Santambrogio +
Comments
-
Menchov didn't do the Giro.ShinyHelmut wrote:Timoid. wrote:So if an ex GT winner is being rumoured to be fingered and Vini Fantini is as dirty as sin is Garzelli tranquillo at the moment?@tourdejose wrote:According to La Gazzetta, the UCI is about to announce a Russian cyclist tested positive for doping at the Giro.http://t.co/BgYLFzpArQ
Adding two and two together and probably making five but Menchov ticks both boxes.
Seven Russians did the Giro - six ride for Katusha, one for Saxo. For Bjarne Riis this is like some sort of Russian Roulette.Twitter: @RichN950 -
So its been 24hours, does that mean there are no positives from day 2!
On to day 3 then!Scott Addict 2011
Giant TCR 20120 -
-
If we're doing PTP - Pharmaceutical Treatment Pick - I'm going for Belkov0
-
Very goodRichmond Racer wrote:If we're doing PTP - Pharmaceutical Treatment Pick - I'm going for Belkov
0 -
-
RichN95 wrote:
Menchov didn't do the Giro.ShinyHelmut wrote:Timoid. wrote:So if an ex GT winner is being rumoured to be fingered and Vini Fantini is as dirty as sin is Garzelli tranquillo at the moment?@tourdejose wrote:According to La Gazzetta, the UCI is about to announce a Russian cyclist tested positive for doping at the Giro.http://t.co/BgYLFzpArQ
Adding two and two together and probably making five but Menchov ticks both boxes.
Seven Russians did the Giro - six ride for Katusha, one for Saxo. For Bjarne Riis this is like some sort of Russian Roulette.
As I said; 2+2=5
I blame the jetlag.0 -
There were 8 riders as can be seen above.Contador is the Greatest0
-
Contador is the Greatest0 -
ShinyHelmut wrote:Timoid. wrote:So if an ex GT winner is being rumoured to be fingered and Vini Fantini is as dirty as sin is Garzelli tranquillo at the moment?@tourdejose wrote:According to La Gazzetta, the UCI is about to announce a Russian cyclist tested positive for doping at the Giro.http://t.co/BgYLFzpArQ
Adding two and two together and probably making five but Menchov ticks both boxes.
Alternatively, you can take the rumour detailed above (2) and add it to the withdrawal of a well known GT winner from the tour in slightly dubious circumstances (2) and come up with 7 .0 -
Oohhh that's a bit close to home for us Brits.0
-
Apparently Santambrogio's biological passport showed nothing suspicious.squired wrote:In theory the Biological Passport should be picking up this sort of thing. At least if the UCI told us he was targeted as a result of suspect results on his Biological Passport that would be something, and show that it is working (despite the apparent cutbacks and reduced testing).
So he was probably targetted based on his sudden noticeable improvement. And/or tips out of the peloton - although unless any rider had definite evidence, I hope not, because grassing on peers without facts can be misused.
The backroom team at FDJ recommend that rather than biological passports and blood tests, it should be powerdata which is used to notice sudden leaps in ability. But I suppose no team wants to make known all its data to anyone, in case it falls into the hands of the opposition?0 -
knedlicky wrote:
Apparently Santambrogio's biological passport showed nothing suspicious.squired wrote:In theory the Biological Passport should be picking up this sort of thing. At least if the UCI told us he was targeted as a result of suspect results on his Biological Passport that would be something, and show that it is working (despite the apparent cutbacks and reduced testing).
So he was probably targetted based on his sudden noticeable improvement. And/or tips out of the peloton - although unless any rider had definite evidence, I hope not, because grassing on peers without facts can be misused.
The backroom team at FDJ recommend that rather than biological passports and blood tests, it should be powerdata which is used to notice sudden leaps in ability. But I suppose no team wants to make known all its data to anyone, in case it falls into the hands of the opposition?
Power data is inherently dodgy for this purpose though. No-one has anything better than a best guess at what is naturally possible, and there's huge variation between riders (if there wasn't we wouldn't have a sport). You also train to improve your power output and increase your efficiency. In essence power outputs are no more effective than any other appraisal of performance - just with numbers on so you don't get confused by how the gradient looks on the telly.
Bio passport is a direct measure of physiology though. Not unfakeable, but probably enough to put a benefit cap on doping.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
The power data idea is full of problems.knedlicky wrote:The backroom team at FDJ recommend that rather than biological passports and blood tests, it should be powerdata which is used to notice sudden leaps in ability. But I suppose no team wants to make known all its data to anyone, in case it falls into the hands of the opposition?
How do you measure what is 'normal' for a rider?
What variations are acceptable?
Will the general concept of form be recognized?
Are they going standardise a young rider's progression - must they conform to a model?
How do you rationise that fact that some riders are good at short efforts while others are better at longer ones?
How are you measuring the data?
If we translate the 'jumps in ability' rationale to another sport - football - Wigan won the FA Cup, beating Manchester City, a few days later they were relegated. Rationalise that. Form isn't uniform.
Blood is a lot less subjective.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
The power data idea is full of problems.knedlicky wrote:The backroom team at FDJ recommend that rather than biological passports and blood tests, it should be powerdata which is used to notice sudden leaps in ability. But I suppose no team wants to make known all its data to anyone, in case it falls into the hands of the opposition?
How do you measure what is 'normal' for a rider?
What variations are acceptable?
Will the general concept of form be recognized?
Are they going standardise a young rider's progression - must they conform to a model?
How do you rationise that fact that some riders are good at short efforts while others are better at longer ones?
How are you measuring the data?
If we translate the 'jumps in ability' rationale to another sport - football - Wigan won the FA Cup, beating Manchester City, a few days later they were relegated. Rationalise that. Form isn't uniform.
Blood is a lot less subjective.
I'm a firm proponent of the use of power data to help combat doping, but only in conjunction with the other available tools.
As Rich said there are many problems with using power data, which (in my opinion) rules it out as a standalone detection method. Measuring normal levels and abnormal variations would require a calibration period in order to establish baseline levels, these data would clearly be incorrect if the rider happened to be doping during this period.
Statistically it would be a complex project, and would probably only be useful for highlighting suspicious performances for further investigation, rather than being "proof" of doping.0 -
If there has been whistleblower(s) in the peloton who have helped the testers target Santa then this is a real forward move for the sport.
If the Omerta can tumble then we have a real chance of building back credibility over time.
I hope its the case.0 -
jimmythecuckoo wrote:If there has been whistleblower(s) in the peloton who have helped the testers target Santa then this is a real forward move for the sport.
If the Omerta can tumble then we have a real chance of building back credibility over time.
I hope its the case.
How is this a move forward? According to many reports, Armstrong tipped off the UCI about his rivals on at least two occasions. That went well in smashing the omerta, eh?0 -
andyp wrote:jimmythecuckoo wrote:If there has been whistleblower(s) in the peloton who have helped the testers target Santa then this is a real forward move for the sport.
If the Omerta can tumble then we have a real chance of building back credibility over time.
I hope its the case.
How is this a move forward? According to many reports, Armstrong tipped off the UCI about his rivals on at least two occasions. That went well in smashing the omerta, eh?
Depends entirely on the motivations. If it's a clean rider/team reporting for the good of the sport then we've made progress. If it's a dirty rider (possibly in collusion with the authorities) reporting a rival nothing's changed.0 -
andyp wrote:jimmythecuckoo wrote:If there has been whistleblower(s) in the peloton who have helped the testers target Santa then this is a real forward move for the sport.
If the Omerta can tumble then we have a real chance of building back credibility over time.
I hope its the case.
How is this a move forward? According to many reports, Armstrong tipped off the UCI about his rivals on at least two occasions. That went well in smashing the omerta, eh?
The issue with Armstrong tipping off the UCI about his rivals isn't that he did it and they acted on it, it's that he was apparently immune from anyone doing similar to him.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
...because not too many years ago people like Bassons were getting laughed at for even suggestion blowing the whistle.andyp wrote:How is this a move forward?
Baby steps and all that.0 -
ddraver wrote:Twitter saying Mystery Russian is - Alexander Serebryakov
Already suspended from a positive in April, now has another in febuary!
I thought Mystery Russian was supposed to have ridden the Giro?0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:ddraver wrote:Twitter saying Mystery Russian is - Alexander Serebryakov
Already suspended from a positive in April, now has another in febuary!
I thought Mystery Russian was supposed to have ridden the Giro?
Are you suggesting that a rumour on twitter may have been wrong? Suggest you think carefully before you make allegations like that."I have a lovely photo of a Camargue horse but will not post it now" (Frenchfighter - July 2013)0
