Will Chris Boardman be on the French list for taking EPO.

[mikehammer67]

3 days later and nothing shows up for epo

i doubt they were careful in 1998 but it won't prove anything

was he definitely tested in dublin?

 

[andy1234]

1 BOARDMAN Christopher GAN 100 06:12 54.194
2 OLANO MANZANO Abraham Banesto 70 0:04 53.617
3 JALABERT Laurent O.N.C.E. 50 0:05 53.475
4 JULICH Bobby Cofidis 40 ,, ,,
5 MOREAU Christophe Festina - Lotus 32 ,, ,,
6 ULLRICH Jan Team Telekom - ARD 26 ,, ,,
7 ZüLLE Alex Festina - Lotus 22 0:07 53.193
8 DUFAUX Laurent Festina - Lotus 18 0:09 52.913
9 TCHMIL Andrei Lotto - Mobistar 14 0:10 52.775
10 EKIMOV Viatcheslav US Postal Service 10 0:11 52.637
11 ANDREU Frankie US Postal Service 8 ,, ,,
12 LUIS CASERO MORENO Angel Vitalicio Seguros 6 ,, ,,
13 HEULOT Stephane Francaise des Jeux 4 ,, ,,
14 VIRENQUE Richard Festina - Lotus 2 0:12 52.500
15 JALABERT Nicolas Cofidis 1 ,, ,,
16 BROCHARD Laurent Festina - Lotus ,, ,,
17 KNAVEN Servais TVM - Farm Frites ,, ,,
18 CIPOLLINI Mario Saeco Macchine da Caffe' - Cannondale 0:13 52.364
19 DEKKER Erik Rabobank ProTeam ,, ,,

Not anyone on that list that has the ring of cleanliness about them. According to Walsh when does Andreau stop using ?

However, when were the samples taken during the race ? horsinabout has it very close in his post above. Boardman had satisfied his "professional" needs by the end of day 1. If the time to "failure to detect" was longer than that to the point of taking the sample that has been kept, then Boardman may well be clean, whilst possibly having used epo earlier.

The samples were taken the moment he came off the podium, on both days in yellow.

 

[Zweistein]

Graeme Obree had neither the professionalism, management set up or the wherewithal to dope - so this line of inquiry should be closed.

That isn't true. When he went pro, he was sacked on the same day his contract started because he refused to dope. He was a pro for 12 hours.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

To the bold, absolutely Doc, but I can only reference what I know.
If there are other names, then We can discuss them at the time.

To both yourself and PMCG - thats cool.

To the highlighted, I hope you are correct - but a word of warning.
From this article, it says of the 60 samples from 1998 were retested, 44 were pos, 9 were clean- but another 7 could not be interpreted. That is part of my reluctance on this issue - what happens if Boardman falls in to the latter category?

 

[ebandit]

bright spark

Even if he isn't on the lists, he could still very well be a doper.

genius.......................however consider that chris has always been vocal in

proclaiming that he avoided doping

and no-one has evidence otherwise.............no hearsay beyond.......he rode

during an era of cheating

Mark L

 

[horsinabout]

That isn't true. When he went pro, he was sacked on the same day his contract started because he refused to dope. He was a pro for 12 hours.

Yes and that is why I said he wasn't professional, lest you want to contradict me for the sack of a 12hr pro contact? He also wasn't the greatest technical bike handler, couldn't stay up right in the peloton. Ten pin bowling ring a bell

 

[mikehammer67]

genius.......................however consider that chris has always been vocal in

proclaiming that he avoided doping

and no-one has evidence otherwise.............no hearsay beyond.......he rode

during an era of cheating

Mark L

yes like paula radcliffe.............


doesn't prove anything

 

[spalco]

That is part of my reluctance on this issue - what happens if Boardman falls in to the latter category?

Then he has to be considered clean, I'd say.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but "inconclusive" in this context doesn't mean "suspicous", but just that the sample is too degraded for proper testing, no?
Obviously if the certainty of a sample to be EPO positive doesn't pass 1998 standards but would pass current standards, and just for this formality can't be considered "positive", the conclusions should be different.

 

[andy1234]

To both yourself and PMCG - thats cool.

To the highlighted, I hope you are correct - but a word of warning.
From this article, it says of the 60 samples from 1998 were retested, 44 were pos, 9 were clean- but another 7 could not be interpreted. That is part of my reluctance on this issue - what happens if Boardman falls in to the latter category?

If its the latter category, unfortunately it means no one is the wiser.

 

[ebandit]

doh!

yes like paula radcliffe.............


doesn't prove anything

so if paula is not on the list.......................she could still be a doper

................i'm shocked................another genius

Mark L

 

[mikehammer67]

so if paula is not on the list.......................she could still be a doper



Mark L

that is correct


it's hard to read your posts btw

 

[mikehammer67]

Then he has to be considered clean, I'd say.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but "inconclusive" in this context doesn't mean "suspicous", but just that the sample is too degraded for proper testing, no?
Obviously if the certainty of a sample to be EPO positive doesn't pass 1998 standards but would pass current standards, and just for this formality can't be considered "positive", the conclusions should be different.

there was a bit of controversy about the reliability of testing around that time

bernard lagat and marion jones had A samples come back negative after failing on the A
http://trackandfieldnews.com/index.php/display-article?arId=114

 

[pmcg76]

To both yourself and PMCG - thats cool.

To the highlighted, I hope you are correct - but a word of warning.
From this article, it says of the 60 samples from 1998 were retested, 44 were pos, 9 were clean- but another 7 could not be interpreted. That is part of my reluctance on this issue - what happens if Boardman falls in to the latter category?

Boardman should have two samples so it would really suck if both degraded to an untestable level. Will be interesting to see who the clean results are, just guessing here but I would say they came from later in the Tour after the raids etc. Chances are some riders dumped their EPO supplies and were riding as close to eau claire as possible.

I would say guys who were not contending for anything might not have risked being caught in possession.

 

[Zweistein]

Yes and that is why I said he wasn't professional, lest you want to contradict me for the sack of a 12hr pro contact? He also wasn't the greatest technical bike handler, couldn't stay up right in the peloton. Ten pin bowling ring a bell

Being a professional doesn't mean the same thing as doping. You are talking about someone that had the hour record. He knew how to train and take care of himself. Doping doesn't not equate being professional. It is kind of disgusting you think that if someone rode clean, they are being unprofessional.

Bike handling on track is a lot harder than you think. When Pharmstrong was talking about breaking the hour record, he went out to a track and invited select people from the media to watch a tryout. He could barely stay upright on the track. He never talked about the hour record after that.

To ride the bike that he put together and stay upright was hard. To break the hour record in that goofy position is amazing.

 

[spalco]

In the context of 1990s pro road racing, "professional" did mean exactly that: willing to do whatever it takes.

 

[BroDeal]

there was a bit of controversy about the reliability of testing around that time

bernard lagat and marion jones had A samples come back negative after failing on the A
http://trackandfieldnews.com/index.php/display-article?arId=114

That had nothing to do with reliability. If the A sample comes out borderline positive then the B sample may come out borderline negative.

 

[blackcat]

yes like paula radcliffe.............


doesn't prove anything

add me +1 to this post.

I have had enough of these chariots of fire gordonstoun brits.

you lost your empire in WWII folks. you can get over it with jeremy clarkson.

 

[mikehammer67]

add me +1 to this post.

I have had enough of these chariots of fire gordonstoun brits.

you lost your empire in WWII folks. you can get over it with jeremy clarkson.

ya she went on and on about anti doping

even forced the chicago marathon to test her before the race.......

wanted her samples refridgerated lol........

then for some strange reason she seemed to be mostly unavailable for ooc testing before big events cos she was away in alburquerque or iten

not sayin she was dopin or anythin............

 

[BroDeal]

ya she went on and on about anti doping

even forced the chicago marathon to test her before the race.......

wanted her samples refridgerated lol........

then for some strange reason she seemed to be mostly unavailable for ooc testing before big events cos she was away in alburquerque or iten

not sayin she was dopin or anythin............

I wonder if they refridgerated any stool samples.

 

[Zweistein]

In the context of 1990s pro road racing, "professional" did mean exactly that: willing to do whatever it takes.

No, being professional never meant doping. Doping is being unprofessional. It is in violation of conduct set governing agencies and the sponsors.

Mapei had great team result but the sponsor quit because it got tired of dealing with all the doping problems within the team.

Rabobank was a good team but the sponsor quit because of doping scandals.

Radioshack didn't renew its sponsorship due in part to doping revaluations.

Liberty Mutual retracted sponsorship after Saiz got caught in a blood doping scandal.

Kelme ended its sponsorship after involvement in Operacion Peurto was found.

T-Mobile discontinued sponsorship after doping scandals.


How is it doing the exact thing which will chase away the company that pays your check being professional? Doping chases away sponsors. Sponsors don't really care about results that much. Almost all the teams I listed had very good results and the sponsors couldn't get away from them fast enough and everyone on those teams even if they didn't dope was out on their ***.

 

[86TDFWinner]

And if the forum tries to turn Boardman into the next LeMond complete with halo, then I think it will be more solipsism than I can take.

It appears you have issues w/LeMond and him being clean? Do you have info on the contrary or something? Do you know something we don't? Please post it if you do. Why the hate for a true clean rider, curious.....explain?

 

[blackcat]

I wonder if they refridgerated any stool samples.

yeah, wim delvoye has some

 

[mikehammer67]

That had nothing to do with reliability. If the A sample comes out borderline positive then the B sample may come out borderline negative.

i don't think that was the reason


there was a famous study around 08 where 8 samples from LA were sent to 2 wada accredited labs

one lab reported all 8 samples as postive

the other lab reported all 8 as negative

 

[horsinabout]

Being a professional doesn't mean the same thing as doping.

Graeme Obree was a quintessential armature (not the same as unprofessional), it was only when he got offered a professional contact did he get offered dope - Fact.

It is kind of disgusting you think that if someone rode clean, they are being unprofessional.

Obree was a one off, he was unique and was a specialist pursuiter /TT and to turn pro he was expected to ride in bunch racing, that was not his main skill set. He did get offered doping when he turned pro - Fact.

Bike handling on track is a lot harder than you think. When Pharmstrong was talking about breaking the hour record, he went out to a track and invited select people from the media to watch a tryout. He could barely stay upright on the track. He never talked about the hour record after that.

Spare me the condescension, as you have no idea what knowledge I have on this subject or experience.

To ride the bike that he put together and stay upright was hard. To break the hour record in that goofy position is amazing.

Not arguing with this, but professional racing required Obree to do group racing, which Obree had little experience of and it is a fact that he had problems in the bunch - I think it is kind of disgusting that on more than one occasion you have condescended me on this forum and twisted what I say.

 

[horsinabout]

Being a professional doesn't mean the same thing as doping.

Graeme Obree was a quintessential armature (not the same as unprofessional), it was only when he got offered a professional contact did he get offered dope - Fact.

It is kind of disgusting you think that if someone rode clean, they are being unprofessional.

Obree was a one off, he was unique and was a specialist pursuiter /TT and to turn pro he was expected to ride in bunch racing, that was not his main skill set. He did get offered doping when he turned pro - Fact.

Bike handling on track is a lot harder than you think. When Pharmstrong was talking about breaking the hour record, he went out to a track and invited select people from the media to watch a tryout. He could barely stay upright on the track. He never talked about the hour record after that.

Spare me the condescension, as you have no idea what knowledge I have on this subject or experience.

To ride the bike that he put together and stay upright was hard. To break the hour record in that goofy position is amazing

Not arguing with this, but professional racing required Obree to do group racing, which Obree had little experience of and it is a fact that he had problems in the bunch - I think it is kind of disgusting that on more than one occasion you have condescended me on this forum and twisted what I say....