The Tour drug tests
Comments
-
That's good news but Pat's probably not checking all the numbers, I'd like to know Pierre "le rottweiler" Bordry's take on the data.
What's happened to the Valverde case? With the Vuelta round the corner, Pat and Co need to take a decision soon.0 -
iainf72 wrote:All complete and no positives or suspicious samples according to Pat McQ.
Good news.
:roll:
Astarloza?0 -
-
iainf72 wrote:All complete and no positives or suspicious samples according to Pat McQ.
Good news.
:roll:
Fantastic!
First clean Tour in a decade, no?The most painful climb in Northern Ireland http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs200.snc1/6776_124247198694_548863694_2335754_8016178_n.jpg0 -
No0
-
paulcuthbert wrote:iainf72 wrote:All complete and no positives or suspicious samples according to Pat McQ.
Good news.
:roll:
Fantastic!
First clean Tour in a decade, no?
First clean Tour since 1903 if you believe that."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
It's heartening to see that you accept that Tours of 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 2004 and 2005 were fuelled by drugs. Given the huge advantage Epo and blood doping gives, a clean rider probably had no chance of even getting on the podium in those years.paulcuthbert wrote:First clean Tour in a decade, no?0 -
Just as David Walsh predicted, a commercially motivated whitewash. Given the UCI's record it wouldn't surprise me if some riders had been more or less given the green light to take anything they wanted.iainf72 wrote:All complete and no positives or suspicious samples according to Pat McQ.
Good news.
:roll:
If only Patrice Clerc were still around.0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
Just as David Walsh predicted, a commercially motivated whitewash. Given the UCI's record it wouldn't surprise me if some riders had been more or less given the green light to take anything they wanted.iainf72 wrote:All complete and no positives or suspicious samples according to Pat McQ.
Good news.
:roll:
If only Patrice Clerc were still around.
Given that the tests were performed by the AFLD, Patrice Clerc's involvement seems immaterial, surely?
David Walsh is an excellent journalist but his comments on this year's Tour reek of someone who is hoping that cyclists are still doping so he has something to write about. The VAM analysis he was basing his claims on has been torn apart by other experts.
Was the Tour totally clean? Probably not as we all know. Was it clean within the current testing regime which pisses on other sports from a great height? Possibly though McQuaid did say he hadn't heard of any positives or retesting "yet".
The one thing which I thought marked this Tour out as pretty strange was the lack of remarkable performances.0 -
Er, weren't the tests at this years Tour conducted by the UCI, with the AFLD only having the right to request that additional tests be done?stagehopper wrote:Given that the tests were performed by the AFLD, Patrice Clerc's involvement seems immaterial, surely?
(Recall those stories about The UCI testers spending a cosy hour having coffee with Astana management before getting around to testing the riders and so on).0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
Er, weren't the tests at this years Tour conducted by the UCI, with the AFLD only having the right to request that additional tests be done?stagehopper wrote:Given that the tests were performed by the AFLD, Patrice Clerc's involvement seems immaterial, surely?
(Recall those stories about The UCI testers spending a cosy hour having coffee with Astana management before getting around to testing the riders and so on).
Yes, AFLD chose who was to be tested, UCI carried them out. I think this is a step backward.
It was the AFLD's approach last year that led to the likes of Ricco eventually being caught. Chasing people who were trying to avoid tests rather than waiting outside their bus for 55 minutes.Scottish and British...and a bit French0 -
one word:
microdosing0 -
dulldave wrote:It was the AFLD's approach last year that led to the likes of Ricco eventually being caught. Chasing people who were trying to avoid tests rather than waiting outside their bus for 55 minutes.
Meanwhile the UCI's testing method nabbed Landis, Vino and Kash.
How many positives would the AFLD have got last year if it wasn't for the CERA test no one knew about?
The UCI aren't great but by the same token, the AFLD aren't some super magic anti doping agents.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
actually the VAM calculation was questioned by Jonathan Vaughters on the grounds that 'bikes are no longer 8 kg'. However, if one bothers to look at the original calculation, the 8kg figure is for the bike and all additional equipment - clothing, shoes etc. And there are a host of other variables included. I guess if ytou accept Vaughters as an expert then he you'll also conclude he ripped the calculation apart. He wouldn't of course have a hidden agenda due to the fact that it was his rider - who had performed in a GT in a way that none of his previous performances had suggested he was capable of - who was being accused of not being clean?
Given McQuaid's track record I expect a rash of embarassing results in the next few weeks 0 -
Micron
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/contado ... questioned
The calculations appear to be seriously flawed.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
micron wrote:actually the VAM calculation was questioned by Jonathan Vaughters on the grounds that 'bikes are no longer 8 kg'. However, if one bothers to look at the original calculation, the 8kg figure is for the bike and all additional equipment - clothing, shoes etc. And there are a host of other variables included. I guess if ytou accept Vaughters as an expert then he you'll also conclude he ripped the calculation apart. He wouldn't of course have a hidden agenda due to the fact that it was his rider - who had performed in a GT in a way that none of his previous performances had suggested he was capable of - who was being accused of not being clean?
Given McQuaid's track record I expect a rash of embarassing results in the next few weeks
He also pointed out (it may have been in his NYvelocity interview) that comparisons were being made with longer climbs like Hautacam. Well, if it's only a 20 min climb of course you can go faster than a 40-60 min one.Le Blaireau (1)0 -
Agreed. But do you think that the lack of positive tests this year was a reflection of a largely 'clean' race, or more a reflection of the UCI's and ASO's desire not to have any further doping-related 'embarrassments'?iainf72 wrote:The UCI aren't great but by the same token, the AFLD aren't some super magic anti doping agents.0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
Agreed. But do you think that the lack of positive tests this year was a reflection of a largely 'clean' race, or more a reflection of the UCI's and ASO's desire not to have any further doping-related 'embarrassments'?iainf72 wrote:The UCI aren't great but by the same token, the AFLD aren't some super magic anti doping agents.
Yeah - because the UCI and ASO are going to let dopers get away with it just to prevent them from looking bad. :roll:0 -
Pokerface wrote:BikingBernie wrote:
Agreed. But do you think that the lack of positive tests this year was a reflection of a largely 'clean' race, or more a reflection of the UCI's and ASO's desire not to have any further doping-related 'embarrassments'?iainf72 wrote:The UCI aren't great but by the same token, the AFLD aren't some super magic anti doping agents.
Yeah - because the UCI and ASO are going to let dopers get away with it just to prevent them from looking bad. :roll:
I refer the honourable gentlemen to the 1990s..."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
stagehopper wrote:The one thing which I thought marked this Tour out as pretty strange was the lack of remarkable performances.
Did you watch Schleck and Contador sprint up Ventoux....................Robert Millar for knighthood0 -
disgruntledgoat wrote:Pokerface wrote:BikingBernie wrote:
Agreed. But do you think that the lack of positive tests this year was a reflection of a largely 'clean' race, or more a reflection of the UCI's and ASO's desire not to have any further doping-related 'embarrassments'?iainf72 wrote:The UCI aren't great but by the same token, the AFLD aren't some super magic anti doping agents.
Yeah - because the UCI and ASO are going to let dopers get away with it just to prevent them from looking bad. :roll:
I refer the honourable gentlemen to the 1990s...
This isn't the 1990's.0 -
Pokerface wrote:BikingBernie wrote:
Agreed. But do you think that the lack of positive tests this year was a reflection of a largely 'clean' race, or more a reflection of the UCI's and ASO's desire not to have any further doping-related 'embarrassments'?iainf72 wrote:The UCI aren't great but by the same token, the AFLD aren't some super magic anti doping agents.
Yeah - because the UCI and ASO are going to let dopers get away with it just to prevent them from looking bad. :roll:
Seconding what disgruntledgoat said. The various cycling governing bodies have been doing exactly that for, ooh, the first 100 years of the sport's history. How do you think it got into this mess in the first place?0 -
And you think their current attitude is to simply bury their heads in the sand even further?
I would have thought the rash of recent big name and high profile busts would indicate they were taking the fight against doping a little more seriously these days.0 -
Pokerface wrote:And you think their current attitude is to simply bury their heads in the sand even further?
I would have thought the rash of recent big name and high profile busts would indicate they were taking the fight against doping a little more seriously these days.
I think you have to understand that some of these guys want blood(so to speak) or heads on a stake, or, oh h*ll, I don't know what they want. You'll have to ask them.
Bernie, french, afx. They all want something, but I'm beginning to believe that it has very little to do with doping.0 -
Yes, the Landis and similar cases caused a lot of 'embarrassment' all round, sponsors were walking away and the UCI and ASO decided to go back to the traditional ways of the omerta. This is why Patrice Clerc, the man who was responsible for the more robust approach to drug testing in last year's Tour was forced out, largely due to the influence of Pat McQuaid.Pokerface wrote:And you think their current attitude is to simply bury their heads in the sand even further?
Clerc deeply mistrusted the UCI and was loath to make peace after the two bodies severed ties earlier this year following ASO's exclusion of the Astana team from the Tour. UCI chief Pat McQuaid subsequently went over Clerc's head to the widow of the ASO founder, with skiing legend Jean-Claude Killy acting as a go-between. An accord that will bring organizers of the Tours of France, Italy and Spain back into the UCI fold was signed two weeks ago. Meanwhile, Marie-Odile Amaury has installed her 32-year-old son in Clerc's place -- for the time being.
"It's something I shouldn't comment on," McQuaid told ESPN.com Wednesday. "It's an internal Amaury decision. All I would say [to Clerc] is 'goodbye,' and you can read between the lines if you like."
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/c ... id=3621096
As for McQuaid / The UCI burying their heads in the sand...
Pat McQuaid has a somewhat brighter look on the doping problems in pro cycling than various commentators as well as former riders. On Monday evening McQuaid said, that he believes the days of organized doping in cycling are over, and that doping violations today is an individual matter for some riders.
This statement made Jörg Jaksche roll his eyes and respond with a smile.
”Maybe I have just been unlucky, because I have been on six teams, and on all six there has been organized doping,” Jaksche said.
http://www.thepulse2007.org/?p=730 -
dennisn wrote:]Bernie, french, afx. They all want something, but I'm beginning to believe that it has very little to do with doping.
^ Don't feed the troll.Pokerface wrote:And you think their current attitude is to simply bury their heads in the sand even further?
I would have thought the rash of recent big name and high profile busts would indicate they were taking the fight against doping a little more seriously these days.
That seemed to be the case for the past 3 or 4 years, so doesn't it surprise you when there are no positives at all during the biggest race of the year? Either the dopers have got one step again, there is a conspiracy to keep the positives away from the Tour, or everyone is riding clean.
Which one is the most unlikely?0 -
What do I want? Simple, a sport where I can believe in the 'authenticity' of the performances and know that the podium places don't indicate which riders had the best doping program / have a physiology that responds the best to the current 'state of the art' doping techniques.dennisn wrote:Bernie, french, afx. They all want something, but I'm beginning to believe that it has very little to do with doping.0 -
afx237vi wrote:dennisn wrote:]Bernie, french, afx. They all want something, but I'm beginning to believe that it has very little to do with doping.
^ Don't feed the troll.Pokerface wrote:And you think their current attitude is to simply bury their heads in the sand even further?
I would have thought the rash of recent big name and high profile busts would indicate they were taking the fight against doping a little more seriously these days.
That seemed to be the case for the past 3 or 4 years, so doesn't it surprise you when there are no positives at all during the biggest race of the year? Either the dopers have got one step again, there is a conspiracy to keep the positives away from the Tour, or everyone is riding clean.
Which one is the most unlikely?
Well, OBVIOUSLY the dopers are one step ahead again! It's new era of microdosing. But I won't buy into the theory that they are simply burying positives to protect their image. Not now.
Go on - shout me down now.0 -
Pokerface wrote:afx237vi wrote:That seemed to be the case for the past 3 or 4 years, so doesn't it surprise you when there are no positives at all during the biggest race of the year? Either the dopers have got one step again, there is a conspiracy to keep the positives away from the Tour, or everyone is riding clean.
Which one is the most unlikely?
Well, OBVIOUSLY the dopers are one step ahead again! It's new era of microdosing. But I won't buy into the theory that they are simply burying positives to protect their image. Not now.
Go on - shout me down now.
Er, who is shouting? I'm glad you at least don't think everyone is clean.0
