Lance Armstrong gets life ban,loses 7 TDF,confesses he doped
Comments
-
News report says LA just bought a 4 million home in Austin.0
-
Really, dead pleased for him...........................the cheating b@st@rd. :evil:dennisn wrote:News report says LA just bought a 4 million home in Austin.Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
Well with $19m from his insurance scam 'win under any means' and many years of huge sponsorship contracts...
Nasty b*gger0 -
Couple of questions that are related to this topic. Sorry if this has been discussed before.
Who or what(computer?) makes the decisions on who / whom is to be drug tested?
How does this this "decision" make its way to the various men and women with the pee cup and needles?
Depending on the answers I get I'm going to assume I will have more questions.0 -
dennisn wrote:Couple of questions that are related to this topic. Sorry if this has been discussed before.
Who or what(computer?) makes the decisions on who / whom is to be drug tested?
How does this this "decision" make its way to the various men and women with the pee cup and needles?
Do you mean in competition tests?
If we use the TdF as an example - If you win the stage, or hold any of the leaders jerseys you automatically get tested. Might be the top few positions. Then there is "random" tests. These vary between truly random (pulled out of a hat type thing) to "random" based on other information. That's more targeted testing based on information from other sources
The testers get a list of athletes, and their names are put up as people needing to report for doping tests. These days they have a chaperone to make sure they don't do anything to try scupper the test. (injecting clean urine into their bladder, masking agents, that kind of thing)
The tests are done and all stages are witnessed by the athletes, and they sign off their urine or blood samples going into containers. There are controls there where the athlete can pick pots or whatever, and they're all sealed to prevent contamination. Samples are marked with a number and when the samples get to the lab, the labs have no idea who they're testing. In the case of an AAF (adverse analytical finding or "positive") this gets communicated to the governing body who can correlate sample to athlete.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
iainf72 wrote:dennisn wrote:Couple of questions that are related to this topic. Sorry if this has been discussed before.
Who or what(computer?) makes the decisions on who / whom is to be drug tested?
How does this this "decision" make its way to the various men and women with the pee cup and needles?
Do you mean in competition tests?
If we use the TdF as an example - If you win the stage, or hold any of the leaders jerseys you automatically get tested. Might be the top few positions. Then there is "random" tests. These vary between truly random (pulled out of a hat type thing) to "random" based on other information. That's more targeted testing based on information from other sources
The testers get a list of athletes, and their names are put up as people needing to report for doping tests. These days they have a chaperone to make sure they don't do anything to try scupper the test. (injecting clean urine into their bladder, masking agents, that kind of thing)
The tests are done and all stages are witnessed by the athletes, and they sign off their urine or blood samples going into containers. There are controls there where the athlete can pick pots or whatever, and they're all sealed to prevent contamination. Samples are marked with a number and when the samples get to the lab, the labs have no idea who they're testing. In the case of an AAF (adverse analytical finding or "positive") this gets communicated to the governing body who can correlate sample to athlete.
How do these testers actually "....get a list of athletes...."? i.e. e-mail, phone call, notes passed to them.
How many people see these testing orders(if you will)?0 -
dennisn wrote:
How do these testers actually "....get a list of athletes...."? i.e. e-mail, phone call, notes passed to them.
How many people see these testing orders(if you will)?
It's just the start list for the race.
When there's been testing of my club in hockey (very rare), they just get a list of the players playing in the match, ascribe each one a number and then draw numbered tags out of a bag in front of a team representative.Twitter: @RichN950 -
dennisn wrote:How do these testers actually "....get a list of athletes...."? i.e. e-mail, phone call, notes passed to them.
How many people see these testing orders(if you will)?
In competition? Anyone who wants to see it can - it's publically displayed
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
If you look at that picture Iain posted above it shows their strategy.
It's after Stage 19 of last year's Giro. Kreuziger was the winner, Rodriguez the leader.
Of those numbers:
121 is Basso and 95 is Hesjedal. These are performance related picks.
142 is Bruseghin who is involved in the Mantova investigation, so may be a targeted test.
The other three are Velasco, Niemec and Bakelandts and were probably picked at random.Twitter: @RichN950 -
I guess that maybe what I'm trying to ask is how would a rider find out in advance that that they were to be tested? Either in season or out? As I recall, people said, more than once, that LA had advance knowledge of testing. More so than the average rider. How would this work?0
-
dennisn wrote:I guess that maybe what I'm trying to ask is how would a rider find out in advance that that they were to be tested? Either in season or out? As I recall, people said, more than once, that LA had advance knowledge of testing. More so than the average rider. How would this work?
In competition it's pretty easy, you'd have to assume you're going to be testing.
OOC is different - But you could be warned by many people in the chain. The person requesting the test (and there will be a few folks), the testers themselves. But the complication around OOC tests is overstated. If the testers turn up outside your one hour window you just need to pretend you're not there.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
Why has it went all quiet on the western front ? when do any of the lawsuits take place and are we going to see this cheat stand before a judge and get his just deserts !!0
-
iainf72 wrote:dennisn wrote:I guess that maybe what I'm trying to ask is how would a rider find out in advance that that they were to be tested? Either in season or out? As I recall, people said, more than once, that LA had advance knowledge of testing. More so than the average rider. How would this work?
In competition it's pretty easy, you'd have to assume you're going to be testing.
OOC is different - But you could be warned by many people in the chain. The person requesting the test (and there will be a few folks), the testers themselves. But the complication around OOC tests is overstated. If the testers turn up outside your one hour window you just need to pretend you're not there.
I'm still a bit confused. Like I said, there was some talk of LA and his team knowing when testing was going to take place. For something like this to be useful it would seem to me that the people being tested would have to know some hours or even days in advance to "flush" it all out, somehow. I can understand how you might be able to avoid OOC tests. Seems anyone could manage that, to a point. What test's were LA and team warned of in advance? As some forum people have claimed.0 -
You know when some are coming - If Lance is in the Yellow jersey then he ll be tested for example. Alternatively you make sure you re not "glowing" for your allotted hour
The rest is probably just speculation, but it only takes 10/20 mins to shove an IV bag in so even the 30min warning is enough to fool a test. It could be as bent as USPS having a "mole" inside the drug testing group who gives an hour warning maybe or as simple as someone who knows what the testers look like hanging around the town centre and seeing who is where...
I'm still not sure why you re trying to defend Armstrong though dennis, in the scheme of things this is pretty unimportant...We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
If the vampires (people who are taking blood samples) are coming, you need about 45 minutes to sort out your blood. Its not like you need a huge amount of time.
Hamilton explained it quite well in his book - you'd know how long you'd "glow" for - And just plan accordingly. If you do EPO I/V it won't show up in a urine test in less than 12 hours. If you have taken a transfusion you need saline + plasma expander which you can do pretty quickly.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
ddraver wrote:You know when some are coming - If Lance is in the Yellow jersey then he ll be tested for example. Alternatively you make sure you re not "glowing" for your allotted hour
The rest is probably just speculation, but it only takes 10/20 mins to shove an IV bag in so even the 30min warning is enough to fool a test. It could be as bent as USPS having a "mole" inside the drug testing group who gives an hour warning maybe or as simple as someone who knows what the testers look like hanging around the town centre and seeing who is where...
Other than the "mole" part it sounds as if the doping testing playing field is pretty level for everyone (so to speak).
Care to speculate on how a "mole" might gain info into testing sooner than the average rider or team would know about it?0 -
dennisn wrote:
Other than the "mole" part it sounds as if the doping testing playing field is pretty level for everyone (so to speak).
Care to speculate on how a "mole" might gain info into testing sooner than the average rider or team would know about it?
That's easy. You offer the right person some money.
Or "Hey Ted, nice to see you again. You seem like a nice guy, have you ever considered working on a cycling team? The pay would be better than working for <outsourced testing company> and we have a lot of fun" Form a relationship and you get told.
It's happened in Spain a fair bit where the testers would ring people and tell them they'd be around the next day.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
iainf72 wrote:dennisn wrote:
Other than the "mole" part it sounds as if the doping testing playing field is pretty level for everyone (so to speak).
Care to speculate on how a "mole" might gain info into testing sooner than the average rider or team would know about it?
That's easy. You offer the right person some money.
Or "Hey Ted, nice to see you again. You seem like a nice guy, have you ever considered working on a cycling team? The pay would be better than working for <outsourced testing company> and we have a lot of fun" Form a relationship and you get told.
It's happened in Spain a fair bit where the testers would ring people and tell them they'd be around the next day.
I can buy into all of that. Money? Hell yes.
So, certain?(but not all?) of these testing picks and or choices are made how far in advance? Days? I can see how this would play into riders hands.
Where and or with whom do these testing orders originate? Who's at the top or end of the line so to speak? Who says "GO"?0 -
ddraver wrote:Not sure, but combinations of National Agencies and the UCI - some National Agencies are better than others, mentioning no names Spain....
That has sort of been my thinking all along. Bunches of people out there with info that more than a few people, in more than a few sports, will pay good money for?
In other words it's sort of like military secrets. Which are, by nature, very fleeting?
Sort of asks the question of how do the people who are ranting for stricter testing propose to accomplish this?
Wouldn't more testing simply be promoting more secrets for sale? Add to that the need for more testers and it would seem that all you've created is more people on the "take"? I know that's a somewhat sarcastic view of things but.....?0 -
ddraver wrote:What do you suggest?
I have no clue, to be honest. I barely understand the problem.
Sounds like a bit or a lot of corruption from possibly many different organizations. All of whom either have or want a piece of the pie or cake, with many hoping for that corner piece of cake. You know, the one with the frosting pretty much all around.
So, from top(whatever or whomever that is) to the bottom(the guy getting a few dollars for casually mentioning something to a certain someone) anyone in the so called pipeline is suspect? And rightly so, as they COULD misuse
what they know?
Also, the actual lab work? What do we really know there? How do they figure in this pipeline of info? Lab tech's aren't above suspicion, are they?
Bunches of people out there with info that affects pro athletes everywhere and then there's the money. I like money.
I'm starting to think that the old saying of cutting off the head kills the monster isn't really true in this case. A lot of people thought that LA was the head but he's been basically decapitated and I'm of the opinion that the monster chugs on? :?0 -
YAWNdennisn wrote:ddraver wrote:So what?
Are you asking what now or simply saying who cares? :?
The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Sweet DreamsOrganiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 19720 -
deejay wrote:
YAWNdennisn wrote:ddraver wrote:So what?
Are you asking what now or simply saying who cares? :?
The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Sweet Dreams
I agree.
So, next question.
What's to stop any other team or person from doing the same or better(if you will)?0 -
Going to see David Walsh at the IMAX in Glasgow on Tuesday. Looking forward to hearing more and to the questions he gets asked later.0
-
dennisn wrote:deejay wrote:
YAWNdennisn wrote:ddraver wrote:So what?
Are you asking what now or simply saying who cares? :?
The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Sweet Dreams
I agree.
So, next question.
What's to stop any other team or person from doing the same or better(if you will)?
Morals?
Well perhaps not but hopefully changing attitudes in the sport, more advanced tests.
The things helping them are a federation that is still run by McQuaid that wants to bury its head in the sand rather than sort out the problem. I'd hope we will never see anything on the scale of US postal again though
(Edited due to spelling...)0
