[Closed] doping in this years tour

Contador

Armstrong, the Shreks, Wiggins, Kloeden...all of them in fact.

Who has been doping or who will be caught? Only the stupid ones get caught.

I doubt there will be many caught ths year - they have the procedures so tight

Well Astarloza is already standing in the firing line - http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/aug/04/tour-de-france-mikel-astarloza-drugs

Sorry, but I just don't think Wiggins is a doper. He's been brought up in what I think is a clean system, rides for a team that does all it can to show it's clean and is very clear on his views on doping.

If that's right then it realistically opens up the possibility that at least some of the other contenders aren't cheating either (though I'm not commenting on whether they did in the past or not).

As to who the cheats are, well, who can say. Personally I've never trusted Contador but that's because of his links to Manolo Saiz though with all the failed tests after leaving the team, I suppose you could logically say the same about Bruyneel...

Whispers are just that - no one knows any facts.

Armstrong has always frustrated me - as a fan (and I know that sounds hopelessly sad), I want to believe the myth, but as far as I'm aware, the furthest he seems to go is saying he has never tested positive. Now is it just me, or is that a huge distance from saying 'I've never doped'?
Until there is more transparency in pro cycling, there are always going to be doubts,

Any rider from Spain.

Contador.

Sir Wiggo and King Lance have never let so much as a fruit pastille pass their lips nor have experienced more skin breakage than a nettle sting (drugs testers excluded). And if they have then I won't hear of it.

I think the Shreks just enjoy hurting an awful lot. I expect they're into severely heavy MS, especially Andy. Look at his face when he's climbing, he's in heaven!

I expect they're into severely heavy MS,

Marks and Spencers ??

Only the stupid ones get caught.

Don't agree with you on that now. I think in the past that was definitely true but with the targeted testing, I think it's changed from having to be stupid to simply having to be unlucky and with the number of tests they're doing now, you are likely to eventually be unlucky at least using the drugs of choice in the past.

I suspect that those that are still cheating are having to use less effective methods of doping that improve your chances of being unlucky though - eg microdosing EPO or small autologous blood injections.

Agreed with Clubber. I do trust Wiggins (and I'm sticking with that!), and using him as a benchmark it's by no means inconceivable that a fairly close race in the top 10 places was actually clean.

I do worry about Contador. The attacks at Arcalis and Verbier reminded me horribly of Ricco last year.

BD true about Contador and as I've said, I have my suspicions BUT the margin from Wiggo to AC wasn't that great really. When you consider that Wiggins is world class at 4 min efforts (eg track) it's unlikely that he's ever going to be the number 1 at riding 3 week tour type efforts. As such, the margin from him to Contador (let's say that he is naturally the best) isn't unreasonable. Of course, Contador's TTing ability does raise some questions but both ITTs included reasonable climbs in them.

[i]When you consider that Wiggins is world class at 4 min efforts (eg track) it's unlikely that he's ever going to be the number 1 at riding 3 week tour type efforts[/i]

Yes but he has more or less dropped track completely to concentrate on stage racing, lost 7kg since Beijing, put in a good showing at the Giro - I reckon he'll be on the podium within 2 years.

As for the OP...
Difficult one really, procedures have been tightened dramatically but Contador's last TT where he beat Cancellara by a convincing margin seemed too good to be true.

[i]but as far as I'm aware, the furthest he seems to go is saying he has never tested positive[/i]

Armstrong chooses his words carefully - he's said "I have never taken any illegal substances" which is a bit like Bill Clinton saying he never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky...
Of course, exactly where your definition of illegal substances falls is a slightly grey area. I'd like to believe that he has never doped but I DO believe he's maximised every possible grey area to it's fullest extent within the rules.

Yes but he has more or less dropped track completely to concentrate on stage racing, lost 7kg since Beijing, put in a good showing at the Giro - I reckon he'll be on the podium within 2 years.

True enough, I'm not suggesting that he's still trained for the track, but only that that's where he really was at his best and as such, IMO it's unlikely that he's also going to be the absolute best at 3 week tours (and especially the mountain stages) even if he's clearly damn good at them.

where he beat Cancellara by a convincing margin seemed too good to be true.

3 seconds isn't really convincing... anyway, there was a big (for an ITT) hill in the middle of it... if he'd been that close in a flat TT, well that would be quite different.

Wiggo is clean...deffo! he's looking into getting his blood profiles published back to 1999! not checked yet but 2009 figures will be on G-Slipstream site soon if not already...how many others will have the balls to match that

EDIT yep link was there...anybody question these?

Contador does raise questions...interesting to see if he publishes anything!

Schlek brothers are mad...anyone who enjoys climbing that much should be sectioned!...not sure about the M&S connection though!

This is not just cycling ... this is M&S cycling.

Does speculation like this help in anyway?

Cycling has a history of a drug problem going back many decades. The authorities are currently making an effort to clean the sport up. Given the history, a bit of healthy suspicion is no bad thing but to start casting doubt on individuals without good cause just degrades the efforts of the authorities and hence the whole event to my mind.

Surely we either have faith in the authorites to catch any cheats, or we assume the whole thing is a sham and don't follow the race as it isn't a fair competition?

I hope that the testing regime catches no-one and that this is considered PROOF that the competitors were clean and the race was fair. If that happens then this year's tour will go down as a great competition. I fear that even if no-one is caught the spevculation will remain. That's a shame.

Armstrong was on EPO, it was fairly conclusively proven a few years back. But as the test is more cicumstancial, it looks for a trend in EPO use rather than ourtight looking for EPO which is in the body anyway, it was fairly clear that he was injecting himself once every three days, not outright proof though, so his results will stand.

where he beat Cancellara by a convincing margin seemed too good to be true.

3 seconds isn't really convincing... anyway, there was a big (for an ITT) hill in the middle of it... if he'd been that close in a flat TT, well that would be quite different.

Even with a hill in it to beat Cancellara is a hell of a feat, the guy is an animal !!

I had my suspicions about Contador on the climb to Verbier and agree he had that look of Ricco about him.

Lemond and his cronies have some intereseting facts and figures on the VO2max that would be needed to make the climb, i cant find the article with the figures in it, but:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j4QybEAuuqMa6K4hxLocuLa6QQmQ

Yeah but Cancellara isn't really suited to 3 week tours BECAUSE he's such an animal - too solid - so he's always going to be relatively slower in the TT towards the end.

Lemond's article may well prove correct but the figures are a load of rubbish - assumptions of rider weight, altitude and so on make it inaccurate.

thisisnotaspoon - Member
Armstrong was on EPO, it was fairly conclusively proven a few years back......not outright proof though,

So, fair to say that it wasn't conclusively proven a few years back then?

Thisisnotaspoon - do you have a link to anything about that? I missed that concclusive proof completely.

Armstrong - lots of evidence - no proof. He also it would appear took stuff that was not banned when he took it but banned afterwards.

Never proven tho - but there is an awful lot of evidence from witness testimony, to circumstantial to flawed positive testing

He also it would appear took stuff that was not banned when he took it but banned afterwards.

Interested to hear what that is TJ - Can't think of anything myself - EPO was always banned (in the Armstrong era at least) as was HGH and the suggestions above are that if he did dope it was with EPO, not anything else.

He also it would appear took stuff that was not banned when he took it but banned afterwards.

World records have been tumbling in the pool at the worlds in Rome. Those records were broken in a suit which is not yet banned, but will be.

If he took something which was not banned at the time, so what? It wasn't banned. As long as he stopped taking it when it was banned, there's no foul.

What about riders who rode previous races with Spinnaci (spl?) bars? These are now banned, but does that mean when they rode with them and they were not banned, they were cheating?

[i]Surely we either have faith in the authorites to catch any cheats, or we assume the whole thing is a sham and don't follow the race as it isn't a fair competition?[/i]

There is a third option, which many of us adopt I think. We watch and enjoy the race, and we are disappointed in the cheats who allow the drug-testing bores to wreck it.

I have no problem with watching bicycle races where some or all of the competitors are on drugs. They appear to be very entertaining. I dislike having the racing spoilt by the exposure of drug cheats by anti-doping officials. I don't care whether the dopers give up or the anti-dopers give up, but the current practice of having what are pretty much provisional results based on who crossed the line first, which are clarified weeks later when the tests are in won't do at all. Given that the anti-dopers show no signs of pissing off and shutting up I've a strong preference for the riders to stop doping.

🙂

Clubber - Not sure now what it was. Perhaps it was he was taking EPO when there was no test for it I think as shown in the retrospective ( and therefore invalid) testing in France.

I seem to remember something else as well but have no references One of the synthetic steriods?

Just really pisses me off when my heroes turn out to be cheats - there's always been a question mark about Armstrong, and despite wanting to beleve otherwise, there's no denying that he's an extremely paranoid and unpleasant individual at times. Ivan Basso - that one left me feeling really let down. Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis - far too obvious, and both resorted to desperate measures to try and clear their names. Gert-Jan Theunisse (that shows my age) - my hero for years, why didnt I realise at the time?
And still, we continue to follow the pro scene, trying to maintain our faith that our sporting heroes arent as flawed or corrupt as the media would have us believe.

[i]World records have been tumbling in the pool at the worlds in Rome. Those records were broken in a suit which is not yet banned, but will be.[/i]

aye, it's all down to the suit. doping is only prevalent in cycling...;)

(I know that wasn't the point of your post - just annoying that in a certain sport quite unbelievable performance is attributed to an item of clothing, and no question marks raised at all in the press...)

BigDummy, yeah I agree. It is unfortunate that things have got so out of hand that the UCI had to resort to this 'provisional' results system. Like you, I watched and enjoyed theraceas it unfolded, and will be sorely dissapointed if subsequent tests reveal that some riders cheated.

AndyP, I completely agree with you - Operation Puerto threw up suspicion and speculation about a lot of other athletes, but for whatever reason, (as far as I'm aware), it was mainly the pro cyclists that were named - why is that?

As I recall, Lance had a positive test in his first come back tour. The test was from the prologue and was a type of steroid in a very very small amount. After investigation it was said to be from bottom boil cream.

The thing is I can't properly enjoy racing if I know there's cheating. For me, sport is about amazing performances that come from the people - more often the mental than physical actually but to me, any idiot can cheat, very few people can pull out amazing performances on their own.

Good point AndyP ...operation Puerto sp? identified dopers from a range of sports including footie, tennis etc can't recall any repurcussions from those.

Barnsleymitch don't read Matt Rendells The Death of Marco Pantani then, pretty damning evidence of whole teams of riders implicating Roche etc.

Armstrongs blood data was criticised by some Aussie guy who related Heamatocrit levels to EPO usage, on examination the looked conclusive, ie very difficult to tamper with the samples to fake a positive result but again the only "positive sample" he's allegedly produced was a Bsample that had been tested without his consent, by a French lab with a vested interest (flogging the story to L'Equipe) in finding a positive result!

Innocent until PROVEN guilty has to give him the benefit of the doubt for me!

whytetrash - got it and read it - try 'bad blood' by Jeremy Whittle, that a sobering read as well. I'm always amazed by the way that doping is seen as almost a 'tradition' in pro cycling, and you only have to look at Armstrong's reaction to Filippo Simeoni in the 2004 tour to understand that 'spitting in the soup' is still not tolerated.

When Delgado won in '88 he tested positive (for a masking agent for steroids) that was not illegal until a week after the tour ended. He kept the race of course.

Think Lance used EPO, certainly banned drugs, as part of his receovery from cancer - used for their proper purpose. I am no medic and no idea how long traces or effects would remain in the body. STill want to believe in him. And sure as I can be that Wiggo is clean.

lance was up to his old tricks at the giro too, trying to bully Cunego like he did with Simeoni

Reading the posts on here, and in doing so rethinking my own position on this, makes me wonder why I remain a fan of Armstrong - maybe the naive part of me just wants to believe that someone could survive cancer and come back to dominate the sport as a great champion. I just wish he didnt come across as such a paranoid control freak all the time, though having said that, he did allow some human frailty to show through this year, when admitting that he just hadnt been strong enough to keep up with Contador.

"King Lance have never let so much as a fruit pastille pass their lips"

you're joking right? he had a 'non-negative' for EPO in '99. not testing +ve officially isn't the same as not ever doping.

at the top, more dope than don't, it's always been that way. read the Dr Ashenden interview on Cycling News.com for a starter, only one side of it i know, but it makes it easier to understand dopig from both rider and tester POV.

he had a 'non-negative' for EPO in '99. not testing +ve officially isn't the same as not ever doping.

While I suspect that's [b]probably[/b] right, to take it as definitive is naive at the least - as has been mentioned above, it was very debateable about how fair or even accurate this was - there were people clearly out to get LA and that's how the results from the testing came out. It certainly wouldn't be unrealistic to say that there's at least a reasonable possibility that the results were made to match what they wanted.

The thing is, even if he is cheating, he still beat all the other people cheating, having come back from having cancer, which is very impressive whichever way you look at it. I'd really like to be a Lance fan, but unfortunately his attitude to drugs (even if he is clean) spoils it for me.

I think the Shreks just enjoy hurting an awful lot. I expect they're into severely heavy MS, especially Andy. Look at his face when he's climbing, he's in heaven

😆 [img] [/img]

aye, it's all down to the suit. doping is only prevalent in cycling...;)

To be fair to the swimmers, there's loads of evidence that wetsuits make you something like 5% faster in the water due to added buoyancy*, and those fancy now banned suits were getting a significant advantage using exactly the same well understood principles.

Joe

*Which is why triathletes will wear wetsuits even if they are not compulsory in a race, and open water swimmers will put them on if they're allowed

The thing is, even if he is cheating, he still beat all the other people cheating

the problem with that is that doping does not give the same performance benefit from one individual to the next, so if all dope then the winner is not necessarily the best athlete

With the amount of testing LA undergoes if he isn't clean then he's on something they haven't banned yet

clubber, you're right, but when you read about the detail of the testing in this instance and all others, you realise it's actually pretty much impossible odds to try to frame someone in the way they suggested it. samples were numbered not named, some were found +ve. later, seperately, someone in the french media matched numbers to samples reliably - and bingo, lance was unofficially +ve. the numbers and names showed there was EPO in hs urine - not proof to ban, but certainly the smoke that suggests a fire. the evidence makes me believe it's more likely correct than a 'stitch up', even if not legally provable that he doped.

It's easy to come up with counter claims like teh 'hounded by the media' stroy and armstrongs' guys are well experienced in this. for example, under oath in a trial over his bonus he had to reveal info that makes his whole 'lighter rider same power' story a load of BS. but people quote it as fact.. read the Ashenden interview, it explains more and ties up a few other aspects of doping in recent years. Nothing's proven but balance of probability say's armstrong isn't superhuman, just damn good. most of the guys he beat so convincingly were the best in the world and were also doped. and armstrong beat them on water alone? unlikely.

however, i'm a fan of Armstrong whether he dopes or not. i love his riding style and he makes a tour more interesting. but like many of my roadie heroes, i'm not naieve enough to claim they are 100% clean. i don't know, i'll take them for what they are.

[i]you're joking right?[/i]

No, i was entirely serious. Right from where I called Lance 'King' through to where I suggested the Shreks were into MS.

This isn't just EPO, this is lovingly injected, carefully screened M&S EPO.
Contador's definitely doping. He's Spanish, has a silly grin, and does that stupid pistol thing. Pretty much incontrovertible evidence in my book.

Fair point IanMunro.

Over on veloriders they've come up with an almost pefect system for detecting dopers - take a rider's surname, work out the corresponding scrabble score (you don't know how to score by memory! that's ok, go [url= http://www.thekatespanos.com/scrabble-score-calculator ]here[/url] 🙂 ).

IIRC Anyone over 15 is questionable, anyone over 20 is cheating. Check out the recent dopers. Astarloza for example.

🙂

Anyone got a link to the Dr Ashenden article?

you're joking right?

No, i was entirely serious

ok then that's clear - sarcasm doesn't always translate well in posts! enough people do call him king, god, etc.. M+S bit lost me

Does anyone know if it's possible to absorb enough sythetic testosterone through the skin to in a solution to make you fail a drug test? I wondered of Landis was handed a bidon from a 'fan' that was spiked, he was poring so much water over his head the day when he cracked. It's a bit unlikely i know, but is it possible?

I doubt it's possible from skin alone unless it's a patch. His claim is that he won the stage by keeping cool by pouring lots of water over himself and that was handed to him by the team car so it's unlikely that he would have taken any from a specatator anyway.

Ashenden: [url] http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=Ashenden+armstrong&meta= [/url]

ref Lance and EPO:

who watched the Wheel Heroes on ITV4 after one of the tour stages? Bunch of cancer survivors riding the etape? They were in the same hotel as a team that got raided (cofidis?). One of the cancer guys talking to camera says "EPO? I had that injected as part of my treatment".

Seems churlish given what Armstrong undoubtedly went thru with cancer, but is it possible his subsequent performance benefited from the treatment he received? Is it possible armstrong, his manager etc knew that this would be the case?

EPO benefits are temporary. Stop taking it and soon enough you lose the benefit. I don't think anyone's arguing that his cancer treatment actually helped him other than by losing muscle.

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

sorry can't see it on Cyc News maybe my gaff, here's another link to interview. very interesting if not conclusive, but then nothing seems to be conclusive in this area.

Sadly, Doping is endemic in pro cycling - thats why most people who speak out against it are quickly ostracised. Wiggo is very outspoken about it, so I suppose its just a matter of time before he becomes the black sheep of the peloton.

I don't think anyone's arguing that his cancer treatment actually helped him other than by losing muscle.

clubber, that's one of the myths questioned by ashenden, it makes me wonder about wiggin's comments saying his form is down to lower weight / same power too. i'm not doubting wiggins as i know sod all about this aspect, but it does seem hard to imagine how an already fit rider like him or lance, at probably around 5-6% fat, can loose that much weight and stay as strong.
Ashenden suggests there's a lot of smoke and mirrors in this area that cover up / explain doped perforance, but then again i don't agree with his theory of being able to calculate ascent times based on weight gradient and VO2 - headwinds, tyre pressure, aerodynamics, it's all too variable unless dope adds a massive gain, in reality its probably a lot more subtle than that.

in reality its probably a lot more subtle than that

nothing subtle about Vino's time trial speed in the last tour he was kicked off!

EPO gives an average increase in performance of 25% (alledgedly).

Ashenden may question it but you only need to look at photos of LA before and after the big C to see that he clearly had lost a lot of upper body muscle.

he definately lost weight post cancer but his 'increasing power-to-weight ratio' is the myth questioned. i'd say armstrongs pre/post cancer racing weight difference looks similar to wiggins over the last year?

Remember that LA started as a triathlete, and it really is pretty hard to actually lose muscle if it is still getting some use (I almost completely stopped kayaking for 6 months or so, yet still retained most of the muscle mass I use for that).

nothing subtle about Vino's time trial speed in the last tour he was kicked off!

true, or his paris finish!! "wind it in vino, your're giving it away by dropping the whole field of sprinters by 100yds!"

but he was blood doping, not on EPO, whether it has a similar level of effect i'm not sure. similar effect on the blood, but i thnk blood doping gives a more dramatic shrt term increase in performance.

I'd like to believe that Armstrong didn't dope pre retirement, but I think that's always going to be an area of uncertainty, and like religion, it's going to be damn near impossible to change an individuals stance on this, unless Armstong holds up his hand and admits it one day.

Post the first retirement though, I can't see it.
Sure, testing has improved. But more importantly, LA has an ego the size of a small planet, and that combined with how much is riding on his return:
Firstly, his performance in a tour which he probably knew in his heart he wasn't going to win, but could still probably place top 5 in, and be happy with that result.
Secondly, his desire to own/run a top team - there would be no chance in todays climate of achieving that if he tested a positive.
Thirdly, Livestrong is probably bigger than he ever imagined, and I think the responsibility for that rests too heavily on his shoulders to run the risks of doping.