Lance Armstrong and drugs

iainf72

Blazing Saddles wrote:

However, are we now to assume Team GB were on the pop, while the rest of the National squads rode on B+W, simply because of who won?

You know the rules. The French are always clean. Unless they live in Switzerland in which case they might be dirty. Except in 2000 because Vaughters said they were clean. And yeah, and that Sandy guy.

We all know who should've won...Don't we?

Who is supposed to win the Vuelta?

blazing_saddles

Here's an interesting comparison.
GB dominates track cycling, while competing against a relatively small number of nations and having a rigorous dope testing policy.
Result? Mutterings about being on the juice in certain areas of media.

Jamaica dominate the track sprinting, while competing against most of the World, including an experience USA squad, but having refused to sign up to out of competition testing.
Result? Exhalted as exceptional athletes; phenomenons.

Try posting something along this line on the average athletics forum, or even the BBC and see the response.

Its not hard to see why only cycling fans can see the ludicrous imbalance in the way sports are potrayed and perceived.
Yet who is living in the real World and who, in fantasy land?

Jez mon

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Here's an interesting comparison.
GB dominates track cycling, while competing against a relatively small number of nations and having a rigorous dope testing policy.
Result? Mutterings about being on the juice in certain areas of media.

Jamaica dominate the track sprinting, while competing against most of the World, including an experience USA squad, but having refused to sign up to out of competition testing.
Result? Exhalted as exceptional athletes; phenomenons.

Try posting something along this line on the average athletics forum, or even the BBC and see the response.

Its not hard to see why only cycling fans can see the ludicrous imbalance in the way sports are potrayed and perceived.
Yet who is living in the real World and who, in fantasy land?

Why on earth is this allowed. Does athletics want to clean up, at all. This is top level sport FFS, why on earth is it OK to not sign up to out of competition testing

mididoctors

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Here's an interesting comparison.
GB dominates track cycling, while competing against a relatively small number of nations and having a rigorous dope testing policy.
Result? Mutterings about being on the juice in certain areas of media.

Jamaica dominate the track sprinting, while competing against most of the World, including an experience USA squad, but having refused to sign up to out of competition testing.
Result? Exhalted as exceptional athletes; phenomenons.

Try posting something along this line on the average athletics forum, or even the BBC and see the response.

Its not hard to see why only cycling fans can see the ludicrous imbalance in the way sports are potrayed and perceived.
Yet who is living in the real World and who, in fantasy land?

is that true? thats absurd

blazing_saddles

Didn't even look far. Simply googled Jamaican athletics drugs testing.
First strory was from the Beeb. This is the relevant segment:-
"Clouds do still remain on the Jamaican horizon, however. Perhaps the biggest concern for outside observers is the lack of a fully functioning anti-doping body on the island.

First mooted in 2005, the Jamaican Anti-Doping Commission (Jadco) remains an organisation with more good intentions than testing kits. Repeated promises have been made to fast-track the necessary legislation and funds through parliament but three years later all that is clear is the island's sprinters are faster than its lawmakers.

Neither the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) nor the Jamaican authorities have been able to confirm to BBC Sport that Jadco is actually operating yet. The situation is further muddied by Jamaica's decision to opt out of the Wada-approved Caribbean Regional Anti-Doping Organisation (Rado).


The only organisation currently undertaking widespread testing in Jamaica is the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF)."

mididoctors

Blazing Saddles wrote:

The only organisation currently undertaking widespread testing in Jamaica is the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF)."[/i]

do the IAAF do any out of competition testing? they claim to AIUI

they claim to have done 4+ OOC test to bolts in 2007 for instance?

pdf of tested

is there a qualitative difference between IAAF testing designed to fill a gap where countries have no NADO or RADO and a in place NADO/RADO?

blazing_saddles

Well, there are some strange statisics out there. A source reported in the Washington post, is saying that Bolt (11) and Powell (13) have had a combined total of 24 IAAF tests, since January 2008! :shock:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/olympi ... _11_t.html

Some very supportive comments below the article.
Contrast that, with the 99 IAAF tests carried out, by year's end 2007, on ALL UK athletes.

http://www.uksport.gov.uk/assets/File/G ... 0tests.pdf

To be honest, I now don't know what to believe, other than they haven't signed up to the "local" program and appear to have no testing regime at all, in Jamaica.

Cumulonimbus

I dont think all those were done by the IAAF? 3 or 4 each have been done by the IOC? They arent all out of competition either, quite a few have been done in competition (from winning events?) Maybe British athletes are tested less because they win less? Also, i think the IAAF does more out of competition tests in nations that dont do out of competition tests themselves?

From the first article

'The IAAF spends $2 to $3 million annually on the program, Davies said, to ensure that athletes in nations such as Jamaica and Kenya that do not have national testing programs get tested frequently.'

aurelio_-_banned

A couple of apposite quotes:

As the Marion Jones saga proved conclusively, a cheating athlete is a compulsive liar. Confronted by the evidence and faced by a world of suspicion, they will look you in the eye and swear that they are clean. They are deeply dysfunctional people, immersed in a moral universe where cheating is validated by their peers and vindicated by the medals around their necks.

Valeriy Borchin, you can be sure, celebrated his medal without a shred of guilt, among peers who wouldn't even question how he did it. Physically they are supremely healthy human beings; morally they are sick to the core.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-s ... 57560.html

Even a six-year-old knows that once you tell a lie, you stick to it. You never admit the truth. Never. And when confronted with irrefutable evidence of your guilt, you dig your heels in further still - loudly denying reality until your accusers die of exasperation. It's a brilliant strategy that's kept the Bush administration going for years.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... ympics2008