I think if it can be proven that an athlete has intentionally doped (so the onus is on the prosecution), they should be eligible for lifetime bans. If there's a positive test but reasonable doubt, then I think the current system can work. These are people who've worked their entire life for it and I don't think it's unreasonable for people to say that you will be excluded from your chosen profession for ever if you go and do this and we prove it. Perhaps the payoff won't seem like an adequate risk for a young cyclist who knows that at 21 his entire future could be over whereas now, a couple of years can be recovered.
Does anyone know if it's possible to ban from ALL sports for life? I assume that'd need major federations to agree. That way it'd stop the sport switching you occasionally see.
I believe all IV's have now been banned in cycling, you are not allowed to use an IV to rehydrate.
Atlaz - on the face of it, I agree. However, I don't think its as cleanly cut as you make out. A lot of the 'up and coming' riders are mentored by more senior members in the team. These are young impressionable lads who have dedicated their lives to being a pro cyclist, probably living away from home for the first time. If your director is saying that you should be using certain products or you'll be dropped from a 'difficult to get' contract you can see why some of them turn to it. Especially when contract renewals are performance based and everyone else is on the gear!
I think a banning of team managers/directors with a history of doping would make more sense. Rjis should have been kicked out long ago..
I've always said if its proven that a Sportsman has doped for competitive gain and hes convicted then he/she should be banned for life and stripped of all professional time results and titles etc.
That way you'd stop alot of the fringes from trying it- infact you'd stop all but those who are the most desperate/at the end of their career having won not much before.
What annoys me is a cheater coming out as holy/self-imposed redemption crap. Thinking he/she can talk from a position of 'knowing' on the subject.
Thinking he/she can talk from a position of 'knowing' on the subject.
But thats exactly what David Millar has done, and he's done more for anti doping thatn any other rider in the peloton.
i put to you all, if you do something at work that runs you the risk of being cought and sacked, would you do it? - i'd say some of you do this and or knows someone who does, ahem, bend the rules, but... if you were cought, sackd and then not able to work in that field again! would you risk it?
so, ban them for life. it is simple, no doubt in my mind.
Its not that black and white though is it Hora.
To me there's a difference between a top 3 senior rider doping to win, and a young naive pro who doesn't know any better.
If doping is endemic within a team, and they have espoirs racing professionally for the first time who are encouraged to dope or be kicked out, who is at fault? Without an influx new riders the sport would fizzle out and become dull to watch. It's these young riders that should be monitored and coached so that they don't think the only route is doping. More team Sky's in other words
but... if you were cought, sackd and then not able to work in that field again! would you risk it?
Not that simple, otherwise countries with death-penalties would be murder free.
Plus it's not just a case of the consequences of being caught, you have to add the probability of getting caught and the rewards of not being caught to get a feel of the risks involved.
flange unless your a bit dim even a 16/17yr old up and coming rider will know that taking a substance/offered an injection is bad.
Like I said conviction. If a team doctor is administering the drug unbeknown then there can be argued reasonable doubt against a ban.
However a blanket/no budge-stance would stop almost all attempts over night. I bet it still goes on, I bet theres synthetics etc not picked up, noted or checked yet...
There is no such thing as a "young naive pro who does not know any better" you know its wrong. you simply have to as its all over the sport so your exposure to doping as the wrong route to take surely must be 50ft high with flashing lights on!
ignorance is not an excuse
Contador got caught. Now getting punished, fair enough. Done.
As for the governing bodies covering up for Armstrong I just don't buy it. Most of these governing bodies are European, the first chance they got to discredit an American taking TdF wins it'd be taken.
The conspiricy theories and constant we haven't found anything but are still going to keep looking until we do, approach are a bit strange. How many times can they test the same samples and go over the same ground to find proof they didn't last time through.
I'm pretty sure if EPO was so hard to trace 12 years ago the playing field would have been pretty level for all the top riders rather than the notion that one pro had dedicated enough time and resource to developing new ways to cheat that kept ahead of all the testers.
I'm not certain that he didn't cheat but do think he was an outstanding sportsman who has been tested a hell of a lot without getting convicted of anything.
Why bother with testers anyway - TJ seems to have all the evidence to hand and know who was guilty, how they did it and every other detail possible!!
Steve - its all info in the public domain. read the link about Armstrong and the retrospective testing
As for the governing bodies covering up for Armstrong I just don't buy it. Most of these governing bodies are European, the first chance they got to discredit an American taking TdF wins it'd be taken.
Didn't he also say (and repeated) that the French authorities don't like him? Has done for years which meant he moved/left back to Texas?
If its ever proven that he won his 7 tours with dope then I'll be very upset. The bloke is great, whether you are a fan or not. Single-minded ruthlessness on and off the bike.
If the tests for EPO were unsophisticated in LA's days, then chances are the whole peloton was up to no good. He caned the lot of them. He was also on death's door and riddled with cancer. My hat is off to the guy. His worst crime...Sheryl Crow.
Tehre was no test for EPO when armstrong was winning.
I'm not certain that he didn't cheat but do think he was an outstanding sportsman who has been tested a hell of a lot without getting convicted of anything.
What do you think of Marion Jones?
I do agree that you should lose any results if you show to have doped - as to lifetime ban, is it better having a David Miller back in cycling clean and very anti doping or not ?
Surely he would be an excellent mentor to have ?
I also agree that LA was too good, especially as everyone else around at the time has been busted, but he has never failed a test so the presumption has to be one of innocence, if he fails one - even retrospectively - then take away all his titles and give them to the next "clean" rider.
Could be a very interesting exercise from his early wins ......
Also not sure many other sports would have the balls to chase the winner of their biggest title for drugs - seems very odd the results from Operation Puerto in other sports have never come to light.
Tehre was no test for EPO when armstrong was winning.
They had a haemocrit test. Which measured the constitution of riders blood levels. ie. they tried not to dope [i]too [/i]much.
You only have to look at the ascent time of Alp D'huez to know there was something fishy going on.
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpe_d%27Huez#Ascent_times ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpe_d%27Huez#Ascent_times[/url]
the whole peloton was up to no good
I think that's a given.
In those days - the rider with the best response to EPO treatment won the day.
The conspiricy theories and constant we haven't found anything but are still going to keep looking until we do, approach are a bit strange. How many times can they test the same samples and go over the same ground to find proof they didn't last time through.
Except as TJ says, they have found evidence, the only problem is it's old so cannot be used as proof. Read David Walsh's book "From Lance to Landis".
The other thing is to look at LA's rivals at the time. Ullrich, Virenque, Millar, Riise, Pantani, Basso, Landis, Hamilton, Heras, Vinokourov, Valverde, De Luca etc, etc. They were all doping but couldn't beat LA. Is there any chance at all that a clean LA could beat all these other guys who were doping. No.
The UCI began using a urine test for EPO in 2001.There was no test for EPO when armstrong was winning.
Armstrong won the Tour in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005.
[img] 
[/img]
If the tests for EPO were unsophisticated in LA's days, then chances are the whole peloton was up to no good. He caned the lot of them.
I think this is a key point. It seems unlikely that if Armstrong was doping, that he was alone. In that sense the playing field was level.
The other thing is to look at LA's rivals at the time. Ullrich, Virenque, Millar, Riise, Pantani, Basso, Landis, Hamilton, Heras, Vinokourov, Valverde, De Luca etc, etc. They were all doping but couldn't beat LA. Is there any chance at all that a clean LA could beat all these other guys who were doping. No.
Surely that makes him the best if he beat all comers on a level playing field.
We all forget though that this man went through hell on earth, Cancer & Chemo changed his bodyshape from stocky/slightly thick set to lean and more slender. You can also question the pain hes body went through, his naturally high air/lung capacity and the fact a cancer survivor said he'd never take any chemical in his body again after Chemo.
After all winning a bike race isn't the same as beating Cancer. From what I can gather Cancer makes people think about living not about cheating.
The difference is with Marion Jones, she was deeply entrenched in the BALCO affair.
I think that if LA had been naughty that it would have come out. Plenty of doc's that would surely spill the beans on supplying for a decent payday.
Plus, he has rather a long way to fall should it be true. Is it really worth trying to live the lie rather than tell the truth.
I completely disagree with lifetime bans, three strikes and your out, maybe. But a lifetimne ban for your first offence? Millar has turned himself around. I hope anyone calling for a lifetime ban has never done anything wrong in there life.
If its ever proven that he won his 7 tours with dope then I'll be very upset.
no of course he did not cheat ....the man was able to beat superb athletes like Pantani and others who were drug cheating just by his self determination and will to win. By doing this he proved that cheaters did not always win and he single handed removed drugs from the peloton by showing how you could win clean and we have had no incidents since.
Plus, he has rather a long way to fall should it be true. Is it really worth trying to live the lie rather than tell the truth.
you answer your own question deny it and then he doe snot fall so of course it is
I wish he was clean , like i wish there was a god who righted all wrongs but I have as much faith in either being true. He cant even say he never failed a drug test - very clever athlete but sadly unlikely to be clean IMHO.
The difference is with Marion Jones, she was deeply entrenched in the BALCO affair.
Yes - but before that came out, wasn't everybody saying the same about her as some say about Lance? All you're saying here is that Lance managed to keep his more secret - more luck than judgement that his drugs didn't come from somewhere which got exposed like that. Though of course there is actually evidence against him - with the exception of direct testimony possibly more than against Marion.
No difference at all between Lance and Marion in terms of "has been tested a hell of a lot without getting convicted of anything."
I have to admit I was not at all convinced of LA doping at first, but having seen last year's tour and how people were riding when apparently clean, it makes the incredible feats of speed by LA&co look highly suspicious.
So, Contador....
I was wondering if we would talk about him anytime
I think we've now established Contador is a doper though? Boring discussing him.
Doper? No no, he'd personally bought some meat from a Butchers my dear.
Which Butchers?
Oh dear he can't seem to remember
😆
In that sense the playing field was level.
Yes, you have the cyclist who performed best and responded best to EPO.
Not all riders responded equally so treatments were in some ways tailored.
It is amazing though that no one credible has emerged to point the finger at Armstrong. Someone directly involved. I agree that the balance of probabilities says he doped, no question. Some serious omerta going on, though.Yes - but before that came out, wasn't everybody saying the same about her as some say about Lance? All you're saying here is that Lance managed to keep his more secret - more luck than judgement that his drugs didn't come from somewhere which got exposed like that. Though of course there is actually evidence against him - with the exception of direct testimony possibly more than against Marion.No difference at all between Lance and Marion in terms of "has been tested a hell of a lot without getting convicted of anything."
From what I can gather Cancer makes people think about living not about cheating.
Can tou explain what that means, because it makes no sense to me
Plenty of doc's that would surely spill the beans on supplying for a decent payday.
The doctors are more than well paid. Plus if they 'spill the beans' they get bans too, why would they do that?
Didn't he also say (and repeated) that the French authorities don't like him? Has done for years which meant he moved/left back to Texas?
I thought he buggered off to Spain after leaving the South of France (the bit next to the Italian border). At the time it was considered less suspicious to be in Spain rather than Italy for some reason. Course that's changed a bit...
Oh yes that Lab in Spain that was busted and linked to a lot of 'top' Spanish riders that the Spanish authorities didn't follow up....
Patriotic bunch.
Am I correct in reading Contador had just a tiny trace of steroids, verging on undetectable ?
At the time of testing.
Oh yes that Lab in Spain that was busted and linked to a lot of 'top' Spanish riders that the Spanish authorities didn't follow up....Patriotic bunch.
Well, there was this little detail that doping wasn't a crime (it is now), which means the judges had no jurisdiction. But don't let the facts get in the way of a decent conspiracy theory, eh?
warton - Member
From what I can gather Cancer makes people think about living not about cheating.
Can tou explain what that means, because it makes no sense to me
Plenty of doc's that would surely spill the beans on supplying for a decent payday.
The doctors are more than well paid. Plus if they 'spill the beans' they get bans too, why would they do that?[i]
For cash my dear boy, for cash... Might be well paid, but I am sure there would be one willing to "bust the myth" that is LA.
jambalaya - MemberAm I correct in reading Contador had just a tiny trace of steroids, verging on undetectable ?
Along with plasticizers.
Blood transfusion with his own stored blood that he thought was clean but new more sensitive testing found the tiny trace is the likely explanation.
I feel sorry for the winners of this years tour and the olympics, how would you feel about winning when the best isn't racing?
If the "best" had just been done for doping, not a problem really
I am sure they will feel it is just an utter fraud to not be beaten to gold/yellow jersey by a drug cheat .
Along with plasticizers.
Is that an official result?
why ask a question you know the answer to?
re plasticizers- do you have another expanation for their presence?
"Along with plasticizers"
There is no agreed test for the above, mainly because you you would be found positive if you'd wrapped your butties in cling film.
There is no offical test or limit for plasticizers - its a test that is being developed and is awaiting accreditation. It is however apart of the case against contador thats why they wanted Ashendon to give evidence and why contadors team tried to block him
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/10849/Report--WADA-lawyers-unhappy-with-Contador-CAS-hearing.aspx
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/segura-says-contador-plasticizer-levels-are-indicative-of-transfusion
Not true MT - above a certain level transfusion is the only explanation
why ask a question you know the answer to?
re plasticizers- do you have another expanation for their presence?
Because some people keep on bleating on about them, and Armstrong's guilt, as if they were proven facts and not just newspaper reports.
TandemJeremy - Member
Epicyclo - read my link above - thats pretty strong evidence...
It reads more like an interview to me.
It's up to a court to decide if it's credible evidence.
Its one of the worlds top experts on doping giving a detailed analysis and his opinion. It certainly is strong evidence - a court would decide if it were proof.
Mogrim - the plasticisers in Contadors blood being at a level that proves transfusion is a proven fact. Its not accredited for to use as a banning on its own but its a part of the evidence against him.
anyway - contador is now a proven drug cheat and rightly banned
For cash my dear boy, for cash... Might be well paid, but I am sure there would be one willing to "bust the myth" that is LA.
Michelle Ferrari (who has been convicted) has had links with (from wikipedia):
All of team Gewiss-Ballan that took the entire podium in the 1994 edition of La Flèche Wallonne: Moreno Argentin, Giorgio Furlan and Eugeni Berzin
Lance Armstrong
Tyler Hamilton[5] : stated he worked with Ferrari for one year
Paolo Savoldelli
Mario Cipollini
Gianni Bugno
Giorgio Furlan
Pavel Tonkov
Cadel Evans
Tony Rominger
Abraham Olano
Ivan Gotti
Claudio Chiappucci
Filippo Simeoni: admitted to doping
Patrik Sinkewitz: suspended for positive out-of-competition test while preparing for 2007 Tour de France; admitted to doping
Eddy Mazzoleni
Floyd Landis: suspended for positive doping test at 2006 Tour de France; admitted to doping
Levi Leipheimer
Axel Merckx
Alexandre Vinokourov: suspended for positive doping test at 2007 Tour de France
Michael Rogers
Rumours (and thats all they are) put US postal payments to Ferrari at 15 million dollars.
thats for one rider / one team.
Any money he would get paid for busting LA would be peanuts copmpared to that, why bother? LA's legal team would be all over him
Best not use your camel back bladder to much, especially if you use sugary drinks. Puts more of the plastic into your system than water only. You sure tj, could that evidence be used in sports related drugs case. Correct, no is the answer.
Edit was spelling am trying to improve.
Mogrim - the plasticisers in Contadors blood being at a level that proves transfusion is a proven fact.
Go on then, find me an official test, or even an official statement from an accredited lab - so far all you've posted are newspaper / website reports.
mt - only because it is not accredited and you do not get the same levels from ingestion as from injection. Really - rather than trying to rubbish what I say read up on it. this will be an accredited test in the next year or two and there will be a level set above which folk are banned.
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/8166/Plasticizer-test-inches-closer-to-being-validated.aspx
mogrim - Member
Mogrim - the plasticisers in Contadors blood being at a level that proves transfusion is a proven fact.
Go on then, find me an official test, or even an official statement from an accredited lab - so far all you've posted are newspaper / website reports.
What mogrim said. The bugger is still guilty, though his steak could have been wrapped in clingfilm, liquidised and injected.
Edit was because I'm crap at writting.
You can tell from thepresence of plasticisers that he had a blood transfusion and the reason for the blood transfusion? I haven't seen any cock and biull stories relating to the plasticisers, if thereare can you link. I haven't read to much of this but I understand he said he got tthe meat from a butcher in Irun, and everyone says its a cock and bull story but there is no cock and bull story aboput the placticisers????
We were just discussing this at work and wondering if he has to give the prize money back. As pro tour teams share the spoils amongst their entire staff, everybody would have to pay a bit back.
Also, sorry if this has been posted elsewhere but [url= http://www.radioshacknissantrek.com/news/andy-schleck-no-reason-be-happy ]here's[/url] Andy Schleck's response.
Meanwhile the 'winner' of the 2010 TdF, Andy Schleck has now been given the race but he did not get the chance to stand on the podium waving flowers etc. Probably lost out on some money as well, extra endorsements/crits etc but for people at this level it is not all about money. AC has cheated AS out of a big moment in his life.
I have read about plasticisers and understand, but you cannot find him guilty if that evidence is not allowed by the tribunal. It's as if it does not exist, just like the stuff on Armstrong.
Within no time there will be a plausable reason a high plasticiser in the blood after the first person is found positive on any new test.
I go back to butties and clingfilm, camelbacks, water bottles and to many packes of crisps.
mt - it can be used as a part of the evidence that he transfused. It can be used in that context.
Those things you mention will not give a high reading in the same why as transfusing is my understanding of the testing hence it needs a threshold.
Store the blood in non plastic containers. No Platicisation.
TandemJ - thanks
A good friend of mine and mtb'er ran various drug testing programmes, the testers are always one step behind and always will be 🙁
Probably the easiest way to level the field is to just simply allow doping.
I feel sorry for the winners of this years tour and the olympics, how would you feel about winning when the best isn't racing?
Where did you hear that Wiggins wasn't racing?
Meanwhile the 'winner' of the 2010 TdF, Andy Schleck has now been given the race but he did not get the chance to stand on the podium waving flowers etc. Probably lost out on some money as well, extra endorsements/crits etc but for people at this level it is not all about money. AC has cheated AS out of a big moment in his life.
I feel sorry for Andy Schleck - but even more sorry for Michele Scarponi. He lost the chance to stand on top of the podium when AC shouldn't even have been racing.
Meanwhile the 'winner' of the 2010 TdF, Andy Schleck has now been given the race but he did not get the chance to stand on the podium waving flowers etc. Probably lost out on some money as well, extra endorsements/crits etc but for people at this level it is not all about money. AC has cheated AS out of a big moment in his life.
This is the saddest part for me.
He lost the chance to stand on top of the podium when AC shouldn't even have been racing AND EVERYONE KNEW THIS WOULD HAPPEN
Shameful the whole thing , given toatl liability and his pathetic excuse this was aalways bound to happen - lets hope DS and the Spanish spill the beans on their "favourite son"
He was caught and banned thats fair enough but lets hope that they might now get round to taking Lance Armstrong to trail over it which they now can as the feds case againts him is closed.
Untill the UCI president Pat McQuald is still in his post that will never happen as he doesnt want LA to be charged and run the risk of his tours wins being taken off him.
I will say that the last multi TDF winner to win all his tours clean was Greg Lemond .
Another bad point of todays verdict is that Andy Schleck ( whos father is very good friends with Pat McQuald) is now the winner of the 2010 TDF please he was only second because of the his team mate got every one to slow down and more of less soft pedal stages because he and his brother ( who has been found with a positive drug sample)fell off there bikes and without this help you could argue the time lost there is no way he would have been 2nd.
tj - only mentioned the other plactic containers in jest, thought the bag of crisps was a give away.
Still maintain that a bit of plastic in the blood does not prove anything as long as it is not allowed to be used as evidence. It may soon be allowed but there will be alternatives. Can see it now reporters following cycle team staff to the bottle bank, was that a bottle of Newcastle Brown or Contador blood.
i dont trust any of them, but i really dont care that much, i just like to watch the TDF, im never going to be in it and wouldnt want to be, but when I get home and turn on the telly i like to watch it
I don't think the TDF will miss Contador at all in fact make it more exciting IMO, don't really like his riding style and the way he bobs about standing on the pedals. His team Boss Bjarne Riis was a drug cheat anyway so why is he allowed to manage a team is beyond me.
[url= http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7164/6829547217_6934bda1eb_z.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/kristoframon/6829547217/ ]this photo does not exist[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/kristoframon/ ]kristof ramon[/url], on Flickr
The Panel concluded that booth the meat contamination scenario and the blood transfusion
scenario were, in theory, posssible explanations for the adverse analytic cal findings, but were
however equally unlikely. In n the Panel’s opinion, on the basis of the eevidence adduced, the
presence of clenbuterol was s more likely caused by the ingestion of a contaminated food
supplement.
[url= http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/5649/5048/0/Media20Release20_English_2012.02.06.pdf ]Says TAS[/url]
TAS says that thge blood transfusion is as much cock and bull as the comtaminated meat story. It appears they don't have anyrhing except the contador admission of taking of a banned substance and no clear believable explanation. That knock the transfusion conspiraxcy on the head.
one thing i'd like to know is does this mean alberto should be dis-credited for any previous wins?
i mean he won the tdf in 07 and 09 did he not? are we to believe he 'suddenly' started doping in 2010?? and if so why should he need to given he has won it before? surely this only aids the fact that he and mostly all the other top riders have found a sly and cunning way of cheating over the years? im sure if contador is guilty then the majority of the others are indeed enhancing there chances of staying within reaching distance of him???
i genuinely think its just a sport that will and has always had such a problem since doctors etc found a way of enhancing the riders bodies and managing to cover it up....
if hes been found guilty and stripped of his 2010 tdf win, what about all his other wins? maybe no proof sure, but in my mind he didnt suddenly become useless the folling year at the 2010 tdf and decided to enhance his body....
i think its pretty safe and fair to say that if he has won titles like his in his lifetime then hes been enhanced along the way not just suddenly in 2010....
Tagger - thats not what its saying at all. They did not consider the evidence for the transfusion. 🙄 Contador managed to get he main witness and evidence not heard on this aspect.
on the basis of the [b]eevidence adduced[/b],
Perhaps you could explain to me what "The Panel concluded that both the meat contamination scenario and the blood transfusion
scenario were, in theory, possible explanations for the adverse analytical findings, but were however equally unlikely." means.
to me its says that both the theory of transfusion and meat contanmination were possible they are both unlikely and that the clembuterol entered the bloodsteam in another way. Perhaps they didn't consider the evidence because they, the experts, don't consider it to be likely. if they did consider it likely they would of sent a message to others about blood transfusions.