When did doping become against the rules

[ultimobici]

I've had a look online on several occasions but can't find a definitive answer.

As far as I can tell the death of Simpson was the straw that broke the camel's back in cycling and meant that riders' objections to testing were undermined. But in Coppi's day it seems that they were not against the rules. Certainly in the 30's the TdF explicitly stated that it was up to the rider to provide his own doping products.

So when did doping become illegal as opposed to being detectable.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I've had a look online on several occasions but can't find a definitive answer.

As far as I can tell the death of Simpson was the straw that broke the camel's back in cycling and meant that riders' objections to testing were undermined. But in Coppi's day it seems that they were not against the rules. Certainly in the 30's the TdF explicitly stated that it was up to the rider to provide his own doping products.

So when did doping become illegal as opposed to being detectable.

Doping was first banned in 1928 by the IAAF.

It wasn't until 1965 that testing was first done in cycling and it was not until 1966 that testing happened at the Tour and was approved by the UCI.
The IOC then banned doping in 1967.

It wasn't Simpsons death that prompted testing - another rider called Knud Enemark Jensen collapsed in the TTT during the 1960 Olympics that put doping in the spotlight.

 

[brianf7]

In the 1960's it was a case of if you need a pill then take it but doping as we see it now is much more complex.

The big issues in 1960's was that riders were going to the local vet and using horse steroids that is what killed many of them. up untill 1990's we could go into a old chemist who made up their own scripts and ask for something to make you go faster God only knows what was in it but sometimes it worked.

Them cold mornings in UK 6.00am start to a time trial you could smell the cough mixture as strong as the wintergreen.

Sanctions came in late 1969 to 1973 but only at the top level,

 

[spalco]

Hm, I saw a video on youtube some time ago (can't find it anymore) that discussed doping in cycling, showing for example one cyclist who was so high he literally rode so hard until he dropped off the bike; I could have sworn that was older than 1970-ish.

 

[ultimobici]

Doping was first banned in 1928 by the IAAF.

It wasn't until 1965 that testing was first done in cycling and it was not until 1966 that testing happened at the Tour and was approved by the UCI.
The IOC then banned doping in 1967.

It wasn't Simpsons death that prompted testing - another rider called Knud Enemark Jensen collapsed in the TTT during the 1960 Olympics that put doping in the spotlight.

Didn't mean Simpson's death prompted testing, rather that it made it impossible for the riders to resist testing in its wake.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Didn't mean Simpson's death prompted testing, rather that it made it impossible for the riders to resist testing in its wake.

As is often the way - the real catalyst for change came from outside sports.

In 1962 a motion by the Polish Federation to introduce testing was rejected by the UCI.

In 1963 the French Government drew up doping legislation (coming in to effect 1965) and as other countries were also considering legislation this forced the hand of the UCI and ultimately the IOC to enact their own legislation.

 

[Fester]

Which countries have anti-doping legislation and when did that start?

I am only aware of Spain and Italy in the wake of various scandals legislating against it.

I think if doping were classified as a fiscal crime, we would see police control, control that is by far the most effective. It would also dissolve the worrying symbiosis between doping and anti-doping. WADA and all those jobs owe their existence to doping, I wouldn't know if they are complicit, or if they are genuinely interested in eradicating it.

 

[Polish]

can take about an hour on the tower of power...

In 1962 a motion by the Polish Federation to introduce testing was rejected by the UCI.
.

To be fair to the UCI, the Polish motion was rejected on procedural grounds.

The motion was unclear on how many testers it took to hold a paper cup

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

to be fair to the uci, the polish motion was rejected on procedural grounds.

The motion was unclear on how many testers it took to hold a paper cup

lmfao!!!!!

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Which countries have anti-doping legislation and when did that start?

I am only aware of Spain and Italy in the wake of various scandals legislating against it.

I think if doping were classified as a fiscal crime, we would see police control, control that is by far the most effective. It would also dissolve the worrying symbiosis between doping and anti-doping. WADA and all those jobs owe their existence to doping, I wouldn't know if they are complicit, or if they are genuinely interested in eradicating it.

Here is a WADA link to National Legislation from some countries like Denmark, Germany, Holland, Sweden, UK.

Not sure what you mean by the blue - WADA is a separate entity, it is not for profit, has a budget of just $28 million and relies on 50/50 funding from the Olympic Movement and contributing Governments .

State legislation can certainly be very effective - but unless there is uniform legislation throughout all countries WADA will retain an important role.

 

[BrindSurch]

as if they didnt ban doping riders would be popping so many pills it would be like a freak show riding at 50km/hr every stage

 

[Fester]

Here is a WADA link to National Legislation from some countries like Denmark, Germany, Holland, Sweden, UK.

Not sure what you mean by the blue - WADA is a separate entity, it is not for profit, has a budget of just $28 million and relies on 50/50 funding from the Olympic Movement and contributing Governments .

State legislation can certainly be very effective - but unless there is uniform legislation throughout all countries WADA will retain an important role.

I mean that anti-doping is itself an industry, these test cost huge amounts, event the urine cups, stuff for the blood is manufactured by someone making a lot of money. The tests themselves. Can I set up an organisation and bid to do the dope control at an event?

In terms of WADA there are plenty of NGO's where people profit, look at the IOC! I imagine the contracts with the labs, bribery by teams and athletes, etc, to allow a wide margin for corruption.

Thanks for that link by the way. I didn't know the info was all in one place.