Vaughters n' Thomas Dekker

greasedscotsman

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/vaughte ... gical-data

I think the Interesting part is this bit...

“I’ve asked Thomas to complete a series of tests that cross correlate red blood cell count, off score, haemoglobin, haematocrit with power output, lactate clearance and oxygen uptake. This helps to determine his body’s ability to complete clean,” Vaughters said.

Body's ability to compete clean? Does this suggest some riders are just going to cheat to be competative? Surely that's just some having more ability than others. And what is this series of test, is it similar to the UCI's passport system?

Neil Buckley

Being competitive, winning...same thing really

peddlefever

I think he is just saying that he wants to see if he is still a capable rider while being clean as he was doped. Plus, he had a two year ban. On top of not racing for a couple years and supposedly being clean, he may not be good enough to race at a high level now. I think that is what Vaughters was saying.

greasedscotsman

peddlefever wrote:

I think he is just saying that he wants to see if he is still a capable rider while being clean as he was doped. Plus, he had a two year ban. On top of not racing for a couple years and supposedly being clean, he may not be good enough to race at a high level now. I think that is what Vaughters was saying.

Probably, just seemed like a really odd way of phrasing it. It's not like it was a bad translation.

Pokerface

Seems Dekker is looking for a spot on the Garmin Development team. No incentive then for him to cheat to try and get on the main Garmin team, huh?

58585

I would have thought that this type of test was necessary for any rider at the top level?
Sounds like a PR line - we're going to sign an ex-doper but we're doing due dilligence on him first. After a year in the continental team he is "entitled" to win races in the pro-tour the year after without any raised eyebrows; it's very bad press to have banned riders winning big races straight after a come back

peddlefever

greasedscotsman wrote:

peddlefever wrote:

I think he is just saying that he wants to see if he is still a capable rider while being clean as he was doped. Plus, he had a two year ban. On top of not racing for a couple years and supposedly being clean, he may not be good enough to race at a high level now. I think that is what Vaughters was saying.

Probably, just seemed like a really odd way of phrasing it. It's not like it was a bad translation.

I agree the phrasing was a bit strange, particular on first read. Unfortunately it is also hard not to read into most people's quotes when it comes to doping.

For a team that is based on a clean image, I wish they would refuse to take anyone who failed a test in the past.

andyp

peddlefever wrote:

For a team that is based on a clean image, I wish they would refuse to take anyone who failed a test in the past.

I don't think they've yet signed anyone who's previously failed a test, have they?

Vaughters, understandably given his own history, is very big on redemption, hence why he's prepared to give Dekker a second chance.

deejay

You knock JV but this must be good.

Wouldn't it be nice if the UCI spent some money on this type of programe.

A two year ban and they wander straight back into the Pro Tour peloton at the top and we are not sure how much has carried over from their pre test ban.

Kick em out with a test
Return them only after a more (Contador type) in depth test.

peddlefever

andyp wrote:

peddlefever wrote:

For a team that is based on a clean image, I wish they would refuse to take anyone who failed a test in the past.

I don't think they've yet signed anyone who's previously failed a test, have they?

Vaughters, understandably given his own history, is very big on redemption, hence why he's prepared to give Dekker a second chance.

I should have said continued to refuse anyone that has failed a test or been banned. Of course, I have basically no tolerance for dopers and would rather they be banned for life.

As much as I like guys like David Millar, Contador, and Ivan Basso, among others, seeing them back in the peloton makes me cringe.

PBo

peddlefever wrote:

andyp wrote:

peddlefever wrote:

For a team that is based on a clean image, I wish they would refuse to take anyone who failed a test in the past.

I don't think they've yet signed anyone who's previously failed a test, have they?

Vaughters, understandably given his own history, is very big on redemption, hence why he's prepared to give Dekker a second chance.

I should have said continued to refuse anyone that has failed a test or been banned. Of course, I have basically no tolerance for dopers and would rather they be banned for life.

As much as I like guys like David Millar, Contador, and Ivan Basso, among others, seeing them back in the peloton makes me cringe.

how do you square that circle? with DM being there, you can have still have a strong anti-drugs stance, but you can't be absolute about it.....

iainf72

It's not a black and white issue.

If there is no way back, everyone will just close ranks even more and enforcing omerta will become even more rigorous.

Dekker goes quite a way back with JV if my memory serves. I think the guy is very talented but made a bit of a foxes paw training with Cecchini and all that goes with that.

peddlefever

PBo wrote:

peddlefever wrote:

andyp wrote:

peddlefever wrote:

For a team that is based on a clean image, I wish they would refuse to take anyone who failed a test in the past.

I don't think they've yet signed anyone who's previously failed a test, have they?

Vaughters, understandably given his own history, is very big on redemption, hence why he's prepared to give Dekker a second chance.

I should have said continued to refuse anyone that has failed a test or been banned. Of course, I have basically no tolerance for dopers and would rather they be banned for life.

As much as I like guys like David Millar, Contador, and Ivan Basso, among others, seeing them back in the peloton makes me cringe.

how do you square that circle? with DM being there, you can have still have a strong anti-drugs stance, but you can't be absolute about it.....

I know it is wishful thinking to just totally get rid of all dopers. I would say that at the very least David Millar at least appears to actually feel bad about doping when he talks about it. I can at least give him a little credit and believe he might not dope again. Unfortunately, I rarely feel the same about other riders.

peterst6906

peddlefever wrote:

I know it is wishful thinking to just totally get rid of all dopers...

Like everyone, I wish the entire peleton was racing on the results of natural development, rather than artificially enhanced programs.

In achieving that, I agree completely that bans should be a strong deterrent to doping.

However, the flip side of the big stick approach also has some potential benefit.

If riders can return clean and still be competitive, other riders (including future riders) may have less motivation to dope.

Like all problems, no one single approach is going to stop doping. A suite of appraches is required.

Proactive as well as reactive approaches are needed and I don't have a problem with JV bringing back former dopers with appropriate checks to convince both himself and others that the riders are clean.

I only wish the UCI took such a proactive approach to reforming riders.