Forum home Road cycling forum Pro race

Michael Rogers Positive for Clenbuterol

1246734

Posts

  • Am I alone in thinking that the BBC might be relishing both the JTL and Mick Rogers stories? Both have given them the chance to link Sky with doping, take the BBC Sport front page headline today "ex-Sky rider Rogers fails drugs test".


    Helpful :roll:
  • iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    Am I alone in thinking that the BBC might be relishing both the JTL and Mick Rogers stories? Both have given them the chance to link Sky with doping, take the BBC Sport front page headline today "ex-Sky rider Rogers fails drugs test".

    I guess you need to take the rough with the smooth. Sky are setup to give the union jack pant wearing folk something to cheer, so in theory at rider who was on the "British" team testing + is newsworthy.

    But it could just be spiteful which is ok too

    I'd probably go for contamination in this case. He's a nice guy and all, but has dodged many a bullet I'd say.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • iainf72 wrote:
    Am I alone in thinking that the BBC might be relishing both the JTL and Mick Rogers stories? Both have given them the chance to link Sky with doping, take the BBC Sport front page headline today "ex-Sky rider Rogers fails drugs test".

    I guess you need to take the rough with the smooth. Sky are setup to give the union jack pant wearing folk something to cheer, so in theory at rider who was on the "British" team testing + is newsworthy.

    But it could just be spiteful which is ok too

    I'd probably go for contamination in this case. He's a nice guy and all, but has dodged many a bullet I'd say.


    That's fair comment. I suppose if it was a footballer they might say ex-Man U if the guy had played there in the past.
    @JaunePeril

    Winner of the Bike Radar Pro Race Wiggins Hour Prediction Competition
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 26,451
    That's fair comment. I suppose if it was a footballer they might say ex-Man U if the guy had played there in the past.
    They might now that Moyes is boss. They wouldn't have dared with Ferguson.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • markwb79markwb79 Posts: 933
    RichN95 wrote:
    That's fair comment. I suppose if it was a footballer they might say ex-Man U if the guy had played there in the past.
    They might now that Moyes is boss. They wouldn't have dared with Ferguson.

    Thats an ever fairer comment
    Scott Addict 2011
    Giant TCR 2012
  • thomthomthomthom Posts: 3,574
    Tinkov with retrospective effect... :D
  • Why has it taken so long for the results of this test to be revealed? Is this normal? Do they have such a backlog of samples to get through or are they just slow?
  • RideOnTimeRideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    Clenbuterol

    :lol: :oops: :lol:

    great...
  • RideOnTime wrote:
    Clenbuterol

    :lol: :oops: :lol:

    great...


    Where have you been? Your unique brand of minimalist yet to the point comment has been conspicuous by its absence lately
    @JaunePeril

    Winner of the Bike Radar Pro Race Wiggins Hour Prediction Competition
  • PokerfacePokerface Posts: 7,960
    Why has it taken so long for the results of this test to be revealed? Is this normal? Do they have such a backlog of samples to get through or are they just slow?


    Yes. It takes them this long normally.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 26,451
    Why has it taken so long for the results of this test to be revealed? Is this normal? Do they have such a backlog of samples to get through or are they just slow?
    It's fairly normal. Big events can get priority treatment, but generally I think there are backlogs.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • ProssPross Posts: 34,758
    One thing I've never understood is why an A sample positive gets made public rather than waiting until the B result is in (or the athlete declines that option). Also, can anyone recall a B sample not backing up the A sample? If that did happen there would always be the 'no smoke without fire' argument as the A result has been announced.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 26,451
    Pross wrote:
    One thing I've never understood is why an A sample positive gets made public rather than waiting until the B result is in (or the athlete declines that option). Also, can anyone recall a B sample not backing up the A sample? If that did happen there would always be the 'no smoke without fire' argument as the A result has been announced.
    I don't know about Japan, but when they use Lausanne, it's because L'Equipe have one of their employees leaking things to them.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • andy_wrxandy_wrx Posts: 3,396
    At this rate, Ii might be worth the athletes sealing a meat sample for retrospective testing if they go to China or Mexico...
  • adamfoadamfo Posts: 763
    Do Chinese beef farmers use Clenbuterol ? It's been banned there for some time.

    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/c ... 169759.htm
  • andy_wrxandy_wrx Posts: 3,396
    adamfo wrote:
    Do Chinese beef farmers use Clenbuterol ? It's been banned there for some time.

    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/c ... 169759.htm
    The SFDA said that all clenbuterol supplies involved in the food safety violations were produced by underground drug factories and did not come from licensed pharmaceutical manufacturers.
    Oh great, so it's not even proper clen, it's like those smiley pills people take in clubs without knowing what's in them
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 26,451
    adamfo wrote:
    Do Chinese beef farmers use Clenbuterol ? It's been banned there for some time.

    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/c ... 169759.htm
    Clenbuterol is also banned in cycling. So therefore Rogers can't possibly have taken it.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Pross wrote:
    One thing I've never understood is why an A sample positive gets made public rather than waiting until the B result is in (or the athlete declines that option). Also, can anyone recall a B sample not backing up the A sample? If that did happen there would always be the 'no smoke without fire' argument as the A result has been announced.

    Within the UCI rules to announce it. To ensure its not hidden by the Federation.

    Which they did on the UCI website.

    http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENewsDe ... LangId%3D1

    Nothing has been leaked.

    Iban Mayo's B sample was negative. As was Marion Jones.

    In Mayo's case they re-tested the B sample twice to get it to be positive.
  • ProssPross Posts: 34,758
    Pross wrote:
    One thing I've never understood is why an A sample positive gets made public rather than waiting until the B result is in (or the athlete declines that option). Also, can anyone recall a B sample not backing up the A sample? If that did happen there would always be the 'no smoke without fire' argument as the A result has been announced.

    Within the UCI rules to announce it. To ensure its not hidden by the Federation.

    Which they did on the UCI website.

    http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENewsDe ... LangId%3D1

    Nothing has been leaked.

    Iban Mayo's B sample was negative. As was Marion Jones.

    In Mayo's case they re-tested the B sample twice to get it to be positive.

    Thanks. I wasn't suggesting it was leaked, just that maybe the B sample should be tested prior to a formal announcement. I'm not sure how that would allow a Fed to bury it.
  • AnonymousAnonymous Posts: 79,667
    Interesting, I sadly think it is just plain guilty here. Is it worth thinking that maybe they were on the juice and what they did was made sure that they were seen to be eating the meat in China to give them a back up to fall back on?
  • Pross wrote:
    Pross wrote:
    One thing I've never understood is why an A sample positive gets made public rather than waiting until the B result is in (or the athlete declines that option). Also, can anyone recall a B sample not backing up the A sample? If that did happen there would always be the 'no smoke without fire' argument as the A result has been announced.

    Within the UCI rules to announce it. To ensure its not hidden by the Federation.

    Which they did on the UCI website.

    http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENewsDe ... LangId%3D1

    Nothing has been leaked.

    Iban Mayo's B sample was negative. As was Marion Jones.

    In Mayo's case they re-tested the B sample twice to get it to be positive.

    Thanks. I wasn't suggesting it was leaked, just that maybe the B sample should be tested prior to a formal announcement. I'm not sure how that would allow a Fed to bury it.

    No problems.

    The old rule was not to announce till after the B sample was tested but probably because of the leaks and Feds not declaring the positive the rule was changed.

    The Contador case being an obvious exception.
  • shinyhelmutshinyhelmut Posts: 1,355
    edited December 2013
    Pross wrote:
    One thing I've never understood is why an A sample positive gets made public rather than waiting until the B result is in (or the athlete declines that option). Also, can anyone recall a B sample not backing up the A sample? If that did happen there would always be the 'no smoke without fire' argument as the A result has been announced.

    Within the UCI rules to announce it. To ensure its not hidden by the Federation.

    Which they did on the UCI website.

    http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENewsDe ... LangId%3D1

    Nothing has been leaked.

    Iban Mayo's B sample was negative. As was Marion Jones.

    In Mayo's case they re-tested the B sample twice to get it to be positive.

    Vania Rossi, ricco's better half was cleared by the B sample too.
  • me-109me-109 Posts: 1,728
    sjmclean wrote:
    Interesting, I sadly think it is just plain guilty here. Is it worth thinking that maybe they were on the juice and what they did was made sure that they were seen to be eating the meat in China to give them a back up to fall back on?
    I like this, it's like some kind of double-bluff. Covering up a cover-up. Maybe it's hiding a conspiracy involving Chinese farmers and Western pork-belly traders? Perhaps they were bullied into accepting steers from a ranch in, say … ooooh, maybe Austin, where they were 'exercised' so as to be lean and 'race-fit'? Are Sky filming a programme in China or Japan? Surely we can link them all the way to the top?

    Do I need to put any smilies into this?
  • AnonymousAnonymous Posts: 79,667
    Me-109 wrote:
    sjmclean wrote:
    Interesting, I sadly think it is just plain guilty here. Is it worth thinking that maybe they were on the juice and what they did was made sure that they were seen to be eating the meat in China to give them a back up to fall back on?
    I like this, it's like some kind of double-bluff. Covering up a cover-up. Maybe it's hiding a conspiracy involving Chinese farmers and Western pork-belly traders? Perhaps they were bullied into accepting steers from a ranch in, say … ooooh, maybe Austin, where they were 'exercised' so as to be lean and 'race-fit'? Are Sky filming a programme in China or Japan? Surely we can link them all the way to the top?

    Do I need to put any smilies into this?

    Nice post.

    This is the thing about this forum now, you ask a question or make a suggestion and someone just makes some sarcastic comment that serves no purpose other than to be horrible.

    Is it to unthinkable:

    Riders in the past used to get prescriptions drawn up, which would cover certain chemicals appearing in their blood stream. I think someone said in this thread that if the contamination defense is accepted then the ban will only be 1 year, rather than two. So the team is taking the risk of doping, they find a possible way to have any ban reduced if caught. Would they not use it, if they were risking doping in the first place.
  • andy_wrx wrote:
    At this rate, Ii might be worth the athletes sealing a meat sample for retrospective testing if they go to China or Mexico...

    Clen clears the system in 3 days. He was in Tokyo which was 2 weeks after.

    Rogers needs a better story because it wasn't meat or food from China that caused his positive.
  • andy_wrx wrote:
    At this rate, Ii might be worth the athletes sealing a meat sample for retrospective testing if they go to China or Mexico...

    Clen clears the system in 3 days. He was in Tokyo which was 2 weeks after.

    Rogers needs a better story because it wasn't meat or food from China that caused his positive.

    Edit make that 5 days after China. Still a stretch.
  • ArkibalArkibal Posts: 850
    Clen stays in the system for 2-3 weeks at least (even small doses), hence why it's one of the most traceable drugs.

    Rogers must be either the most idiotic rider ever, eating anything that could be Clen affected food, despite the warnings, or just unlucky to get caught.
    No way a seasoned doper will use Clen for a censored small race, at the end of the season, that's just ridiculous beyond belief
  • fleshtuxedofleshtuxedo Posts: 1,844
    So does Clen stay in your body for 3 days, or 2-3 weeks?
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 26,451
    andy_wrx wrote:
    At this rate, Ii might be worth the athletes sealing a meat sample for retrospective testing if they go to China or Mexico...

    Clen clears the system in 3 days. He was in Tokyo which was 2 weeks after.

    Rogers needs a better story because it wasn't meat or food from China that caused his positive.

    Edit make that 5 days after China. Still a stretch.
    He still eats in between races.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • TheBigBean wrote:
    It's almost like they should just bring in a tolerance threshold for Clenbuterol and move on...

    Isn't the point with Clenbuterol that the body doesn't produce it, so that if it's present, it has to have been taken in one form or another? Thresholds/ratios are applied where the substance concerned is produced by the body.

    If memory serves, the hoohah over Berto was that the level detected by the Cologne lab was below the level that labs need to be able to detect in order to gain WADA accreditation. Thus there was the argument that if he'd been tested by a different lab, he'd have not tested positive.

    Could be wrong here, though.
Sign In or Register to comment.