'98 retro testing...

1…457910…14

Comments

  • thomthom
    thomthom Posts: 3,574
    Slim Boy Fat wrote:
    Ms Tree wrote:
    I agree Rich which is why I put the rolling eyes. Basically what is the point of it in the grand scheme of things?
    It has zero point other than to make those looking at cycling from the outside to say 'tsk, there goes cycling, full of dopers.'

    And telling the current riders that because they cheat the system now doesn't mean they won't get caught later on.
  • slim_boy_fat
    slim_boy_fat Posts: 1,810
    ThomThom wrote:
    Slim Boy Fat wrote:
    Ms Tree wrote:
    I agree Rich which is why I put the rolling eyes. Basically what is the point of it in the grand scheme of things?
    It has zero point other than to make those looking at cycling from the outside to say 'tsk, there goes cycling, full of dopers.'

    And telling the current riders that because they cheat the system now doesn't mean they won't get caught later on.
    Possibly, although I reckon they probably could have worked that out for themselves. And surely to beat doping we have to give the riders a better incentive than 'you might get caught later'?
  • shipley
    shipley Posts: 549
    Oh god. I wish this would stop. Why doesn't someone in power at the UCI just come out and draw a line under the past and move on. We know that 80-90% of the peloton was juiced up both in the 90's and before. With my rosé tinted specs I like to think they were all at it so it was a reasonably level playing field.

    Either way its the past, it's gone, it's the last century.

    Why can't we move on and stop ruining our sport in the view of non cycling fans.

    It's still a stunning sport compared to football or golf etc etc

    :(
  • mididoctors
    mididoctors Posts: 18,908
    nah lets get it all out...its too late to put it back in the box.

    we are commited.


    "move on nothing to see here"... you might as well try to extinguish a volcano by pi55ing on it.

    I would retro test everything that is possible if I had my way.
    "If I was a 38 year old man, I definitely wouldn't be riding a bright yellow bike with Hello Kitty disc wheels, put it that way. What we're witnessing here is the world's most high profile mid-life crisis" Afx237vi Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:43 pm
  • thomthom
    thomthom Posts: 3,574
    Slim Boy Fat wrote:
    ThomThom wrote:
    Slim Boy Fat wrote:
    Ms Tree wrote:
    I agree Rich which is why I put the rolling eyes. Basically what is the point of it in the grand scheme of things?
    It has zero point other than to make those looking at cycling from the outside to say 'tsk, there goes cycling, full of dopers.'

    And telling the current riders that because they cheat the system now doesn't mean they won't get caught later on.
    Possibly, although I reckon they probably could have worked that out for themselves. And surely to beat doping we have to give the riders a better incentive than 'you might get caught later'?

    That's the best we got, I'm afraid.
  • slim_boy_fat
    slim_boy_fat Posts: 1,810
    ThomThom wrote:
    Slim Boy Fat wrote:
    ThomThom wrote:
    Slim Boy Fat wrote:
    Ms Tree wrote:
    I agree Rich which is why I put the rolling eyes. Basically what is the point of it in the grand scheme of things?
    It has zero point other than to make those looking at cycling from the outside to say 'tsk, there goes cycling, full of dopers.'

    And telling the current riders that because they cheat the system now doesn't mean they won't get caught later on.
    Possibly, although I reckon they probably could have worked that out for themselves. And surely to beat doping we have to give the riders a better incentive than 'you might get caught later'?

    That's the best we got, I'm afraid.
    Unfortunately, you're probably right.
  • thomthom
    thomthom Posts: 3,574
    Shipley wrote:
    Oh god. I wish this would stop. Why doesn't someone in power at the UCI just come out and draw a line under the past and move on. We know that 80-90% of the peloton was juiced up both in the 90's and before. With my rosé tinted specs I like to think they were all at it so it was a reasonably level playing field.

    Either way its the past, it's gone, it's the last century.

    Why can't we move on and stop ruining our sport in the view of non cycling fans.

    It's still a stunning sport compared to football or golf etc etc

    :(

    When did I hear this the last time.. 'Just move on..' 'it's in the past'..

    Oh, that's right - 98, 2006 and recently 2013 with Armstrong...

    If one cheated, it has to be known. That's quite frankly important.
  • mididoctors
    mididoctors Posts: 18,908
    to draw a line under it all you need to understand the past anyway.

    then you can say ok guys from this date on... personally I would sanction entire teams their gc/stages/classments on any race were there was a positive from any member of team .

    ban the rider in question and dock the team/individuals their winnings/points
    "If I was a 38 year old man, I definitely wouldn't be riding a bright yellow bike with Hello Kitty disc wheels, put it that way. What we're witnessing here is the world's most high profile mid-life crisis" Afx237vi Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:43 pm
  • thomthom
    thomthom Posts: 3,574
    mididoctors wrote:
    to draw a line under it all you need to understand the past anyway.

    then you can say ok guys from this date on... personally I would sanction entire teams their gc/stages/classments on any race were there was a positive from any member of team .

    ban the rider in question and dock the team/individuals their winnings/points

    Oh, that's a competely different discussion, though. What we can do to prevent doping now.

    It's important that the next generation knows that eventually the past will catch up, even if you slip through today's system. It's not ideal - but saying: Okay, we know they cheated, we have the names but it was a different time so let's forget it and let'em have it. That's not really the wise example to set, is it?
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    ThomThom wrote:

    When did I hear this the last time.. 'Just move on..' 'it's in the past'..

    Oh, that's right - 98, 2006 and recently 2013 with Armstrong...

    If one cheated, it has to be known. That's quite frankly important.
    How far back do you want to go? Tell me when to stop.... Delgado... Zoetemelk... Thevenet... Merckx... Anquetil... Bobet... Coppi... Pelissier.... Petit-Breton... Garin... Taylor... Moore...
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Coach H
    Coach H Posts: 1,092
    For me the benefit of the list is outing the liars that are still involved. This needs to be done to properly set up a truth and reconciliation process.

    Without the list O'Grady just repeats 'Not me mate....it just wasn't on the table" and Zabel continues with "It was only the once in '96, honestly". Now Cookson can make an example of them (it has to happen to someone, life is not fair) and say enough of the lying and half truths, its either all out there or the establishment will out you as a liar and a cheat.
    Coach H. (Dont ask me for training advice - 'It's not about the bike')
  • dimspace
    dimspace Posts: 53
    Here you go. The 98 samples by result, stage etc.

    No colour on a name means no sample taken.

    25ip6hj.png
  • prawny
    prawny Posts: 5,440
    RichN95 wrote:
    ThomThom wrote:

    When did I hear this the last time.. 'Just move on..' 'it's in the past'..

    Oh, that's right - 98, 2006 and recently 2013 with Armstrong...

    If one cheated, it has to be known. That's quite frankly important.
    How far back do you want to go? Tell me when to stop.... Delgado... Zoetemelk... Thevenet... Merckx... Anquetil... Bobet... Coppi... Pelissier.... Petit-Breton... Garin... Taylor... Moore...

    I'd be inclined to go back through until there are no traces of epo, however far that ends up being. I know it wouldn't happen, but it'd be good to know who had the talent and who had the loopy juice (or our suspicions to be confirmed once and for all)

    Feeling better about Jens though, a few months ago I'd have bet my house on him being on the good stuff, less confident now.
    Saracen Tenet 3 - 2015 - Dead - Replaced with a Hack Frame
    Voodoo Bizango - 2014 - Dead - Hit by a car
    Vitus Sentier VRS - 2017
  • dimspace
    dimspace Posts: 53
    Richmond Racer wrote:
    Confessing to huge sigh of relief re Boardman...

    ...who'd have been tested multiple times on that Tour as wearing yellow

    Boardman was tested once. If you look at the chart its clear that Yellow Jersey holders werent automatically tested. Laughably so.
  • gpreeves
    gpreeves Posts: 454
    bipedal wrote:
    Turfle wrote:
    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/i-doped-for-1998-tour-de-france-confesses-australian-cycling-star-stuart-ogrady/story-fngr0c3f-1226684658992

    Stuey 'fesses up with the "I only did it once" excuse.

    ahhh the tried and tested Zabel defence... never doped on csc, nope, no siree

    I was disappointed that he adopted the "it was a decision I made at the time which I thought would basically get me through the Tour" defence." As has been pointed out elsewhere, a stage win and wearing yellow for three days is a little more than merely "getting through."

    I'm probably more sympathetic than most when it comes to doping. If I'd been training my entire life to be a professional sportsman, I doubt I'd have had the moral fortitude to stay clean when my competitors almost certainly aren't. But I'd like to think that I'd fully admit to my mistakes once the game was up.
  • mididoctors
    mididoctors Posts: 18,908
    edited July 2013
    RichN95 wrote:
    ThomThom wrote:

    When did I hear this the last time.. 'Just move on..' 'it's in the past'..

    Oh, that's right - 98, 2006 and recently 2013 with Armstrong...

    If one cheated, it has to be known. That's quite frankly important.
    How far back do you want to go? Tell me when to stop.... Delgado... Zoetemelk... Thevenet... Merckx... Anquetil... Bobet... Coppi... Pelissier.... Petit-Breton... Garin... Taylor... Moore...

    as far back as money and practicality allow I guess.... I would test the the 1892 samples from L-B-L if such things existed

    I would want to know, wouldn't anybody?

    stretching the point somewhat I know...but etc.
    "If I was a 38 year old man, I definitely wouldn't be riding a bright yellow bike with Hello Kitty disc wheels, put it that way. What we're witnessing here is the world's most high profile mid-life crisis" Afx237vi Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:43 pm
  • mididoctors
    mididoctors Posts: 18,908
    dimspace wrote:
    Here you go. The 98 samples by result, stage etc.

    No colour on a name means no sample taken.

    25ip6hj.png

    nice
    "If I was a 38 year old man, I definitely wouldn't be riding a bright yellow bike with Hello Kitty disc wheels, put it that way. What we're witnessing here is the world's most high profile mid-life crisis" Afx237vi Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:43 pm
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    dimspace has been at it again :)
  • sherer
    sherer Posts: 2,460
    have you got a link to that chart so we can see it in more detail
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    sherer wrote:
    have you got a link to that chart so we can see it in more detail


    either follow @dimspace, or have a squiz over at Velorooms which he runs
  • ad_snow
    ad_snow Posts: 469
    mididoctors wrote:
    dimspace wrote:
    Here you go. The 98 samples by result, stage etc.

    No colour on a name means no sample taken.

    25ip6hj.png

    nice

    Can you clarify what undetectable means? Does it mean there's not enough of a sample to test or that any drugs present are undetectable (in which case they should be negative/all the negatives should be undetectable - if you're a cynic)

    Cheers.
    www.adriansnowcycling.blogspot.com
  • shazzz
    shazzz Posts: 1,077
    I seem to recall that Boardman voluteered to have blood samples taken and stored for future testing once the detection testing had caught up with the doping methods. Maybe when he was doing his hour records? Am I imagining that or did it really happen?
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    shazzz wrote:
    I seem to recall that Boardman voluteered to have blood samples taken and stored for future testing once the detection testing had caught up with the doping methods. Maybe when he was doing his hour records? Am I imagining that or did it really happen?


    Pretty certain he did. Just trying to find a link to confirm it
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,890
    So, what's the story with Hincapie being negative?
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    TheBigBean wrote:
    So, what's the story with Hincapie being negative?


    Might not have been taking doses throughout the duration of the Tour. Traces will disappear after xx time, so if he was tested a good number of days after a dose of it, it wouldnt show up in the analysis. Its not like a single dose's traces are still evident when analysed many days later.
  • gpreeves
    gpreeves Posts: 454
    Richmond Racer wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    So, what's the story with Hincapie being negative?


    Might not have been taking doses throughout the duration of the Tour. Traces will disappear after xx time, so if he was tested a good number of days after a dose of it, it wouldnt show up in the analysis. Its not like a single dose's traces are still evident when analysed many days later.

    JV's Twitter suggests that a lot of riders stopped taking EPO after the police raids, the negative result would suggest that Hincapie falls into this category.

    The Senate report hasn't told us much that we didn't already know, there are a lot of riders who would have tested positive before the race/in the first few stages but never had to give a sample.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,890
    Hincapie was negative on stage 4 (and stage 21) though, so that was pretty early on.
  • dish_dash
    dish_dash Posts: 5,647
    Either way, just because they were negative or not tested it doesn't mean that they weren't doping. They just weren't caught through this approach...

    It's a total shambles. Both O'Grady and Blijlevens (not to mention Jaja) highlight that there is no guarantee that anyone will tell the truth to any of these truth and reconciliation approaches being suggested... both lied very recently about their doping past. If I was running Dutch or Australian cycling I'd be fuming...
  • bipedal
    bipedal Posts: 466
    Olano speaks:

    Abraham Olano said that he was “surprised by being on a list of names when I have not tested positive. I don't understand how it can go now. They have to prove it.”

    "I was always under the control and custody of the team and its medical service. I absolutely do not consider myself guilty. I never had the feeling that I was doing anything illegal," said Olano, who is currently technical director of the Vuelta a Espana.

    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cycling ... ves-report

    Spanish cycling really has to stop the endless denial
  • sherer
    sherer Posts: 2,460
    What i'd like is all those who still deny it to be kicked out of the sport. Those that freely admit it and understand that this can't go on any more with the current generation are ok to still be involved

Categories