• 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!

When is a positive not a positive?

A Berkeleyan question for Clinicians: if a substance isn't yet banned, is it a positive test?

On Dopeology.org, a visitor expressed dissatisfaction with the listing for Pedro Delgado:

Dopeology visitor said:
Delgado did not test positive. Probenecid was not on the UCI list of banned substances [It was on the IOC list but the Tour's Rule 35 stated that UCI rules applied - L'arriviste] and therefore Delgado did not register a positive for any banned substances. It was a mistake to report it at that time and it's a mistake to do so now. In fairness to Delgado, I believe his name should be removed from this website.

The visitor is not wrong about the facts of the incident. So it's an interesting situation. Yet, when looking at both contemporary and current press articles that discuss the story, it's still always referred to as a positive test.

Thoughts? :)
 
Dec 21, 2010
513
0
0
Visit site
L'arriviste said:
A Berkeleyan question for Clinicians: if a substance isn't yet banned, is it a positive test?

On Dopeology.org, a visitor expressed dissatisfaction with the listing for Pedro Delgado:



The visitor is not wrong about the facts of the incident. So it's an interesting situation. Yet, when looking at both contemporary and current press articles that discuss the story, it's still always referred to as a positive test.

Thoughts? :)

I feel that in the interests of accuracy it should not be listed, as it was within the rules of the day.

You may wish to have some form of commentary section, and that it be mentioned there in the interests of historical reference.
 
Jul 4, 2011
1,899
0
0
Visit site
This was before the time I could recollect anything but it depends on when and where it was reported and if the UCI (or Tour organisers) conformed to a set standard such as WADA. If not, imo you could put him as a starred rider and mention why.
 
hrotha said:
I'd say he did definitely test positive for probenecid even if it couldn't be considered a doping offense at the time. Testing positive technically just means the named substance was found in your sample.

This. He did test postive for it. And you explain the details. By the way, he is also listed here: http://www.cycling4fans.de/index.php?id=4610

I haven't looked, but do you also have riders listed who might also fall in this category, like positive A sample, but negative B sample? I would include them too, for the same reasons.

Susan
 
Susan Westemeyer said:
This. He did test postive for it. And you explain the details. By the way, he is also listed here: http://www.cycling4fans.de/index.php?id=4610

I haven't looked, but do you also have riders listed who might also fall in this category, like positive A sample, but negative B sample? I would include them too, for the same reasons.

Susan

Yes, though there aren't many examples if I recall. Iban Mayo's case springs to mind but he sort of went A+, B- and finally B+. :)

Sean Yates is in there too. He tested positive in 1989 after winning at the Torhout-Werchter Classic but his other sample was clear, prompting suspicions of tampering.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Delgado tested positive but as always the UCI dragged its feet allowing the teams to find new means before implementing the newly banned substances to their UCI list.
 
He shouldn't have been 'positive' as the substance wasn't banned and they shouldn't have been testing for it. Just like Boonens cocaine 'positive' they should only test for what is banned.

Just because it was on an IOC list means nothing. Remember 1988 is when most of the 100m sprint went positive so hardly a good example.
 
Jul 25, 2009
1,072
0
0
Visit site
L'arriviste, I would just make it a bit clearer that his substance use wasn't against the rules (i.e. cheating). Something like............After considerable confusion over banned lists and jurisdictions (UCI vs. IOC - the UCI had not yet banned the substance), it was recognised that he had not breached the UCI's anti-doping regulations and he was allowed to continue without penalty.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
imo, considering the honourable premise you stated - a logical, in-opinionated presentation rooted in reliable public sources - the best way to handle delgado and any future controversial case (like susan-suggested a-positive, b-negative) is to use a separate definitions and explanations section where you could define terms...like

(i) 'official positive'= adverse analytical finding=failed both a-sample and b-sample

(ii) 'tested positive but'=
a) was not on the banned list at the time
b) failed only a-sample
c) acquitted by cas
etc

if this idea attracts your attention, i can volunteer a more formal write-up because current definitions also include 'atypical finding' which is also a form of positive.
 
What about people who were banned based solely on their confessions? Jaksche, I think also BAsso and Scarponi.

I looked up JJ and see he is there with a laundry list of products, but it is not clear to me from the site that he did not test positive for them.

You might want to consider adding a sentence or two of text for unusual cases. "Jaksche never tested positive, but was suspended after giving up a detailed confession when he was named in Operacion Puerto", or something like that.

And something similar with Delgado.

Susan
 
I don't know what you can and can't do when rendering the content.
My USD$ 0.02 is you need a way to display when a rider gets caught/goes free on a technicality and then explain the technicality.

There are a bunch of dodgy cases I'd include if you have the time. Paints a better picture of the UCI.
 
Thanks everybody for your input.

Here's what I decided to do:

With regard to Susan's views, I have added two incidents to mark the suspensions of Jaksche and Basso which should indeed have been there. On their respective pages, I hope the chronology of incidents reflects what happened with them.

I'm going to keep the Delgado record alive but reclassify it as an investigation because a decision was made based on representations made by his team about the discrepancy between the IOC and UCI rules and Rule 35 of the Tour's rulebook.
 
Apr 3, 2011
2,301
0
0
Visit site
EPO in ToB?

Should they allow EPO in the Tour of Beijing? No more complaints!

"During the competition, the day on which there was the least pollution we had 210 mg/m3 (of carbon dioxide) in the air. The maximum limit in Europe is 40 mg/m3. You really felt the lacking oxygen," one rider said.
 
L'arriviste said:
A Berkeleyan question for Clinicians: if a substance isn't yet banned, is it a positive test?

johannmuhlegg.jpg