Kohl test positive for CERA

Kléber

Retrospective tests will work. The samples just need to be stored under a proper protocol and with rider consent, so there can be no cop outs.

Eurostar

Jeff Jones wrote:

From an entertainment point of view - these riders are professionals, after all - then it shouldn't matter. We don't impose anti-doping laws on musicians do we?

Oh dear - it's rather dismaying to hear that this view is held by any of your team. I could understand it if the drugs had the same effect on all the riders, but we know that's not true; Zabel couldn't stomach themm. And there've also been some early deaths blamed on EPO abuse - hard to reconcile that with entertainment, unless you also think that brain-damage in boxing is best swept under the carpet.

mididoctors

Jeff Jones wrote:

Patrick1.0 wrote:

Right. I think the simplest truth is that we - as cyclists and/or cycling fans - would all (the majority and ones that matter) love to see the total eradication of peds so that everybody has an equal chance to compete and so that we can see genuine winners rather than those with the best chemical enhancement.

It's not that clear cut. For example, there are differing opinions across our editorial team, all with valid arguments.

I have argued both sides: from a sporting point of view and as a competitor myself, then yes I'd like to see cheating via drugs (and anything else) eliminated. Otherwise you don't know how valid the result is.

From an entertainment point of view - these riders are professionals, after all - then it shouldn't matter. We don't impose anti-doping laws on musicians do we?

That said, I would still like to see clean sport because right now it's a confusing mess. And 'we' seem to have crossed the line towards anti-doping and it doesn't seem likely that we'll retrace our steps. Other sports are starting to face this too.

I do think that the tests are working, although it is an arms race. I'd hate it to get to a point where gene doping is de rigeur, because then I will lose all interest.

OTOH, Nicole Cooke rocks. She is a genuine inspiration to me.

I curious as to what a clean tour looks like both from a performance and tactical POV.

dodge1302

Jeff Jones wrote:

OTOH, Nicole Cooke rocks. She is a genuine inspiration to me.

Totally agree with this point. I think we can debate this stuff till we're blue in the face, so in my mind I've stopped looking at the European professionals. I've heard too much from some of our guys who went over to Belgium and Italy...it's in their culture and so it will take years and years (maybe even decades) to eradicate the inherent doping practice.

In my mind, we should all start to focus on our UK riders who I think are proving that success can come clean, Nicole, Bradley, Cav and Gerraint. And our domestic scene which doesn't get enough attention - just look at Russell Downing - what a rider - did an amazing job at the Worlds and IMHO doesn't get enough plaudits.

Perhaps we should all start looking to this until such time (if ever) the rest of the World decides to clean up their act? At least this way we can keep some faith in the sport we all love.

andyp

Is it that simple? All the Brits must be clean whereas all those pesky foreigners are cheats? :roll:

andyrac

As someone who has started following Cycling again, I really enjoyed Le Tour - particularly the Alpe D' Huez stage which I took a day off work to watch. With the enthusiasm to catch cheats I honestly thought there was a sea change in the sport - as Ricco/Duenas/Piepoli had been caught during the Tour. Well maybe not, I seriously hope Sastre/ Cancellara are not any of them - they've become heros of mine.
On another matter - at least Cycling is doing something about it - other sports and journalists 'tut-tut' at the sport - yet I won' have other sports are cleaner. No way. You really telling me that in England there are 92 pro -football clubs and every player is clean?? Operacion Puerto was telling for me - I wonder why it was closed?? Other sports involved but with the power/influence to sweep under the carpet??

dodge1302

andyp wrote:

Is it that simple? All the Brits must be clean whereas all those pesky foreigners are cheats? :roll:

I don't think I actually said that. I do understand your point though and apologise if that was the way it comes across.

However, I choose, perhaps naively, to believe that those who have been brought through the British Cycling system have as good a chance as any of being clean simply because of the environment that is provided for them. Nurturing and implanting good morals and sporting fairness early on is the only way forward. Not a guarantee but what is?

There are not many elite youth cycling programmes such as ours where the national body nurtures them through to turning professional and I think this is more of what is needed on a global scale.

The problem IMO often seems to stem from money and of course the link to significant amount of sponsorship from large corporations. It must come down ultimately to greed, whether for money or for glory.

Any training of the riders with respect to staying clean must surely start no later than early teens, otherwise it will often be too late. Just my opinion. It is much harder to influence these rider's perspectives once older and once into the actual commercial world of professional riding.

Having read the biography of Marco Pantani, for instance, it is clear that he, and others like him, were exposed to money and sponsorship from an early age - surely this must be part of the problem? The focus needs to be more on the sport and competition and stamped into the riders before money and greed can influence.

Unfortunately scaring riders and increasing the risk of being caught will rarely result in a decrease in actual doping. Surely, and sadly, it is the same as crime. For example, does the risk of a death penalty actually reduce the number of crimes punishable by death? I'm not sure it does...an extreme example, but one worth thinking about. Where money is involved - people take risks. It does, however, depend on their values taught from an early age - not always but often.

SpaceJunk

My biggest concern with all this CERA stuff is who is getting caught. Last year, it appeared as if it was the older brigade that was getting caught. I think a lot of us thought (or maybe just hoped), that the youngsters were cycling's future.

This whole episode just highlights that as long as riders believe they could get away with cheating, they will do so - regardless of age.

In retrospect, the 2008 TdF is no better than the previous two editions. One could even argue that the sport has been more damaged by these doping violations.

With the world in economic turmoil, I'm amazed that any enterprise would even want to invest money in this sport.

Alex_Simmons/RST

dodge1302 wrote:

... in my mind I've stopped looking at the European professionals. I've heard too much from some of our guys who went over to Belgium and Italy...it's in their culture and so it will take years and years (maybe even decades) to eradicate the inherent doping practice.

I suppose David Millar and Tom Simpson are/were Europeans.

jimmythecuckoo

Well I am going out to buy a mountain bike on Saturday after selling two road bikes. I hope it is cleaner off road.

dodge1302

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

dodge1302 wrote:

... in my mind I've stopped looking at the European professionals. I've heard too much from some of our guys who went over to Belgium and Italy...it's in their culture and so it will take years and years (maybe even decades) to eradicate the inherent doping practice.

I suppose David Millar and Tom Simpson are/were Europeans.

Ha ha...very good. I didn't say that! They went over there and decided to do as many others were doing. I'm not saying that no British riders have ever doped. Just that many of the European countries have doping as part of their culture (is that incorrect?).

Many riders, British or foreign (European included) choose to dope or not to dope. But if the system is already in place then it is "easier" to take advantage. It is also easier to jusify in their own mind if it is "part of the culture".

I believe the French have dealt with this recently as have the Australians and now us, that is implanting the morale against doping at an early age. That is all I am saying. Time for the other countries to do likewise. It will take years to come through but better to realise that we need to do it and take action now.

Punishment and tests will only take us part of the way, IMHO.

A riders nationality is neither here nor there, but the environment they are brought up in (sporting wise) is very important. Were David Millar or Tom Simpson nurtured in such a way?

I'll probably leave it there...

Jeff Jones

Eurostar wrote:

Jeff Jones wrote:

From an entertainment point of view - these riders are professionals, after all - then it shouldn't matter. We don't impose anti-doping laws on musicians do we?

Oh dear - it's rather dismaying to hear that this view is held by any of your team. I could understand it if the drugs had the same effect on all the riders, but we know that's not true; Zabel couldn't stomach themm. And there've also been some early deaths blamed on EPO abuse - hard to reconcile that with entertainment, unless you also think that brain-damage in boxing is best swept under the carpet.

I'm just pointing out that it's not a black and white issue.

I'd prefer to see doping minimised in cycling. It's cheating and it muddies the waters as far as results are concerned. I don't like reporting on riders dying but in the end it's their choice to pursue glory and money at the cost of their health.

My colleague argues that wars on drugs never work and that it would be better to let them take anything and approach it from a harm reduction point of view, ie have team doctors stop riders from doing themselves too much damage, rather than have them experiment on their own and dying. This is pretty much what has happened until fairly recently.

I disagree with him because I think the team doctors would get in on the arms race and follow the hypocritic oath, rather than the other one. There are plenty of unethical doctors out there.

Bottom line: we don't agree, but there's nothing wrong with that. We both still love riding bikes.

SpaceJunk

I've learnt that doping doesn't discriminate. It doesn't matter how old you are, where you are from, who you ride for, what discipline you ride, what preventive education you've had.

Dopers are cheats. These dopers decided themselves to dope.

The Australian Track Cycling Programme, from which the GB team has based their model on is a good example.

Only recently, we in Australia had the 'Mark French affair' - someone no well versed by Cycling Australia about the perils of doping.

Britain's cycling body can only do so much. If someone chooses to dope, they will dope.

dodge1302

SpaceJunk wrote:

I've learnt that doping doesn't discriminate. It doesn't matter how old you are, where you are from, who you ride for, what discipline you ride, what preventive education you've had.

Dopers are cheats. These dopers decided themselves to dope.

The Australian Track Cycling Programme, from which the GB team has based their model on is a good example.

Only recently, we in Australia had the 'Mark French affair' - someone no well versed by Cycling Australia about the perils of doping.

Britain's cycling body can only do so much. If someone chooses to dope, they will dope.

Absolutely agree with you! But surely it must help it some way?

I think we all know that we'll never 100% eradicate doping, but we still need to try, both in terms of education and testing/punishment, both need to occur.

Tom Butcher

I admit I think our domestic racing is probably cleaner than the equivalent level in, say, Italy. I base that on what people have told me and what I've read - UK riders who have gone over there and been surprised at what has gone on at quite a low level. Whether that means UK riders who reach the pro peloton are cleaner than Italian pros - well history suggests maybe not.

As for whether we should tolerate it - if it weren't for the health risks I'd say there is an argument for that. We can't have young riders dying because their blood is too thick or developing long term risks with their health as the price of being a pro though.

Kléber

Jeff Jones wrote:

I think the team doctors would get in on the arms race and follow the hypocritic oath, rather than the other one. There are plenty of unethical doctors out there.

Exactly. And even if the UCI allocated saintly doctors to the teams then riders would visit the shady doctors.

After all, this is exactly what happened when institutionalised team doping was exposed after the 1998 Festina scandal, riders could not use their team doctor for EPO, they outsourced the role to the likes of Michele Ferrari and Eufamio Fuentes.

There are still so many simple solutions to tackling doping but the authorities aren't implementing them.

SpaceJunk

I agree dodge1302. Everything possible must be done to eradicate doping, and to some degree I believe these programmes must help.

But despite all of this, I think cyclists can quickly 'forget' and be influenced by peer pressure. It only takes one doper to influence another to go to the 'dark side'.

Speculation here: but I can imagine Ricco talking to Piepoli, Ricco looks up to Piepoli and then you have two dopers.

No coincidence that Kohl and Schumacher were roomies. But the question is, did one become a doper after becoming a room mate of the other, or were they roomies because they both doped?

Without knowing all the facts about Frank Schleck, one could also assume that perhaps he looked up to Basso, who introduced him to a certain gyno.

Doping may be on the decrease, but I think there will always be a small % that cheat, as opposed to just a couple random riders here and there.

Just a fact of life I guess.

iainf72

SpaceJunk wrote:

No coincidence that Kohl and Schumacher were roomies. But the question is, did one become a doper after becoming a room mate of the other, or were they roomies because they both doped?

Without knowing all the facts about Frank Schleck, one could also assume that perhaps he looked up to Basso, who introduced him to a certain gyno.

Both Kohl and Schumacher have ridden for T-Mobile / Telekom in their careers so the rot probably set in early.

Frank would've been introduced to Fuentes by Riis -Let's not fool ourselves.

SpaceJunk

iainf72 wrote:

SpaceJunk wrote:

No coincidence that Kohl and Schumacher were roomies. But the question is, did one become a doper after becoming a room mate of the other, or were they roomies because they both doped?

Without knowing all the facts about Frank Schleck, one could also assume that perhaps he looked up to Basso, who introduced him to a certain gyno.

Both Kohl and Schumacher have ridden for T-Mobile / Telekom in their careers so the rot probably set in early.

Frank would've been introduced to Fuentes by Riis -Let's not fool ourselves.

You cynic iainf72

GroupOfOne MkII

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Well I am going out to buy a mountain bike on Saturday after selling two road bikes. I hope it is cleaner off road.

I wouldn't get your hopes up! Rasmussen, Meirhaeghe and Chiotti suggest otherwise.

squired

One of the biggest problems cycling has is the nature of the sport. A rider can disappear for a few months of "training" and bar the odd training camp he can do what he wants. At races he will spend most of his non-racing time in his hotel room. Thus its not easy for people in the team to know what he gets up to, if not impossible.

Lets compare to football. Now, I dislike football because I think the cheating that happens during games, in front of tv cameras, is actually far worse than doping. Nothing is done about it, so it just continues. Dive to get a penalty and an old pro will say it is the "professional" thing to do in the post match analysis. Anyway, I digress... The fact is that footballers all train together. They are constantly at the team training ground, or around team officials. They don't have time for trips off to see doctors in other countries during their long season and in the off season seem to be more worried about partying than fitness. This model makes it harder to dope in my opinion. Maybe Garmin have it right by having the majority of their riders based in the same town, training together, etc?

dennisn

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Well I am going out to buy a mountain bike on Saturday after selling two road bikes. I hope it is cleaner off road.

I didn't realize that you were racing at the pro level and had all these cheats around you all the time. Must be terrible.

Dennis Noward

slojo

Peter Keen has an interesting theory about doping. He believes that PEDs can offer a maximum benefit of around 10 per cent.
Obviously that’s huge.
But eating into the 10 per cent are a whole range of detrimental effects. There’s the psychological effect (I’m doping, do I really need to train so hard?); the need to lie and develop shady relationships with doctors and dealers; the guilt (yes really); and the fear of getting caught.
As a result, only the real psychopaths, with no sense of guilt or fear, get the whole 10 per cent.
More to the point, if the testing authorities can force doping further underground, raise the climate of moral outrage and increase riders’ fear of getting caught, they will reduce the impact of doping right across the board, not just among the dopers they catch.

pat1cp

slojo wrote:

Peter Keen has an interesting theory about doping. He believes that PEDs can offer a maximum benefit of around 10 per cent.
Obviously that’s huge.
But eating into the 10 per cent are a whole range of detrimental effects. There’s the psychological effect (I’m doping, do I really need to train so hard?); the need to lie and develop shady relationships with doctors and dealers; the guilt (yes really); and the fear of getting caught.
As a result, only the real psychopaths, with no sense of guilt or fear, get the whole 10 per cent.
More to the point, if the testing authorities can force doping further underground, raise the climate of moral outrage and increase riders’ fear of getting caught, they will reduce the impact of doping right across the board, not just among the dopers they catch.

Errrrrr,,,,,,that'll be Pricco then !!!!!!

dennisn

richard wants a baum wrote:

For crying out loud, Dennis get over it the 'we' is suppose to mean the cycling loving community, like it or not its the nature of humans to group people. You have been grouped into the hated cyclist group. Cars will try to run you off the road in an aggressive attempt to claim there territory. Question do you actually disagree with what Patrick1.0 said, or do you think we should be going the way of every other sport and cover up positives.

Let me ask you something. You say "cars will try to run you off the road". How is it that
they fail to do this, if they are "trying"? If I wanted to run you off the road or worse, how
hard could it be? I simply swerve over, bash into you and you're gone. Seems easy enough. Why would anyone have to "try"? If all those people are "trying to kill you", you'd
be dead by now. In answer to your question, I don't really care one way or another whether pro riders dope or don't. I'm interested in the "why". Why would you care
what someone you don't even know does? Wjhy does it bother you? You're not doping?
Why get so upset? Is it because you took up cycling to be "cool" and now, with all the bad press, you don't look so "cool" to whomever you were trying to impress?

Dennis Noward

method

Can we agree to ignore Dennis in the hope he'll go away?

Kléber

Dennis, you keep posting argumentative comments that serve little but to nitpick people's statements. Whenever I see your comments, I'm now beginning to skip them as I find them pointless. Sorry if this sounds rude but you keep attacking members on here, it's tiresome.

method

Kléber wrote:

Dennis, you keep posting argumentative comments that serve little but to nitpick people's statements. Whenever I see your comments, I'm now beginning to skip them as I find them pointless. Sorry if this sounds rude but you keep attacking members on here, it's tiresome.

Hence can we ignore his comments?

emadden

squired wrote:

One of the biggest problems cycling has is the nature of the sport. A rider can disappear for a few months of "training" and bar the odd training camp he can do what he wants. At races he will spend most of his non-racing time in his hotel room. Thus its not easy for people in the team to know what he gets up to, if not impossible.

Lets compare to football. Now, I dislike football because I think the cheating that happens during games, in front of tv cameras, is actually far worse than doping. Nothing is done about it, so it just continues. Dive to get a penalty and an old pro will say it is the "professional" thing to do in the post match analysis. Anyway, I digress... The fact is that footballers all train together. They are constantly at the team training ground, or around team officials. They don't have time for trips off to see doctors in other countries during their long season and in the off season seem to be more worried about partying than fitness. This model makes it harder to dope in my opinion. Maybe Garmin have it right by having the majority of their riders based in the same town, training together, etc?

I hear what you say, but I think you over estimate how much time football players and the like spend at their sport, and underestimate the amount of time a pro-cyclist is "in public".

At an average race the rider will be there at least an hour before the start (perhaps another hour getting to the start), race for 6 hours and spend another hour in the finish area/showers/transport to hotels. All ôf that is a significant chunk of a day in the public eye... On top of that, pro cyclists race far more days per year than football players play games and train....

BTW I also dislike football and the cheating

flattythehurdler

method wrote:

Can we agree to ignore Dennis in the hope he'll go away?

+1