Drugs in other sports and the media.
Comments
-
7 British athletes including Mo are publishing their passport data. It won't satisfy everyone but it's a good start I suppose. Interesting that the athletes appear more proactive than their governing body.
One notable absentee.
I did glance at the list but it didn't include Holmes, Radcliffe or Ohorugu did it, if so I'd call that 3 notable absentees based on the hints the Sunday Times gave. I know the internet seems to have settled on it being Paula Radcliffe but she's not the only one that fits the description - although I admit she is one of them.
Is blood doping much use for 400m? If not you could probably eliminate Ohorugu0 -
7 British athletes including Mo are publishing their passport data. It won't satisfy everyone but it's a good start I suppose. Interesting that the athletes appear more proactive than their governing body.
One notable absentee.
I did glance at the list but it didn't include Holmes, Radcliffe or Ohorugu did it, if so I'd call that 3 notable absentees based on the hints the Sunday Times gave. I know the internet seems to have settled on it being Paula Radcliffe but she's not the only one that fits the description - although I admit she is one of them.
Is blood doping much use for 400m? If not you could probably eliminate Ohorugu
Does it have to be blood doping, the passport programme monitors several different levels and EPO and other stuff shows up.0 -
I would say Kimmage would obviously know more than most as its his job to know and he is thick as thieves with David WalshI can't recall another sportsperson getting caught doping having taken such an overtly anti-doping stance. Sure, it could be her but as pointed out there are others who fit the bill too and one in particular with a questionable past. Why would Kimmage know more than anyone else? Having been right once before his M.O. These days is to throw mud at any high profile person.
thick as thieves with Walsh? You're 2 years out of date with that claim. Ever since Walsh declared that he doesn't think Sky are dirty, Kimmage has left him off the Christmas card list. Walsh has gone over to the devil as far as Kimmage and his disciples are concerned. They no longer speak to each other - or rather, Kimmage won't speak to Walsh.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676077#p19676077]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:
I would say Kimmage would obviously know more than most as its his job to know and he is thick as thieves with David WalshI can't recall another sportsperson getting caught doping having taken such an overtly anti-doping stance. Sure, it could be her but as pointed out there are others who fit the bill too and one in particular with a questionable past. Why would Kimmage know more than anyone else? Having been right once before his M.O. These days is to throw mud at any high profile person.
thick as thieves with Walsh? You're 2 years out of date with that claim. Ever since Walsh declared that he doesn't think Sky are dirty, Kimmage has left him off the Christmas card list. Walsh has gone over to the devil as far as Kimmage and his disciples are concerned. They no longer speak to each other - or rather, Kimmage won't speak to Walsh.
So do we think Walsh is a hypocrite or is bending the truth re Sky. Or (as I think), they do just get the very best out of their athletes (legally).
His good work has uncovered some pretty obvious targets (the Irish swimmer, and Lance Armstrong), but outside of that he hasn’t really worked much else out.
As for Kimmage, well the world is against him. Always has been.0 -
either the Sky contract has some serious penalties for revealing insider secrets, or they may actually be clean.
Does anyone know how the Athletics stuff is reported in mainstream athletics magazines ?
Even the BBC reporting is trying to make it shocking that top athletes are using PEDs when the truth is it's been going on for years0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676077#p19676077]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:
I would say Kimmage would obviously know more than most as its his job to know and he is thick as thieves with David WalshI can't recall another sportsperson getting caught doping having taken such an overtly anti-doping stance. Sure, it could be her but as pointed out there are others who fit the bill too and one in particular with a questionable past. Why would Kimmage know more than anyone else? Having been right once before his M.O. These days is to throw mud at any high profile person.
thick as thieves with Walsh? You're 2 years out of date with that claim. Ever since Walsh declared that he doesn't think Sky are dirty, Kimmage has left him off the Christmas card list. Walsh has gone over to the devil as far as Kimmage and his disciples are concerned. They no longer speak to each other - or rather, Kimmage won't speak to Walsh.
So do we think Walsh is a hypocrite or is bending the truth re Sky. Or (as I think), they do just get the very best out of their athletes (legally).
His good work has uncovered some pretty obvious targets (the Irish swimmer, and Lance Armstrong), but outside of that he hasn’t really worked much else out.
As for Kimmage, well the world is against him. Always has been.
On the money with that final sentence.
Lots of people make the mistake of thinking Walsh is an investigative journalist. He's not - he's a sports journalist, paid by the STimes to cover all manner of sports. he went after Lance because he was convinced he was doping, and then it became something of a mission for him. But he isn't an investigate journalist,going after all and sundry.
For an example of someone who is, on the other hand, see Hajo Seppelt. Investigating doping in sports is 'all' Seppelt does - and is employed 100% in that capacity - and is one of the finest in this field. Unlike Walsh, you won't read or see an interview with say Ruby Walsh one week, Chris Ashton the next. Nor will you read or see Seppelt covering the U.S. Open or the RWC.0 -
7 British athletes including Mo are publishing their passport data. It won't satisfy everyone but it's a good start I suppose. Interesting that the athletes appear more proactive than their governing body.
One notable absentee.
I did glance at the list but it didn't include Holmes, Radcliffe or Ohorugu did it, if so I'd call that 3 notable absentees based on the hints the Sunday Times gave. I know the internet seems to have settled on it being Paula Radcliffe but she's not the only one that fits the description - although I admit she is one of them.
Is blood doping much use for 400m? If not you could probably eliminate Ohorugu
I wondered that myself but apparently she did train at altitude so who knows.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
It would be interesting to see Ohuruogu's data given her previous suspension.0
-
It would be interesting to see Ohuruogu's data given her previous suspension.
You qualified in sports haematology?0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676240#p19676240]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:It would be interesting to see Ohuruogu's data given her previous suspension.
You qualified in sports haematology?
Have you learned nothing? You don't need a qualification or any training to interpret the data, just some preconceptions.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676240#p19676240]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:It would be interesting to see Ohuruogu's data given her previous suspension.
You qualified in sports haematology?
Have you learned nothing? You don't need a qualification or any training to interpret the data, just some preconceptions.
SOZ! mea culpa
0 -
Was talking this issue through with a couple of colleagues who have a background in sports science. The consensus was that interpreting athlete's blood data is a very inexact science at the moment and that from a medical point of view it is not particularly clear what normal readings should be.
The point being, that some unusual blood data is not sufficient evidence to condemn athletes as cheaters.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676300#p19676300]Roberto di Velo[/url] wrote:Was talking this issue through with a couple of colleagues who have a background in sports science. The consensus was that interpreting athlete's blood data is a very inexact science at the moment and that from a medical point of view it is not particularly clear what normal readings should be.
The point being, that some unusual blood data is not sufficient evidence to condemn athletes as cheaters.
Like him or loathe him, but you can't deny that Dr Ashenden has some expertise in the matter of interpreting blood data.0 -
Except isn't that exactly what does happen ? This data the Sunday Times has has even been used as corroborative evidence in suspensions.
I'm interested what background in sports science they have - I know plenty of people with sports science degrees I doubt any of them are any more qualified to give an opinion on this than I am.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
Except isn't that exactly what does happen ? This data the Sunday Times has has even been used as corroborative evidence in suspensions.
I'm interested what background in sports science they have - I know plenty of people with sports science degrees I doubt any of them are any more qualified to give an opinion on this than I am.
Well, here's Robin Parisotto's bio:
'Robin is a former Australian Institute of Sport scientist and was the principal researcher of the EPO 2000 Project which developed the first ever blood tests to be used at the Olympic Games (Sydney 2000) to detect the blood booster erythropoietin (EPO). He was awarded the Australian Sports Medal for these efforts. Parallel to this research Robin investigated a range of haematological parameters which led to the development of sports specific blood profiles that could be used as peak performance indicators.
Other blood parameters were identified which could detect sub-optimal health and/or physiology and in many cases the ability to predict (and resolve) under-performance in elite athletes. Robin is a member of the International Cycling Federation (UCI) expert panel for the Athlete Biological Passport program. He is currently the senior scientist in the haemopoietic stem cell transplant laboratory at Canberra Hospital.'0 -
Yes was questioning the relevance of Roberto Di Velo's mates qualifications not those of the Sunday Times experts.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0
-
Yes was questioning the relevance of Roberto Di Velo's mates qualifications not those of the Sunday Times experts.
Ah.0 -
Except isn't that exactly what does happen ? This data the Sunday Times has has even been used as corroborative evidence in suspensions.
I'm interested what background in sports science they have - I know plenty of people with sports science degrees I doubt any of them are any more qualified to give an opinion on this than I am.
I think we've got our wires a bit crossed here; I was more referring to the rumours that a well known athlete has an injunction on the release of their blood data (I should have clarified). Hence in this example, mates are saying that a few unusual results can't really prove doping. I'm sure the Sunday Times story is correct that historical blood data indicates much more widespread doping than we've seen punished. That said, I wonder how much of this is down to the judgement of those looking at the data and how much can actually be proven as clear indicators of cheating.
As to mates qualifications, both have PhD's and research experience in physiology, one used to do consultancy work with British Cycling and the other is a prof in blood cancers.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676413#p19676413]Roberto di Velo[/url] wrote:Except isn't that exactly what does happen ? This data the Sunday Times has has even been used as corroborative evidence in suspensions.
I'm interested what background in sports science they have - I know plenty of people with sports science degrees I doubt any of them are any more qualified to give an opinion on this than I am.
I think we've got our wires a bit crossed here; I was more referring to the rumours that a well known athlete has an injunction on the release of their blood data (I should have clarified). Hence in this example, mates are saying that a few unusual results can't really prove doping. I'm sure the Sunday Times story is correct that historical blood data indicates much more widespread doping than we've seen punished. That said, I wonder how much of this is down to the judgement of those looking at the data and how much can actually be proven as clear indicators of cheating.
As to mates qualifications, both have PhD's and research experience in physiology, one used to do consultancy work with British Cycling and the other is a prof in blood cancers.
I think the problem with the ST data is that whilst such a welter of dodgy values is strongly indicative of widespread doping, trying to pin down specific individuals will be very difficult. (Genuine Passport cases are few and far between even now.)
It's a bit like having multiple riders repeatedly climbing at LeMond / believable speeds. Whilst this is collectively highly unlikely given that such speed represented the limits of physiology 25-30 years ago, trying to pick out the rogues from the naturally talented is hard, which is why 2nd order factors such as riding for a dodgy team or unusual progressions carry so much weight in the world of Forums (though not with sanctioning bodies.)0 -
Isn't the issue that many athlete's blood parameters in the 90s looked a bit like Riis's, and in the 2000s they looked a bit like Armstrong's. This was all before the biological passport came into effect, so there were no sanctions. The Armstrong like parameters have now been leaked and questions are being asked - the story being that the athletes, like the cyclists, doped a lot and the IAAF was powerless at the time.0
-
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676240#p19676240]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:It would be interesting to see Ohuruogu's data given her previous suspension.
You qualified in sports haematology?
Have you learned nothing? You don't need a qualification or any training to interpret the data, just some preconceptions.
You don't need to be qualified in something to find it interesting.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676413#p19676413]Roberto di Velo[/url] wrote:Except isn't that exactly what does happen ? This data the Sunday Times has has even been used as corroborative evidence in suspensions.
I'm interested what background in sports science they have - I know plenty of people with sports science degrees I doubt any of them are any more qualified to give an opinion on this than I am.
I think we've got our wires a bit crossed here; I was more referring to the rumours that a well known athlete has an injunction on the release of their blood data (I should have clarified). Hence in this example, mates are saying that a few unusual results can't really prove doping. I'm sure the Sunday Times story is correct that historical blood data indicates much more widespread doping than we've seen punished. That said, I wonder how much of this is down to the judgement of those looking at the data and how much can actually be proven as clear indicators of cheating.
As to mates qualifications, both have PhD's and research experience in physiology, one used to do consultancy work with British Cycling and the other is a prof in blood cancers.
Give it time, you can't stop sh*t coming out sometimes.
I gather there are some more Panoramas on the way too.0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676413#p19676413]Roberto di Velo[/url] wrote:Except isn't that exactly what does happen ? This data the Sunday Times has has even been used as corroborative evidence in suspensions.
I'm interested what background in sports science they have - I know plenty of people with sports science degrees I doubt any of them are any more qualified to give an opinion on this than I am.
I think we've got our wires a bit crossed here; I was more referring to the rumours that a well known athlete has an injunction on the release of their blood data (I should have clarified). Hence in this example, mates are saying that a few unusual results can't really prove doping. I'm sure the Sunday Times story is correct that historical blood data indicates much more widespread doping than we've seen punished. That said, I wonder how much of this is down to the judgement of those looking at the data and how much can actually be proven as clear indicators of cheating.
As to mates qualifications, both have PhD's and research experience in physiology, one used to do consultancy work with British Cycling and the other is a prof in blood cancers.
Has a super-injunction stopping the release of the fact that their blood was allegedly marked as being really suspicious at a time that they were performing better than everyone else in the world. Was supposed to have featured on that Panorama programme, but give it time, you can't stop sh*t coming out sometimes.
I gather there are some more Panoramas on the way too.
Joel, remember how only a couple of weeks ago you got hacked off with all the shoot being chucked around about Froome and Sky? This is exactly what you're doing now yourself. And for Christs sake stop believing everything you read on the internet.0 -
There appears to be evidence here. And the person who told me has been extremely reliable so far.0
-
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676413#p19676413]Roberto di Velo[/url] wrote:Except isn't that exactly what does happen ? This data the Sunday Times has has even been used as corroborative evidence in suspensions.
I'm interested what background in sports science they have - I know plenty of people with sports science degrees I doubt any of them are any more qualified to give an opinion on this than I am.
I think we've got our wires a bit crossed here; I was more referring to the rumours that a well known athlete has an injunction on the release of their blood data (I should have clarified). Hence in this example, mates are saying that a few unusual results can't really prove doping. I'm sure the Sunday Times story is correct that historical blood data indicates much more widespread doping than we've seen punished. That said, I wonder how much of this is down to the judgement of those looking at the data and how much can actually be proven as clear indicators of cheating.
As to mates qualifications, both have PhD's and research experience in physiology, one used to do consultancy work with British Cycling and the other is a prof in blood cancers.
If your colleagues have specific expertise relating to blood values you should have said No clearly that kind of background is relevant - I was assuming more a sports science BSc when you said a background in that discipline, but anyway...
No I don't think we were talking at cross purposes.
I agree to the extent that the blood values obtained by the Sunday Times may not provide sufficient evidence to sanction an athlete using that data alone. As I said it has already been used as corroborative evidence so clearly it is sufficient to cast serious doubt on the honesty of an athlete. I just read your post as casting a bit more doubt on the findings of the Sunday Times experts than perhaps is warranted.
It looks to me like the evidence is fairly clear about the scale of doping in that period but that if may not be possible to pin down the majority or even any of the individuals for sure because of possible explanations for unusual values in individual cases.
My approach to this kind of thing is that while I accept we have to adhere to a pretty high standard of evidence to start taking official action against anyone - stripping medals etc - as individuals we'd have to be naive not to have suspicions long before the evidence reached that level. I'm sure most of us suspected Lance Armstrong was doping long before it was proven to the satisfaction of the relevant authorities.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
There appears to be evidence here. And the person who told me has been extremely reliable so far.
And that's the type of stock answer Karol and his acolytes would dish out.
Why do you care anyway?0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676844#p19676844]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:There appears to be evidence here. And the person who told me has been extremely reliable so far.
And that's the type of stock answer Karol and his acolytes would dish out.
Why do you care anyway?
I like to see dopers get caught, especially those who speak out against it. But there has to be some evidence or you have to give people the benefit of the doubt. If you have suspicious blood values, or you email Ferrari about training, or you go on holiday with Motoman...0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19676844#p19676844]Richmond Racer 2[/url] wrote:There appears to be evidence here. And the person who told me has been extremely reliable so far.
And that's the type of stock answer Karol and his acolytes would dish out.
Why do you care anyway?
I like to see dopers get caught, especially those who speak out against it. But there has to be some evidence or you have to give people the benefit of the doubt. If you have suspicious blood values, or you email Ferrari about training, or you go on holiday with Motoman...
Yeah. It really does seem civilized to give people the benefit of the doubt.
Ok. So let's take 'going on holiday with Motoman'. As is fairly known, Sean Yates remained friends ove rthe years with Monsieur Motoman, Philippe Maire. Even took Froome and Porte along to Motoman's bike shop, until Sky got wind of it all and nixed them going there. Motoman's bike shop seems to be a well known LBS to many of the pros who live and train around Nice including the likes of Gilbert.
So where does that put any of those riders on the Joel List of Suspicion?0 -
It would be tricky to exist as pro cyclist without, at some point, chatting to a former doper.
The prevailing opinion is that all things these days are a bit cleaner, so giving some benefit of the doubt seems like a reasonable position, but I'm a lot less generous to those competing in all endurance sports around 10 years ago.0 -
IAAF just announced the results of retro testing of samples from the 2005 & 2007 World Athletics Champs
32 AAFs from 28 athletes
http://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/positive-retests-helsinki-2005-osaka-20070
