Gazzetta dello Sport reports today that journalist Nicolas Geay recieved exclusive info from Tygart that USADA has possession of 38 blood samples of Armstrong, collected from in competition and surprise random tests between October 16 2008 and April 30 2012, which were found positive for prohibitive substances.

USADA had the intention of using them (provided by the UCI) in the Armstrong case, had he gone to arbitration. It is not known whether or not the UCI has ever provided Armstrong blood samples in the period between 99-05, when the Texan had his Tour streak.

Does this mean that Lance now has the record for the most positives of any athlete ever?

I truly cannot think of another athlete more deserving of this trophy than Lance.

 

[webvan]

This does beg the question how they were swept away in the first place if they are indeed real positives, not just "suspicious".

 

[LauraLyn]

This does beg the question how they were swept away in the first place if they are indeed real positives, not just "suspicious".

It also begs the question how the USADA got the samples and how they tested them.

 

[python]

again, it is unlikly anything was swept away even if it is sexy to contemplate so.

this thread
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=17811

provides answers.

 

[LauraLyn]

again, it is unlikely anything was swept away even if it is sexy to contemplate so.

this thread
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=17811

provides answers.

Python. The thread you started is excellent. However, it does not respond to Webvan's question and the current discussion in the media.

 

[rhubroma]

to the bolded. this is hardly the news.

we had a lively discussion about it in this dedicated thread.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=17811

whether something new was found in those 38 samples would inded be very interesting but, as i mentioned many times, unfortunately blood samples collected for biopassport are discarded due to short shelf life.

only blood samples collected specifically for detecting other doping substaces (like hgh for ex) - not biopassport - can be stored for a long period of time b/c they deal with blood plasma that can be frozen...

Well I was just reporting what I read in the paper today, as it was in connection to the recent CN article: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-usada-in-possession-of-positive-armstrong-samples

Now my question is, in light of the NY Times article from July you indicate, why is this being emphasized again now? Because the French source suggests that USADA is quite certain about the validity of their evidence? Of course in the aftermath of LA opting not to go to arbitration. Is this the big bomb, the hard physical proof, they have against him, the "smoking-gun" as they say?

 

[ManInFull]

This does beg the question how they were swept away in the first place if they are indeed real positives, not just "suspicious".

Yes, we are still dealing with a lot of unknowns. I assume that USADA followed the appropriate protocols for re-testing his samples. Why didn't the original testing uncover anything? Was it due to a new undetectable drug or was it part of a cover-up? Or was it an autogolous blood transfusion where plasticizers were detected?

 

[LauraLyn]

Well I was just reporting what I read in the paper today, as it was in connection to the recent CN article: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-usada-in-possession-of-positive-armstrong-samples

Now my question is, in light of the NY Times article from July you indicate, why is this being emphasized again now? Because the French source suggests that USADA is quite certain about the validity of their evidence? Of course in the aftermath of LA opting not to go to arbitration. Is this the big bomb, the hard physical proof, they have against him, the "smoking-gun" as they say?

My impression is that this is part of the USADA lining up its ducks. Lance came out with, what he thought, was a strong opening. He is increasingly being cornered into surrendering his kingship.

 

[LauraLyn]

Yes, we are still dealing with a lot of unknowns. I assume that USADA followed the appropriate protocols for re-testing his samples. Why didn't the original testing uncover anything? Was it due to a new undetectable drug or was it part of a cover-up? Or was it an autogolous blood transfusion where plasticizers were detected?

The use of "new testing methods." (I am not sure this is a full explanation.)

 

[D-Queued]

Too many Lance threads...

Here is an interesting piece.

Commentary: The curious intersection of Lance and Landis

The intertwined destinies are being examined.

Dave.

 

[Kennf1]

Too many Lance threads...

Here is an interesting piece.

Commentary: The curious intersection of Lance and Landis

The intertwined destinies are being examined.

Dave.

Just read that. $700k of the $1 million raised in the FFF came from big ticket donors, including four investors in Tailwind. Tom Weisel donated $50,000. Which means, as part of Floyd's restitution deal, that he has to actually pay money to Weasel and his cronnies?

 

[D-Queued]

Just read that. $700k of the $1 million raised in the FFF came from big ticket donors, including four investors in Tailwind. Tom Weisel donated $50,000. Which means, as part of Floyd's restitution deal, that he has to actually pay money to Weasel and his cronnies?

Good question. Sounded like he only has to pay back ~$300k.

Perhaps the big contributors are deemed 'sophisticated investors' or something like that.

Dave.