Brian Smith reaction to JTL

johnboy183

But why then the discussion that samples can be retested years later? If such a short window for detection then presumably no-one is going to be caught out after the event. Or are the authorities talking about blood being stored an retested?

Pross

I thought the freezing of samples is to enable future testing if tests improve or to allow retrospective testing if new doping products are discovered with the general idea it will act as a deterrent?

r0bh

johnboy183 wrote:

But why then the discussion that samples can be retested years later? If such a short window for detection then presumably no-one is going to be caught out after the event. Or are the authorities talking about blood being stored an retested?

Frozen samples would be retested years later with new tests, for substances that weren't detectable with the tests available when the sample was taken.

jimmurray

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/EXCLUSI ... story.html

jimmythecuckoo

Interesting stuff.

No sign of a 'fess up coming is there?

slowbike

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Interesting stuff.

No sign of a 'fess up coming is there?

Does rather depend if there is anything to fess up to though doesn't it? I've not read the reports on the passport test - but I assume they're not infallible and whilst on the balance of probability they do indicate doping there's always the slim possibility that a false positive is produced. Perhaps JTL falls into that false positive - perhaps he doesn't.
Whilst I accept the onus is on the rider to provide reasoning behind their results I would hope that the anti-doping body have done all they reasonably can to investigate fully rather than just pointing the finger. Beyond that it's difficult to know what to suggest - JTL may protest his innocence, but currently doesn't have a credible reason for the test results - UKAD cannot be expected to endlessly investigate this case based on the riders word and the support of friends & relatives - but equally it may just be that JTL is innocent (of doping) but cannot identify the cause of the abnormal results.

Yellow Peril

I just find the whole booze fest too implausible to believe.

RichN95.

Slowbike wrote:

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Interesting stuff.

No sign of a 'fess up coming is there?

Does rather depend if there is anything to fess up to though doesn't it? I've not read the reports on the passport test - but I assume they're not infallible and whilst on the balance of probability they do indicate doping there's always the slim possibility that a false positive is produced. Perhaps JTL falls into that false positive - perhaps he doesn't.
Whilst I accept the onus is on the rider to provide reasoning behind their results I would hope that the anti-doping body have done all they reasonably can to investigate fully rather than just pointing the finger. Beyond that it's difficult to know what to suggest - JTL may protest his innocence, but currently doesn't have a credible reason for the test results - UKAD cannot be expected to endlessly investigate this case based on the riders word and the support of friends & relatives - but equally it may just be that JTL is innocent (of doping) but cannot identify the cause of the abnormal results.

In cases that go to a hearing the balance of probability is vastly in favour of the doping though. (The balance is of the order of Real Madrid v the local primary school's under 10 team)

mike6

RichN95 wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Interesting stuff.

No sign of a 'fess up coming is there?

Does rather depend if there is anything to fess up to though doesn't it? I've not read the reports on the passport test - but I assume they're not infallible and whilst on the balance of probability they do indicate doping there's always the slim possibility that a false positive is produced. Perhaps JTL falls into that false positive - perhaps he doesn't.
Whilst I accept the onus is on the rider to provide reasoning behind their results I would hope that the anti-doping body have done all they reasonably can to investigate fully rather than just pointing the finger. Beyond that it's difficult to know what to suggest - JTL may protest his innocence, but currently doesn't have a credible reason for the test results - UKAD cannot be expected to endlessly investigate this case based on the riders word and the support of friends & relatives - but equally it may just be that JTL is innocent (of doping) but cannot identify the cause of the abnormal results.

In cases that go to a hearing the balance of probability is vastly in favour of the doping though. (The balance is of the order of Real Madrid v the local primary school's under 10 team)

There are good reasons for that. All care seems to have been taken to get the case right, governing bodies etc dont like wasting time taking weak or poorly put together cases to expensive hearings, so when they do they make sure the case is strong.
Also the JTL case has gone on for a long long time, more than enough time for him and his legal team to explain the anomalies. I would say, In this case at least, the rider has been given every chance to prove, or even suggest innocence. I would say they have bent over backwards to be fair.

If it had been me I would go straight on the web and do some research on fluctuations in blood values, then base my excuse on the most plausible one that I can make fit my lifestyle. Oh....thats what they have been doing, alegedly.

cougie

Would a pro really be so silly to go out on a bender like that the week before their first Worlds ?
If JTL had performed at his Net App peak at Sky - then his case would be strengthened.

As it is - the most likely scenario is the simplest.

Doped to get the Sky Contract, and then when testing was tighter - he stopped doping. His performance suffered as a result.

No_Ta_Doctor

Paulie W wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

ad_snow wrote:

If he had continued to do whatever he had been doing in 2012 am I right in thinking that he would probably still be riding assuming SKY hadn't caught on to what he had been doing on the side? As his Bio Passport levels would still be consistent.

No. It's not just about levels being consistent - it's also about how values relate to each other. An off-score is one such comparative measurement. And his was super-high.

I find that quite strange. There's so much talk about the passport being longitudinal testing, establishing baselines, and that individual results can only be analyzed in the context of the rest of the passport values, yet the off score for this one test seems to be held up as falling outside any allowable range in itself. It doesn't refer to JTLs own baseline, it's pretty much a fail in its own right. I suppose they needed the other tests in order to qualify it a bit, but it's not clear how, or by how much.

Is there a possibility that a high off score could be indicative of serious illness if it is consistent over time whereas a one-off can only really be explained by doping?

Possibly, but then you could just pull the rider up on the first score and check them for signs of the illness. Rather than waiting to see of they drop dead while you're organizing new tests.

disgruntledgoat

Let's be honest, it was only the fact that he was British and we were able to be familiar with his "first" career that seperated our perception of him from the likes of that guy who monstered the Tour of Turkey that time