What Dwain Chambers took

G man

I know it's athletics, but Dwain Chambers has spilled the beans on the full extent of his doping regimen.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/athletics/7403158.stm

DaveyL

More like Victor Conte has spilled the beans.

This is a disgrace. Lots of talented young chemists working in clandestine laboratories will lose their jobs because of this. Conte should have kept his mouth shut like Basso. Errr...

dirk_van_gently

Perhaps it would be easier to list what he didn't take :shock:

LangerDan

If it was Vino listing what he had taken, WADA would have a press release on the streets in, oh, about 30 seconds telling us we were all dirty, dirty boys and what would you expect from such a tainted sport anyway.

le_patron

DaveyL wrote:

More like Victor Conte has spilled the beans.

This is a disgrace. Lots of talented young chemists working in clandestine laboratories will lose their jobs because of this. Conte should have kept his mouth shut like Basso. Errr...

skavanagh.bikeradar

The key thing is the ability for athletes to miss tests and continue taking the cocktail of drugs with impunity. This is why the 'oh the dog ate my homework' defence of some athletes just doesn't wash with me. Christine Oghuru and supporters take note. Silly mistakes or not the assumption has to be that you were up to no good when you went to the wrong venue/forgot your phone/tripped over a badger etc etc.

Anyway, why worry? As Carl Lewis has already told the world only the talentless cheat. And Pat McQuaid is sure cycling has only a couple of teeny-tiny issues...................

What are the top 10 things the UCI or IAAF ought to do to change the culture and balance of reward vs penalty?

skavanagh.bikeradar

LangerDan is right by the way about WADA. Also Pat McQuaid would be on the wires telling everyone that the Tour of Russia might be 8 stages in 2010.

LangerDan

skavanagh.bikeradar wrote:

What are the top 10 things the UCI or IAAF ought to do to change the culture and balance of reward vs penalty?

Increase the cost of drugs and decrease athletes salaries / prize money. :evil: You're less likely to spend €50k on drugs if you can only make back €20K.

yorkshireraw

Ohurugu was an idiot, and she compounded her error by not seeming to understand why people might think there was something wrong, and that she might have been a bit more apologetic - instead she seemed to think she was almost being picked on and it was not her fault etc. All in all a sign of immaturity and lack of experience - in both life and the sport. Reading the details also suggests she didn't appreciate (and that of course is totally her fault) the consequences of missing the tests. However (and I'd be very dissapointed if I was proved wrong) I don't believe she was on anything, if she is / was I doubt it's to the depths that chambers was - Ohurugu is part of a small London based set-up, with no links to doctors or dodgy supplement companies, as far as I am aware. That of course doesnt excuse her (let's be kind) disorganisation. Let's remember in all this that the athletes don't know when the out of competition testers are going to show up.

One consequence of the Ohurugu case is that athletes have stopped giving their training venue as the declared place they will be for the 1 hour a day 5 days a week they have to state - given what can happen with having to change venues or whatever. One UK Middle distance guy sensibly stated he will be at home in bed between 5 and 6am every day. I think the system for updating the whereabouts declaration has also been improved a lot - it used to involve posting in paper forms which is ridiculous.
On a side note it's interesting that Premier league clubs (and maybe all league clubs) will ONLY allow their players to be tested at the training ground i.e. with club officials about, and the testers can't pull the player off the pitch - they have to wait until the player is made available to them. Of course even when the player has been told they are due to give a sample they may 'forget' after a few minutes and go off shopping (Rio!), whilst strangely making a phone call to a private clinic a couple of hours later for some reason - but that's another thread I'm sure!

Conte has made a good point about the 'whereabouts' system - bascially if you want to get on the gear you just claim you'll be in one place for a month, go somewhere else to do the 'cycle', as the chances of being randomly tested during that time are fairly low anyhow.

If we in the UK at least really want to ensure our athletes are clean then UKA (a less than humble organisation - although slowly improving under De Vos and Warner) need to take a look at David Brailsford and the cycling set up. They appear to be much more in control of the guys they are funding, get better results and haven't had the issues athletics has.

Final point - Chambers is a grade 1 tw4t (and obviously not the sharpest knife in the drawer). He claimed at first he thought the THG 'drops' were a nutritional supplement, then admitted he knew it was dodgy. Now with Conte's letter we can see the full extent of what went on - with the amount of injections / pills / cream he was getting chambers knew full well what the score was, either that or he thought he was on a heavy acupuncture regime!
It's interesting that in his first year (2002) of training in the US and being on the juice he performed quite well, but come 2003 he looked too big, too heavy and laboured. Michael Johnson stated as much in the BBC commentary at the time - maybe he knew something but couldnt come right out and say it. So ironically Chambers, who I saw run at 16 when he was already a big guy, may not have been gaining much, if any, advantage from his ridiculous cocktail of chemicals.

Apologies for the rambling post!

Monty Dog

Bizarrely, this whole doping ring thing only got exposed because of a fall-out between the coaches - UST&F didn't have a clue. It now transpires that virtually all successful US sprinters of the recent era were on the stuff - Olympic, World champions and record holders - but I still don't see the media howling in derision about a 'dirty, corrupt' sport like they do with cycling. I'm extremely cynical about soccer clubs and their insistence on 'officials' monitoring tests - smacks of the Michelle Ferarri & Dr Fuentes 'health check' rather than a genuine concern to stop doping. The likes of Marion Jones and others have never failed literally hundreds of tests - so the argument about 'not being positive' and 'being clean' are clearly spurious.

yorkshireraw

quite right - the Trevor Graham trial that's about to go down in the states could be the biggest thing to hit the sport (athletics) - even bigger than Ben Johnson. Those involved used to worry about losing a few quid and a couple of years of their careers, now it's become legal people are looking at jail time for federal offences, so are likely to start singing like mad to reduce their own punishments.

The whole 'shock horror' recently at the possible naughty antics of Mo Greene and his coach John Smith is hilarious given that Charlie Francis - coach to Ben Johnson - stated (I think in his book) that he learnt everything he knew about doping sprinters from John Smith. That was nearly 20 years ago!

Bringing it back to cycling I couldn't believe when I read in Cycling Weekly the other week how some guy was extoling the virtues of a training camp he attended in Italy and the great advice he got - the camp was held by one 'Dr Ferrari'! Not a mention of his sidelines! Not suggesting the guy in the article took anything other than training advice out of it, but if Cycling Weekly is publishing stuff that makes it look like dodgy doctors shoudn't be ostracised from the sport how can they (Cycling Weekly) then publish any editorial on how the sport should get itself in order with any credability?!

LangerDan

YorkshireRaw wrote:

It's interesting that in his first year (2002) of training in the US and being on the juice he performed quite well, but come 2003 he looked too big, too heavy and laboured. Michael Johnson stated as much in the BBC commentary at the time - maybe he knew something but couldnt come right out and say it.

TBH, I think that there are very few top level athletes in any sport whose doping is unknown to their peers. The problem is that there is no effective way to get this information back to the sporting or testing bodies, a "whistle-blowers charter" if you will.

Last year, as part of a TV documentary over here, the case of Michelle Smith was discussed. It was a litany of missed tests, interference in doping controls by her husband, obstruction of testers, incompetence by FINA and the icing on the cake was a former international swimmer turned TV pundit admitting that prior to the Atlanta Olympics he was fully aware she was doping and even challenged her on the matter privately.
I'd lay a fairly large bet that not one person contacted any of the responsible bodies

Mombee

As I mentioned in the CakeStop thread on this...

I know it's not good that (some) sports 'stars' take performance enhancing drugs, but the real and devastating implication in this letter that US Anti-Doping Assoc (USADA) actively slowed their test rates in the lead up to this summer's Olympics to reduce the chances of catching their athletes..

If that proves to be accurate, then that's a bigger indictment of drugs at a national level than a few scabby athletes.

LangerDan

Mombee wrote:

As I mentioned in the CakeStop thread on this...

I know it's not good that (some) sports 'stars' take performance enhancing drugs, but the real and devastating implication in this letter that US Anti-Doping Assoc (USADA) actively slowed their test rates in the lead up to this summer's Olympics to reduce the chances of catching their athletes..

If that proves to be accurate, then that's a bigger indictment of drugs at a national level than a few scabby athletes.

The testing stats are here: http://www.usantidoping.org/what/stats/quarterly.aspx

TBH, there may be a variety or reasons for this. The total number of tests is fairly static for the past few years - may be that their budget only allows ~ 7800 tests. Given that they had a far higher number of tests earlier in the year, perhaps the cash simply ran out.
Or maybe the peak time for taking PEDs on an OOC basis is actually Q1 of the year. Conte says he advised USADA of the need to increase Q4 testing in 2003. He doesn't note if this was after he was nabbed or while he was still in the manufacturing business - completely different incentives for directing the testing to particular time slots.

You'd really need to see the test numbers for Q1 and Q2 this year to see whether USADA are really backing off.

z000m

Carl Lewis has already told the world: "only the talentless cheat" and this from a guy who tested positive for pseudoephedrine, ephedrine and phenylpropanolamine.

flattythehurdler

LangerDan wrote:

skavanagh.bikeradar wrote:

What are the top 10 things the UCI or IAAF ought to do to change the culture and balance of reward vs penalty?

Increase the cost of drugs and decrease athletes salaries / prize money. :evil: You're less likely to spend €50k on drugs if you can only make back €20K.

Unless you also manage the Northern Rock.

andy_wrx

The thing that strikes me as interesting is that Chambers had to get Conte to write him a letter to give to the authorities, explaining what he was 'on'.

Chambers isn't that bright, let's face it - he knew he was on 'stuff' and it would make him faster, but clearly didn't knowwhat it was, how it worked, what the specific effects were, dosages and timings, etc. He relied on someone else working that out for him then took what he was told to. He knew he was doping but hadn't much clue what he was doing.

So him spilling the beans to the authorities about what he was 'on' wasn't going to get very far - he could probably only give illuminating facts like "I injected the stuff in the brown bottle on Mondays and Wednesdays, took the pink pill on Thursdays" etc.
Presumably Conte didn't give the stuff to him with the manufacturer's labels on the bottles and with those printed sheets you get with prescription drugs (like the one for paracetamol saying it may give you side-effects like headaches... ).

The same will be true of most other athletes, cyclists, swimmers, footballers (especially footballers ! LOL) - they're not, with exceptions, all that bright, they've not got post-doctoral qualifications in sports physiology/pharmacology.

I bet there's a lot of rumours and rough knowledge passed around in dressing rooms as to what to take, when, what dosage, but that's pretty unscientific dabbling.
Some of the team soigneurs and ex-rider DS's will have a rough idea too, but again perhaps not that scientific.

It's the 'specialist' doctors like Ferrari, Fuentes et al who re producing these very specific doping plans who need rooting-out.
Chambers needs to cough who it was who was 'helping' him in this way as well as Conte.

Basso does (as well as Fuentes), and the other caught or admitted dopers.

yorkshireraw

Anyinfo from Chambers will of course shed some light on the doping 'industry' if you like, but to be honest a this idea of 'naming names' is all a bit of PR. Unless there's more to come out it's pretty well documented that Chambers left the UK in the Winter of 2001/02 to head to the US to train under Remi Korchemy (excuse spelling) the Russian coach of 72 Olympic double sprint champ Valeri Borsov. Its there he hooked up with Conte as well.
I suppose there may have been an intermeidary supplier back in the UK for when Chambers was back here but come the summer, as indicated by Conte, most sprinters would only be using stimulants etc. rather than the rounds of steroids.

Jamey

Why don't they just have two different Olympics - one for people who aren't on drugs and one for people who are.

Then the purists can watch the clean olympics and the rest of us can have a look at just how fast a human can go.

iainf72

Jamey wrote:

Why don't they just have two different Olympics - one for people who aren't on drugs and one for people who are.

Then the purists can watch the clean olympics and the rest of us can have a look at just how fast a human can go.

Because the people in the "clean" Olympics will take drugs to win.

Jamey

In that case, just have a druggie olympics.

z000m

Jamey wrote:

In that case, just have a druggie olympics.

we already do

GeorgeShaw

Jamey wrote:

In that case, just have a druggie olympics.

This is a much-repeated idea. But the problem is that the winners will be some combination of the the rich, the ones with the best doctors, and those who adapt best to their drug regime. This is already partially the case, as the rich countries have the best facilities, but I kind of like the idea that Africans have the chance to beat the pants off the US and Europe some of the time.

Oh, and more people will die ...

Steveen

Anyone looked at the drug test stats for Rugby?

Jamey

GeorgeShaw wrote:

This is a much-repeated idea.

Really? Damn, I thought I was onto something original there.

Kléber

As said, Chambers just didn't know what he was taking. EPO for example, increases your chances of cancer. Same of human growth hormone. Taking lots of these substances in what amount to overdoses for normal people means you're risking your health, if you understand the risks! Most athletes just don't know the risks and their medical staff are happy to sell them illicit drugs for fat profits.

What's also interesting is that he was taking so many things as masking agents. Makes you think about all those positive testosterone tests, they could just be a sign of more sinister doping.

afx237vi

GeorgeShaw wrote:

Jamey wrote:

In that case, just have a druggie olympics.

This is a much-repeated idea. But the problem is that the winners will be some combination of the the rich, the ones with the best doctors, and those who adapt best to their drug regime. This is already partially the case, as the rich countries have the best facilities, but I kind of like the idea that Africans have the chance to beat the pants off the US and Europe some of the time.

Oh, and more people will die ...

Then make sure you watch the long distance running events in Beijing...

andy_wrx

Watch all the events in Beijing.

I reckon the Chinese will win 50% of the medals.

Due to nothing more than having the home crown behind them, of course :twisted:

Peakraider

LangerDan wrote:

If it was Vino listing what he had taken, WADA would have a press release on the streets in, oh, about 30 seconds telling us we were all dirty, dirty boys and what would you expect from such a tainted sport anyway.

Yeah, cycling gets such a bad press. It's all WADA and the journalists' fault.

Peakraider

Monty Dog wrote:

I'm extremely cynical about soccer clubs and their insistence on 'officials' monitoring tests - smacks of the Michelle Ferarri & Dr Fuentes 'health check' rather than a genuine concern to stop doping. .

Absolutely. From Chelsea's "blood spinning" to Rio...

It's a bit like US baseball, where the players unions had to be informed a month ahead of any test!

forearms Van Petegem

if you think the UK track cycling program has clean riders you have your head in the sand.

There are some clean riders, Wiggins in particular, even tho his ol man was known to do some stuff on the 6's circuit. Some of the younger guys in the road and track program hopefully are clean.

But lets be real...

YorkshireRaw wrote:

Ohurugu was an idiot, and she compounded her error by not seeming to understand why people might think there was something wrong, and that she might have been a bit more apologetic - instead she seemed to think she was almost being picked on and it was not her fault etc. All in all a sign of immaturity and lack of experience - in both life and the sport. Reading the details also suggests she didn't appreciate (and that of course is totally her fault) the consequences of missing the tests. However (and I'd be very dissapointed if I was proved wrong) I don't believe she was on anything, if she is / was I doubt it's to the depths that chambers was - Ohurugu is part of a small London based set-up, with no links to doctors or dodgy supplement companies, as far as I am aware. That of course doesnt excuse her (let's be kind) disorganisation. Let's remember in all this that the athletes don't know when the out of competition testers are going to show up.

One consequence of the Ohurugu case is that athletes have stopped giving their training venue as the declared place they will be for the 1 hour a day 5 days a week they have to state - given what can happen with having to change venues or whatever. One UK Middle distance guy sensibly stated he will be at home in bed between 5 and 6am every day. I think the system for updating the whereabouts declaration has also been improved a lot - it used to involve posting in paper forms which is ridiculous.
On a side note it's interesting that Premier league clubs (and maybe all league clubs) will ONLY allow their players to be tested at the training ground i.e. with club officials about, and the testers can't pull the player off the pitch - they have to wait until the player is made available to them. Of course even when the player has been told they are due to give a sample they may 'forget' after a few minutes and go off shopping (Rio!), whilst strangely making a phone call to a private clinic a couple of hours later for some reason - but that's another thread I'm sure!

Conte has made a good point about the 'whereabouts' system - bascially if you want to get on the gear you just claim you'll be in one place for a month, go somewhere else to do the 'cycle', as the chances of being randomly tested during that time are fairly low anyhow.

If we in the UK at least really want to ensure our athletes are clean then UKA (a less than humble organisation - although slowly improving under De Vos and Warner) need to take a look at David Brailsford and the cycling set up. They appear to be much more in control of the guys they are funding, get better results and haven't had the issues athletics has.

Final point - Chambers is a grade 1 tw4t (and obviously not the sharpest knife in the drawer). He claimed at first he thought the THG 'drops' were a nutritional supplement, then admitted he knew it was dodgy. Now with Conte's letter we can see the full extent of what went on - with the amount of injections / pills / cream he was getting chambers knew full well what the score was, either that or he thought he was on a heavy acupuncture regime!
It's interesting that in his first year (2002) of training in the US and being on the juice he performed quite well, but come 2003 he looked too big, too heavy and laboured. Michael Johnson stated as much in the BBC commentary at the time - maybe he knew something but couldnt come right out and say it. So ironically Chambers, who I saw run at 16 when he was already a big guy, may not have been gaining much, if any, advantage from his ridiculous cocktail of chemicals.

Apologies for the rambling post!