J T-L

1…34689…13

Comments

  • symo
    symo Posts: 1,743
    Pokerface wrote:
    And yet, no doubt all these justifications were brought up by his lawyers to both the UCI and UKAD. Neither of them found it compelling enough to give him a pass.

    I suspect in time we will hear more about exactly what it was in his passport that stood out and why it wasn't able to be justified.

    Would still love to see the reasoning document. (if they do have one)
    +++++++++++++++++++++
    we are the proud, the few, Descendents.

    Panama - finally putting a nail in the economic theory of the trickle down effect.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    symo wrote:
    Pokerface wrote:
    And yet, no doubt all these justifications were brought up by his lawyers to both the UCI and UKAD. Neither of them found it compelling enough to give him a pass.

    I suspect in time we will hear more about exactly what it was in his passport that stood out and why it wasn't able to be justified.

    Would still love to see the reasoning document. (if they do have one)
    UKAD will put it up on their website once the period for appealing has passed (unless there's an appeal)
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • mfin
    mfin Posts: 6,729
    Pokerface wrote:
    And yet, no doubt all these justifications were brought up by his lawyers to both the UCI and UKAD. Neither of them found it compelling enough to give him a pass.

    I suspect in time we will hear more about exactly what it was in his passport that stood out and why it wasn't able to be justified.

    Well said that man. People are saying whether they think the findings were right or wrong when (A) they would not be in the slightest bit qualified or knowledgable to interpret any data, and (B) they don't even know what the findings are.

    Armchair punditry is one thing, but doing the above is incredibly thick. That said, discussing the rise (and fall) of JTL is at least something that can be done.
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,549
    Salsiccia1 wrote:

    BIG test of the Bio Passport this one.

    To date, the UCI have brought 15 prosecutions based on biological passport data. Their current record is 14-0 in their favour, with just the Kreuziger case outstanding.

    When it was introduced they were concerned that it would fail if the initial cases failed, so they only prosecute when they are all but certain that they'll be successful. We haven't yet seen the reasoning for this case, but I don't think it is a big test as the biological passport programme has shown that it works.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    iainf72 wrote:
    Everyone knows 3 experts need to agree independently to open a passport case, right? To flag up on it is not trivial. With a relatively small set of data the samples they flagged up must've been pretty out there.

    In terms of avoiding EPO positive - IV injection, plenty of water and you'll be golden for the urine test in 12 hours

    3 experts from the same institution who has brought the bio passport case in the first place? Or from outside that organisation altogether?

    Bit tough to say they bring cases which are watertight and never fail otherwise.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • rozzer32
    rozzer32 Posts: 3,923
    frenchfighter wrote:
    iainf72 wrote:
    Everyone knows 3 experts need to agree independently to open a passport case, right? To flag up on it is not trivial. With a relatively small set of data the samples they flagged up must've been pretty out there.

    In terms of avoiding EPO positive - IV injection, plenty of water and you'll be golden for the urine test in 12 hours

    3 experts from the same institution who has brought the bio passport case in the first place? Or from outside that organisation altogether?

    Bit tough to say they bring cases which are watertight and never fail otherwise.

    Here's a good explantion about bio passport from inrng http://inrng.com/2013/10/uci-bio-passport-tiernan-locke/
    ***** Pro Tour Pundit Champion 2020, 2018, 2017 & 2011 *****
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Cool thanks.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Ok so it sounds like a robust procedure but it does not say where the experts come from - does anyone know?

    Then Kreuziger for instance can get three experts to say the bio passport case is not possible to be upheld. Odd. Unless he is paying these experts on the proviso they argue the clean angle regardless.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,436
    Brian Smith ‏@BriSmithy · 17m
    Sorry peeps....can't comment until decision made about appealing the decision by UKAD.
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • r0bh
    r0bh Posts: 2,436
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Ok so it sounds like a robust procedure but it does not say where the experts come from - does anyone know?

    Then Kreuziger for instance can get three experts to say the bio passport case is not possible to be upheld. Odd. Unless he is paying these experts on the proviso they argue the clean angle regardless.

    That is generally how defence witnesses work; you're hardly going to pay someone to say you are guilty are you.
  • OPQS
    OPQS Posts: 187
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Brian Smith ‏@BriSmithy · 17m
    Sorry peeps....can't comment until decision made about appealing the decision by UKAD.

    UKAD = UK Amateur Dramatics?
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    OPQS wrote:
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Brian Smith ‏@BriSmithy · 17m
    Sorry peeps....can't comment until decision made about appealing the decision by UKAD.

    UKAD = UK Amateur Dramatics?

    lol.

    Feel sorry for the guy...even if he wins an appeal no team is likely going to want him.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Ok so it sounds like a robust procedure but it does not say where the experts come from - does anyone know?

    Then Kreuziger for instance can get three experts to say the bio passport case is not possible to be upheld. Odd. Unless he is paying these experts on the proviso they argue the clean angle regardless.
    No. The experts are employed by the APMU (Athletes Passport Management Unit) who run the passport for the CADF (Cycling Anti-Doping Foundation) who do all the testing. I think there are nine experts in all.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • r0bh
    r0bh Posts: 2,436
    OPQS wrote:
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Brian Smith ‏@BriSmithy · 17m
    Sorry peeps....can't comment until decision made about appealing the decision by UKAD.

    UKAD = UK Amateur Dramatics?

    Presumably you have some evidence that UKAD haven't followed due process to back this statement up?
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    r0bh wrote:
    OPQS wrote:
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Brian Smith ‏@BriSmithy · 17m
    Sorry peeps....can't comment until decision made about appealing the decision by UKAD.

    UKAD = UK Amateur Dramatics?

    Presumably you have some evidence that UKAD haven't followed due process to back this statement up?
    We would he need evidence to back up a daft, off the cuff joke?
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    RichN95 wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Ok so it sounds like a robust procedure but it does not say where the experts come from - does anyone know?

    Then Kreuziger for instance can get three experts to say the bio passport case is not possible to be upheld. Odd. Unless he is paying these experts on the proviso they argue the clean angle regardless.
    No. The experts are employed by the APMU (Athletes Passport Management Unit) who run the passport for the CADF (Cycling Anti-Doping Foundation) who do all the testing. I think there are nine experts in all.

    Wasnt Ashenden on this panel of experts?
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    Paulie W wrote:
    Wasnt Ashenden on this panel of experts?
    Yeah, but he quit when they insisted on confidentiality. Ashenden had a habit of going to the press when he didn't get his way. (see the Contador case)
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • curium
    curium Posts: 815
    chrisday wrote:
    Art Vandelay wrote:
    Oleg getting stuck in:
    @olegtinkov
    I am very high opinion on Sir.Brailsword as a manager, but this zero tolerance hestiria makes him really shallow in my eyes. Sorry, SIR.

    I am AGAINST doping in any sports, would never support or encourage it, but would never pretend that I can change it, pure PR and propaganda

    That is why i never bs about doping, simply because it is impossible to guarantee anything, Anglo-Saxon typical hypocrisy and PR only

    Now #SKY and their manager look very stupid, after screening at every corner about "zero-tolerance stance to doping".They'd better be whist

    What's Russian for schadenfreude?
    Interesting his use of the term Anglo-Saxon as a negative. I've heard this in France before.

    Ironically his DS is a Dane, aren't they Saxons? And they're part-funded by Saxo Bank.

    Anyway, is there a widespread feeling on the continent that the Anglo-Saxons have a different way of doing things which is to appear to conduct themselves in a certain manner while secretly being as deviant as the rest of them?
  • curium
    curium Posts: 815
    Gazzaputt wrote:
    Like to ask how the hell did he afford to dope as a continental rider? I'm led to believe a proper doping strategy can cost 1000s to 10000s of Euros. Surely that was not money he had available to him. Also wasn't he UK based? Getting these products is a lot harder in the UK than Europe. A very strange case and very sad for him.
    I've heard that, if anything, the lower rungs of the racing hierarchy are even dirtier than the World Tour. Your doping strategy only needs to be better than or equal to your competitors'.

    Also, you can buy most things on the internet.
  • curium
    curium Posts: 815
    Does anyone think the tone of the JTL debate betrays some hypocrisy in the attitude to doping violations in the English language media at least and possibly on this board?

    Just interesting to compare and contrast the comments on the JTL case with the Menchov case. Most people seem confident Denis is guilty as hell while in the JTL case I'm picking up either disappointment in JTL or lack of confidence in the bio-passport procedure.
  • Macaloon
    Macaloon Posts: 5,545
    curium wrote:
    Does anyone think the tone of the JTL debate betrays some hypocrisy in the attitude to doping violations in the English language media at least and possibly on this board?

    Just interesting to compare and contrast the comments on the JTL case with the Menchov case. Most people seem confident Denis is guilty as hell while in the JTL case I'm picking up either disappointment in JTL or lack of confidence in the bio-passport procedure.

    I think it reflects the difference between mainstream coverage of the team - no stone left unturned - and the reality, that they've made some terrible naiveligent judgement calls. Nuance is dead. The tabloids won.
    ...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.
  • Pokerface
    Pokerface Posts: 7,960
    curium wrote:
    Does anyone think the tone of the JTL debate betrays some hypocrisy in the attitude to doping violations in the English language media at least and possibly on this board?

    Just interesting to compare and contrast the comments on the JTL case with the Menchov case. Most people seem confident Denis is guilty as hell while in the JTL case I'm picking up either disappointment in JTL or lack of confidence in the bio-passport procedure.


    Menchov had links to doping doctors, years of suspect performances, affiliations, teams, etc, etc. JTL is a newcomer to the scene and whilst he had a few good performances, he didn't go off and win a Grand Tour so it's natural for people to be more sceptical of whether or not he doped. Plus he was on a lower-level team, had a respected manager, and a myriad of other reasons why people doubt he could have done something.

    Not saying it's right, but it's also not necessarily English language bias.
  • Coachb
    Coachb Posts: 68
    Tyson gay and all those other athletes are welcomed back into their sport with open arms and reduced bans.
    I doubt JTL will be welcomed back. Does not seem right somehow. They profit physically form the gains made from steroids and financially from the rewards of diamond league etc yet JTL will be lucky to get a ride in the tour series. Millar and all those popular dopers seemed to have doped at the right time and are laughing all the way to the bank.
  • Macaloon
    Macaloon Posts: 5,545
    ^ Golf club bore. You haven't had an original thought since 2012.
    ...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.
  • OPQS
    OPQS Posts: 187
    edited July 2014
    r0bh wrote:
    OPQS wrote:
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Brian Smith ‏@BriSmithy · 17m
    Sorry peeps....can't comment until decision made about appealing the decision by UKAD.

    UKAD = UK Amateur Dramatics?

    Presumably you have some evidence that UKAD haven't followed due process to back this statement up?

    Me? No. It was just a rubbish joke; I have no idea what UKAD stands for.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    OPQS wrote:
    Me? No. It was a genuine question; I have no idea what UKAD stands for.
    United Kingdom Anti-Doping
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • OPQS
    OPQS Posts: 187
    RichN95 wrote:
    OPQS wrote:
    Me? No. It was a genuine question; I have no idea what UKAD stands for.
    United Kingdom Anti-Doping

    Thanks Rich. I could have Googled - was just being lazy.
  • r0bh
    r0bh Posts: 2,436
    UKAD Final Decision: http://www.ukad.org.uk/anti-doping-rule ... ion/a/6605
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    r0bh wrote:
    UKAD Final Decision: http://www.ukad.org.uk/anti-doping-rule ... ion/a/6605
    For those who don't want to read it all: 2 year ban starting from Jan 1 2014, disqualified from his results in the ToB and WCs in 2012 and fined £15K+.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    Did he really expect people to believe that a cyclist could drink that much booze?
    Twitter: @RichN95

Categories