- 10:13 PM
- 11/21/09
As my name suggests, I am a cyclist, so you may consider me biased on this subject. I'd hope that majority of public recognizes that the events Dr. Thompson instigated involved intentional assault.
I'll be first to admit some cyclists act like jerks and cause antagonism between drivers and anyone on a bicycle by their actions. On the other hand, drivers regularly pull bonehead moves as well. I've been involved in two accidents with cars in last 3 years - both times because a car pulled out in front of me in broad daylight, leaving me no option but to T bone them. I was fortunate in that I wasn't seriously injured either time.
I understand the frustration some cyclists cause drivers, after all, I'm a driver too. But I also recognize that anyone on a bicycle is much more vulnerable in any encounter with a car, so I take that into consideration whenever passing cyclists in my car and also when I'm out riding my bike. The law may say I'm entitled to ride two abreast on my bicycle, but an SUV outweighs me by at least 3000 lbs. So I try to be aware of my surroundings and take appropriate precautions, whether I'm riding my bike or driving my car.
Bottom line is that person on a bike that just aggravated you probably has a family at home. They may have inconvenienced you and may be a jerk - that doesn't mean they deserve to be intimidated or seriously injured. If you observe a cyclist breaking the law, try to get the police involved. Don't take matters into your own hands! And if you are a cyclist, obey traffic laws for God's sake. You're going to lose any battle you pick even with the smallest compact car on the road.
posted by BikeNut at 12:01 PM on November 03
What a mess! All because one guy decide he "owns" the trail. Feel really bad for Bishop - crashing out on a neutralized stage when he's in the overall race lead.
posted by BikeNut at 09:45 AM on July 31
Etagloh left out one important part of Kimmage's background. His journalistic career was encouraged and mentored by David Walsh. The same David Walsh who has spent last 10 years hounding Armstrong and others in cycling about doping and insisting that Armstrong must have doped because he couldn't have achieved what he did clean. That fact makes me question Kimmage's objectivity. I'm no apologist for doping in cycling. I believe WADA and UCI are trying hard to remove it from the sport. What amazes me is how many people are critical of cycling, but blind to drug problems in a host of other sports. For example, Operacion Puerto in Spain has been reported widely as a blood doping ring for cycling. But cyclists only represent 30% of the names associated with Operacion Puerto. The rest came from soccer, track&field, etc. Has anyone been asking the international governing bodies from these sports what they are doing to clean up their sports?
posted by BikeNut at 09:49 AM on February 16
I'm supposed to believe he used steroids through his college career and then stopped when he got to the NFL. Give me a break!
posted by BikeNut at 08:50 AM on October 01
I just don't understand the motivation for this. I don't buy argument money is issue - the guy is still pulling in millions a year in endorsements. And I think while cancer publicity is clearly something extremely important to him, there would seem to be easier ways to get that message out.
I think it all boils down to his need for competition plus still having a chip on his shoulder with anyone who doubts him. TdF Director Christian Prudhomme has already said Lance is welcome back provided he and his team complies with drug testing regulations.
My guess is barring injury, he's going to be riding TdF next year. He usually follows through on anything he announces publicly. I wouldn't bet against him winning #8, but it is a very high risk move on his part. I'd put his biggest competition as Alberto Contador - if he signs on with Astana (which is likely), he'll have neutralized him. But there's still a lot of things that can go wrong to derail what looks like a sure thing TdF win - just ask Cadel Evans.
posted by BikeNut at 12:15 PM on September 10
Dissapointing, but not surprising. When you start with a "presumption that it (LNDD) conducted sample analysis in accordance with international laboratory standards", its easy to see that CAS never had any intention of considering the Landis arguments based on procedural errors by the lab. With that argument gone, he really didn't have a leg to stand on. I find the imposition of a $100,000 fine strange. Doesn't the athlete have a legal right to pursue an appeal? Why penalize him further when he loses? Was this intended to support potential lawsuit by WADA to recover their legal fees? Now that this has reached its conclusion, I wonder what's in future for Landis. His competitive career is over - I don't think any team would touch him, even after Jan 2009. Could he end up in a coaching role? After all, other highly respected teams have sports directors who have admitted doping in past (CSC with Riis). My guess - I wouldn't be suprised to see Landis linked to Rock Racing in some role in the not too distant future.
posted by BikeNut at 11:21 AM on June 30
Is anyone really surprised by this? And does anyone truly think the '70's Steelers were the only team of their era using steroids? What's really shocking is 30 years later, the NFL continues with a weak policy that really does not provide sufficient penalty and incentive to players and teams to discontinue steroid use. Anyone who thinks today's teams aren't using just as much or more than the '70's Steelers is living in a dream world.
posted by BikeNut at 12:57 PM on June 26
I hope these guys and their coach get the book thrown at them. This is one of the worst examples of poor sportsmanship I've ever seen. I used to catch a little in college. Although I may have gotten crossed up, I can't remember it ever causing me to drop to my knees and duck.
posted by BikeNut at 02:29 PM on June 18
As a cycling fan and former racer, I'm happy to see the efforts made to eliminate drugs from professional cycling. At the same time, I think cycling gets penalized by the public for the very reason that it is working to clean things up. Every time a rider is caught, the media is full of stories about how "dirty" cycling is. And yet, cycling imposes extremely tough penalties - typically at least 2 year suspension (4 years from the pro ranks). Given the short careers of most pro cycllsts, this amounts to a lifetime ban for most. I've always wondered how NFL, NBA, or MLB fans would react if players caught using drugs in their sports were suspended for 2 to 4 years.
posted by BikeNut at 07:57 AM on May 29
Have you looked at the Orioles roster recently? Ripken could still suit up and be better than most of them, hurt or not.
posted by BikeNut at 11:24 AM on March 04
Sorry to see him go, but I don't blame him for hanging them up. I couldn't imagine trying to play the game at his age. All of Wisconsin is going to have a really bad day today.
posted by BikeNut at 09:51 AM on March 04
I thought he was using one of those pocket warmers. It was a handwarmer. I live in Wisconsin - it was -20 at my home on Sunday morning (actual temp - not wind chill). I can't believe so many of the players went with bare arms - frostbite does not make you macho (or improve your play). My bet is Favre comes back for one more season. He may have blown it on Sunday night, but he had a lot of help (Al Harris on Burress, no running game, dumb penalties on defense that sustained Giant drives). He did lead the Packers to a 13-3 season when most people thought they'd be lucky to go 8-8. With benefit of playing in a weak division, he's got to believe he's got a better than average shot of making playoffs again next year.
posted by BikeNut at 02:32 PM on January 21
Sorry to see the Packers lose - would have been neat to see Favre make it to one more Super Bowl. Giants defense did great job making Packers offense one dimensional. The Packers gave up on the run very early. Packers also helped out the Giants offense with penalties at key moments that kept Giants drives going. Good luck to Giants against Pats. I think they're going to need to play mistake free and get a few turnovers againts Pats to pull it off.
posted by BikeNut at 08:02 AM on January 21
I live in Wisconsin and have heard a lot of local coverage on this. Most of it sounds like this guy is a moron who did something really stupid while he's in middle of a divorce. I'd say his chances at any child custody hearings are about as close to zero as they can get.
posted by BikeNut at 06:38 PM on January 17
I've watched this play out in cycliing numerous times. Once you're named in media, you're screwed, no matter what you do. Clemens and other baseball players have advantage of a strong players union and a lot more money to defend themselves - but the bottom line is his future endorsement value has been damaged and his future legacy in question. The only way this gets cleaned up is if the players, teams, and coaches all commit to making the sport clean. You can't enforce your way out of this without everyone's support.
posted by BikeNut at 08:17 AM on December 20
Interesting that she got off using an argument similar to one made by Landis. Difference may be she focused on one specific violation rather than throwing multiple arguments at the Panel as the Landis' team did.
posted by BikeNut at 09:08 AM on December 15
It will be interesting to see how MLB deals with this. If the implicated players were cyclists, they would immediately be fired by their teams, subject to 2 year bans by WADA, and forced to refund all salary/bonuses paid them during time they used steroids. I'm guessing MLB reaction will be minimal. Given the difference - which sports really have a drug problem? The ones that are handing out harsh penalties to anyone caught? Or the ones that ignore the problem and try to sweep it under the rug?
posted by BikeNut at 01:38 PM on December 13
Is he still being prosecuted under state charges in Virginia? Could this add more time to his sentence? I guess next question is what does NFL do now. Will he ever get chance to play in the league again?
posted by BikeNut at 01:32 PM on December 10
If DB can generate 1600 lbs force, what happens when he meets a 210 lb RB who runs a 4.4 head on? Are we talking over 3000 lbs force??
posted by BikeNut at 09:07 AM on November 28
On one hand, he built WADA from scratch, putting together an international organization for enforcing anti-doping in a wide range of sports. But on the other, he subsequently undermined what he built by his outrageous statements to the press, often well before the data had been produced to determine if an athlete was guilty. He created the atmosphere in which athletes are considered guilty and are convicted in the press without any due process, courtesy of leaks from WADA laboratories. Frankly, I think he has done more damage to anti-doping efforts than he has good, especially in the last 5 years. I certainly hope he is not appointed to the CAS! Given his past public comment on a number of cases, it would be hard to view the CAS as unbiased if he were part of it.
posted by BikeNut at 02:05 PM on November 15
In related news, Roberto Heras is planning a comeback. His suspension ends Oct 27. One thing of interest - he was suspended for 2 years even though his "B" sample came back negative. That didn't stop WADA - they just ran a second analysis of the "B" sample to get the answer they wanted. This is my big issue with whole process - whether its cycling or any other sport. The deck is totally stacked against the athlete and there is no independent oversight of the labs running these analyses. Even when athlete produces evidence of botched tests, the suspension process rolls forward. Result is once an athlete is accused, they're finished. And in interest of full disclosure, I am not a Landis supporter. I don't know if he cheated and could give a flip. I am a supporter of a fair process based on solid science.
posted by BikeNut at 08:18 AM on October 11
I think he has less than 2% chance of overturning his conviction, regardless of how strong his case or how favorable the panel he gets at CAS. But here's a question I haven't seen on any of the many cycling sites I view. What happens if he does win and overturns the doping charge? Does Oscar Pereiro then have to give the yellow jersey back to Landis? That would be really bizarre. Of course, it will never happen.
posted by BikeNut at 08:13 PM on October 10
I don't know if Landis is innocent - none of us do - the only one who knows for sure is Landis. I am however, a Ph.D. chemist who knows something about the tests in question. The whole question of whether "tests are valid" is off the mark - any chemical test, no matter how simple, is only as good as the expertise of the person conducting it and the integrity of the sample they are testing. So citing use of a test in other cases as evidence of its reliability is not relevant. If the lab screwed up this time, the results of the test are meaningless, even if they ran the same test 100 times before without any problems. Furthermore, lack of appeals by others accused using the same test has no bearing. They may have lacked the financial means to contest their positive test - most cyclist, runners, etc are not able to mount the $2,000,000 defense that Landis did. Two things about this case bother me. First, from scientific viewpoint, the metabolite results reported in the IRMS are physiologically questionable and inconsistent with known steroid metabolism. This was pointed out by one expert witness (Amory), but apparently only one member of panel understood the implication. Second, the appeal process stacks the deck so high against the athlete that the chance of a successful appeal is essentially nil. Something just smells bad to me when WADA prevents any employee of a WADA accredited lab from testifying on behalf of an athlete, even if they know that WADA screwed up the test and got it wrong. Given the implications for the athlete (and the sport), I think WADA needs to go extra mile to demonstrate their results are above question. That should include allowing peers at other WADA labs critique each other.
posted by BikeNut at 04:37 PM on September 21
but he had like 4 times the level of testosterone he should Actually, his testosterone level was below normal. It was his T/E ratio that was high due to an abnormally low epitestoterone level. But that is same T/E test that panel said was unreliable due to lab errors.
posted by BikeNut at 11:03 AM on September 21
Arbitration panel member Chris Campbell's dissent provides a lot of detail and insight into this whole case. Given he was Landis' choice for panel, you may consider his opinion biased, but he raises a lot of serious questions about how things are done at LNDD.
posted by BikeNut at 09:14 PM on September 20
The decision comes to an interesting conclusion. The initial test with high testosterone:epitestosterone ratio was ruled unreliable. But subsequent carbon isotope ratio test is considered reliable, so Floyd is considered guilty. Basically, it says the test we originally thought we caught you on was wrong, but that's okay, we found another one that supports our original conclusion. With logic like that, any athlete caught should just give up immediately and accept whatever punishment WADA decides to dole out. Don't even ask for the B sample to be tested. You're going to lose no matter what the outcome. Mounting an appeal just prolongs the agony.
posted by BikeNut at 03:55 PM on September 20
I agree bperk. AJC's attempt to justify their position in the lawsuit was tacky beyond belief in an article about this man's death.
posted by BikeNut at 08:53 AM on August 30
I grew up following the Orioles and remember Wild Bill and how everyone divided attention between game and Section 34 to see what he would do next. The fact that there is no one who has taken his place says a lot about how the Orioles franchise has lost it's way - but that's a different story. Sorry to hear he's gone. He was a great peronality. They don't make Orioles fans like that anymore.
posted by BikeNut at 05:01 PM on August 22
I don't know whether to be outraged at the animal cruelty or sad that anyone so talented could be this stupid. He's got a M$130 contract and numerous high dollar licensing deals, yet he decides to get involved in an illegal dog fighting ring that was going to make him maybe K$100. Now the licensing deals are dead and if he's not banned from football for at least a year, I'll be amazed. If he's ever allowed back in the NFL, he'll be lucky to make 1% of his previous salary. A psychologist could write a Ph. D. dissertation on self distructive behavior using Vick as his poster child.
posted by BikeNut at 08:45 PM on August 20
Nice to see Ernie Els playing well and making a run on Sunday - but starting from 6 strokes back on Tiger made it almost impossible to pull off. I thought the guy who interviewed Ernie after his round was an idiot. He'd just shot a 66, so this moron asks him if he's dissapointed in missing birdie attempts on 9 and 11. What about all the shots he made? Mickelson wasn't really competitive in Majors this year - didn't he miss cut on two of them? Too bad someone can't really challenge Tiger more consistently. I think it would drive him to be even better. You could see a glimpse of that in how he responded on last three holes when his lead was threatened.
posted by BikeNut at 10:36 AM on August 13
It is a clear indication of how much damage cycling has done to itself that no matter what rider's name is mentioned, someone is absolutely certain they (or their entire team) are doping. I've read hundreds of comments on other boards implicating Contador, Evans, Leipheimer, the entire Discovery team, all Spaniards, etc. etc. etc. It will be a long time until cycling recovers from this. They need to stop the constant bickering between UCI, WADA, and Grand Tour organizations and realize that if they don't fix things soon, they'll be about as popular as competitive eating competitions. Too many of their "solutions" are aimed soley at the riders and not at teams, managers, sponsors who look the other way when doping is obviously occurring. I have a hard time believing Vino was blood doping on his own and no one else on Astana knew about it. Am I supposed to believe he's got an IV of blood hanging by his bed and no one noticed? Vino is facing the consequences of his actions, as he should, but I"d like to see the others involved (team managers, doctors, etc) facing sanctions as well.
posted by BikeNut at 08:17 AM on July 30
No big surprise here. I predicted Rasmussen would get kicked out before end of Tour at start of this thread. His story about missing 4 doping controls just didn't hold water. And his performance in the first time trial set off alarm bells with anyone who follows the sport - the guy has never time trialed worth a damn before and suddenly he's in the top 10. Sure looked highly suspicious to me. Although I think he's full of it, Lemond is right - cycling has got to burn itself to the ground before it can start to rebuild. I hope it can. It is a great sport.
posted by BikeNut at 05:36 PM on July 25
Vino is an idiot. It was clear before the Tour even started that UCI had their eye on Astana and he would be the prime target as the top favorite to win the Tour. At the pre Tour new conference, he was peppered with question about his relationship with Italian doctor Michele Ferrari. So what's this moron do - blood dope before the first time trial and then smoke the course. Since he won that stage and yesterday's, he automatically get's pulled for doping test twice in three days. Did he think no one would check for blood transfusions? I've lost all hope that cycling can ever clean itself up. The riders are idiots. UCI and WADA are incompetent. And team management take no responsibility whenever one of their riders test positive - they just fire the rider and move on. I fully expect Rasmussen to test positive for some form of doping any day now. Might as well call the whole TdF off.
posted by BikeNut at 02:13 PM on July 24
MrFrisby, I see two warnings on label that may have played into this case. When using this product, do not bandage tightly - she reportedly was using the cream under "adhesive pads". Stop use and consult a doctor if symptoms persist for more than 7 days - she reportedly has been using the cream for an extended period. No manufacturer can anticipate every way that a consumer can potentially misuse their product. Common sense has to come into play. I'm sure her parents will sue and I won't be surprised if they get a big settlement. And as a result of this and similar lawsuits, we all pay more for products we buy every day because manufacturers need to factor the risk of a lawsuit into the cost of doing business. I'm truly sorry this girl died, but she, her parents, coaches, trainers, and others need to take some responsiblity for their actions.
posted by BikeNut at 01:48 PM on June 12
"doses of less than 1 teaspoonful have been deadly in small children." This is true only if you take methyl salicylate internally. Toxicity from external use if extremely rare. This is a really sad case. It's too bad a trainer or coach didn't notice and advise her on how to use the product safely.
posted by BikeNut at 05:23 PM on June 11
Now that Riis and other a number of his fellow Telekom teamates have admitted to doping during mid 90's, it seems almost certain that Ullrich was doping as well when he won in 1997. It will interesting to see if he comes forward with a similar admission. While it is rewarding to see someone of Riis's stature come forward and admit to doping, I have a hard time giving him an accolades. After all, he's been lying to media, sponsors, fans, and his CSC team for the last 11 years. I'd have been more convinced of his sincerity if he returned his winners jersey and trophy and asked to have his name removed as the official winner of the 1996 Tour. And while everyone is saying cycling is dirty, keep one thing in mind. There were over 150 athletes linked to Operacion Puerto. Only 42 of them were cyclists. Who are the others? Are their sports investigating and trying to clean up their problems? Fact is there are a lot of other sports with similar or worse doping problems than professional cycling. Cycling gets the bulk of negative press because they are trying to do something about it.
posted by BikeNut at 09:51 AM on May 26
Greg Lemond is potential witness for USADA, not Landis. While I'd like to believe Floyd has a chance, the USADA has never lost a case at arbitration. And even if he wins - damage is already done. No accolades will be coming his way. His TdF win will always be considered suspect by many. Basso is a joke. He clearly got caught redhanded with his hand in the cookie jar, but only admits to planning to steal a cookie. What a joke. Guess I'm cynical today too.
posted by BikeNut at 05:14 PM on May 15
As of this morning, Tinkoff still saying Hamilton and Jaksche are going to ride the Giro. Italian media says otherwise. Giro, TdF, and Vuelta organizations all saying no one with link to Operacion Puerto will be invited. My guess is they are out - which probably means Hamilton's career is over.
posted by BikeNut at 05:57 PM on April 30
I don't think it's going to be. In fact, it appears to be expanding and growing worse by the day. I find the timing of Basso's announcement troubling. He's just two days away from hearing with CONI - he clearly doesn't expect anything positive to come from that. At the same time, Landis is releasing more information pointing to slipshod procedures at LNDD. He appears to have hit a nerve as the lab immediately responded today with request for outside verification. I sure hope there is some "meat" in all the allegations coming from Operacioin Puerto this time.
posted by BikeNut at 01:59 PM on April 30
Or, if you're a photogenic Italian at the peak of his career, get signed by the biggest team in the world and get given a huge salary. My prediction is UCF and TdF will find a way to bar Basso from riding in Tour this year.
posted by BikeNut at 04:43 PM on April 23
It is impossible to determine the strength of the case against Landis since only pieces of evidence have been publicized. And while I know it sounds like Landis is trying to get off on technicalities, lab procedures and technique are absolutely critical when dealing with tests as sensitive as these. But if tests were done correctly - there's really no explanation for a testosterone ratio to be anywhere near 11:1 except doping - then he's guilty and should be stripped of the TdF crown. What troubles me most in cycling is the way the athletes are railroaded by the media, WADA, UCI, Tour de France, USADA, and L'Equipe. Once accused, the athlete is immediately fired by their team and typically left without the resources to fight back. They just get ground up by "the machine". Landis has landed a few blows by pointing out sloppy work in original analysis at the French lab. So the USADA responded by analyzing samples previously tested as negative - clearly against their own guidelines - and keeping his representative from observing the testing process. So even when the athlete wins, the regulatory bodies just change the rules of the game!
posted by BikeNut at 04:19 PM on April 23
Ullrich had all the potential in the world and didn't have the hunger and willpower to harness it. Most cyclists will never accomplish what he did - but almost everyone in the sport sees his accomplishments as falling short of his potential. Armstrong beat him mentally before the race even started in every TdF from 1999 to 2005. I do think the drug control policies in cycling are broken when accusations and innuendo from Operacion Perto force Ullrich and others out of the sport. I'm all for strict enforcement and policing the sport - but there needs to be some balance that allows the accused to defend himself before being tried and convicted in the media. Simply having a vague reference ("Rudi's boy") without any corroborating evidence does not prove that Ullrich was ever guilty of doping.
posted by BikeNut at 02:49 PM on February 26
14er refers to a mountain with elevation over 14,000'. Colorado has 53 mountains officially reaching this height. I agree, it's a dumb name for a basketball team!
posted by BikeNut at 04:42 PM on January 25
inadvertantly collides with an opposing team's player and his head falls off Wow! That must have been a heck of a collision. Hope the Colorado player had life insurance for his family's sake.
posted by BikeNut at 03:43 PM on January 25
I grew up a Orioles fan cheering for Brooks, Frank, McNally, and Palmer. Watching this team disintegrate over the last 10 years has been painful. Angelos continues to make the same mistake repeatedly - signing aging stars in the twilight of their careers to lengthy, multimillion dollar contracts - then acting suprised when their production goes down. Pitching is an afterthought and any young prospect showing any hint of talent bolts for better managed teams at first opportunity. Angelos complains it takes $100 million to compete in AL East and he is keeping ticket prices down. But will fans continue to pay even these ticket prices to watch the team lose 90-95 games a year. This year's attendance suggests they are reaching the end of their patience with his strategy.
posted by BikeNut at 02:27 PM on January 19
I agree. The rumor would be more believable if the consultant job was with the Panthers or NC based college.
posted by BikeNut at 10:45 AM on January 11
Excellent link, apoch. I've never liked Pound and have always thought he does more to hurt his cause than help it with his comments. WADA has established procedures and they need to be followed by everyone, including Pound and the labs that run the tests. I firmly believe athletes deserve the opportunity to review the results of any positive doping test before it is announced in the press by Pound or anyone else. If the science is sound and the lab handles samples correctly, then positive results should lead to a quick and severe sanction. Any appeal process needs to be resolved quickly and not take years of an athletes career to resolve. As it works today in cycling, athletes can be convicted in the press based on inuendo, and disqualified from competition without any positive drug test at all. And once caught in the web of suspicion, they never get out.
posted by BikeNut at 12:23 PM on December 28
Clearest evidence of gene doping will likely be healthy, highly trained athletes suffering severe side effects from unanticipated side effects. Gene doping is a highly untested therapy in humans.
posted by BikeNut at 08:22 AM on December 05
Amateur, I may have erred in my use of the word inept, but I have worked in laboratories producing reports for FDA and EPA regulated products. When we produce a report, quality assurance has to verify that every piece of data can be verified, the equipment used to produce it has been properly calibrated and maintained, and the people involved in the analysis are trained in the procedures they are running. If not, the whole study and its results are thrown out - and no, "administrative error" is not an acceptable argument. This is the level I believe WADA accredited labs should strive for in their work as well. After all, they are dealing with peoples careers and reputations. And leaking information to the press should not be tolerated by anyone associated with these labs. In fact, I believe it should be a criminal offense. While you may doubt the quality of Landis' team defense, this is not the first time the LNDD lab results and procedures have been questioned. The report of independent investigator Emile Vrijman following the claim by LNDD and WADA that Lance Armstrong used EPO in 1999 concluded that the lab had no internal chain of custody for samples, analyzed previously opened samples for whch the identity and integrity could not be guaranteed, and used analysis methods that were not validated and did not follow WADA's own laboratory and testing standards. To my mind, these findings draw serious questions concerning the LNDD labs quality of work. I agree, an independent third party conducting the analysis is highly desirable. I also believe the independent lab also needs to be held to a very high standard which I do not believe WADA accredited labs are anywhere near reaching at this time.
posted by BikeNut at 06:24 PM on November 17
Given the ineptness of WADA, the labs, and their obvious willingness to leak information to the press before sharing evidence with implicated riders or conducting confirmatory analyses, I can't blame any rider for being hesitant to cooperate. The Tour kicked out a whole host of riders based on inuendos and weak references in Operacion Puerto - now even the Spanish courts are saying there isn't enough evidence to indict anyone. A lot of press slams cycling for being weak on dopers. But when caught, the doper faces a 2 to 4 year ban for a first offense and lifetime ban on second offense. Imagine if the NFL, MLB, and NBA had similar rules. I don't deny there's a clear problem in cycling, but I do think they are trying to work on it. Improving their procedures on how investigations are handled (e.g. not trying those implicated in the press) would go a long way to fixing things. In addition, they need to put some of penalty on teams, not just riders. If a team has multiple riders shown to be doping, the entire team needs to be banned, including the sports directors and doctors of the team.
posted by BikeNut at 08:53 AM on November 17
The fact that the lab director felt impelled to comment on this suggests to me some nervousness about the upcoming Landis hearing. I agree with Amateur that this is only one, very small, part of Landis' defense and by itself, unlikely to sway the decision. I also find the use of the term "administrative error" interesting. This was not some secretary that made this mistake - it was the lab technician responsible for the analysis who recorded this incorrectly in their lab notebook. So how many other errors did this technician make? Can any of the results be trusted?
posted by BikeNut at 11:38 AM on November 16
I agree with Apoch. There seems to be serious question if Landis ever really did test positive - the control numbers on both A and B samples don't match Landis! And the level of testosterone in his urine is actually low - its the epitestosterone that is out of wack - that suggests either poor lab technique or intentional contamination. I work in the pharma industry and am responsible for contracting a lot of studies with labs. I can tell you this - if any lab I worked with made this many mistakes in handling samples, I'd fire them in a minute.
posted by BikeNut at 08:25 AM on October 13
Sic, actually, his wife gave that testimony. Then Andreu refuted his wife's testimony under cross examination and said he never heard Lance say this. This is nothing more than a disgruntled former employee and his wife trying to tear down their former employer.
posted by BikeNut at 11:47 AM on September 13
This article contains no new information suggesting Armstrong ever doped. In fact, Andreu testified in court that he never saw Lance dope, was never asked by Lance to dope, and was not aware of any organized doping program on the US Postal team. But the "fair and balanced" NY Times uses Andreu's "confession" of EPO use (7 years after the fact) to insinuate that Armstrong doped so it can sell a few more papers. Until there is some solid evidence, this is just a load of crap and yellow journalism at its worst.
posted by BikeNut at 11:08 AM on September 13
I don't know what to think about this case at this point. On one hand, I want to believe Landis, and I do agree the way the UCI rushed to release the results without giving him advance notice seems unfair. Head of UCI - Pat McQuaid - justifies this by saying he knew someone at lab was bound to leak the results. That doesn't give me a lot of faith in the lab's ethics or the UCI's ability to enforce it's own protocols. Aren't all samples supposed to be blind to lab technicians?? On other hand, the carbon isotope results (assuming the test was run correctly) are hard to dodge. If correct, Landis had synthetic testosterone in his body. That's hard to get around. No matter what happens from here on, his goose is cooked. Barring someone from lab or elsewhere admitting to tampering with his sample, I don't see any way he's ever going to overcome the media storm. If he's truly innocent, I really feel sorry for him.
posted by BikeNut at 10:21 PM on August 07
One thing about the process for handling the "B" sample bothers me. I work in the pharmaceutical industry. When we develop a new test method, we are required to have it validated by a second, independent lab, following our procedure. This confirms that the test actually works and eliminates any chance of bias or poor technique from the original lab. So why in sports drug testing is the second test conducted by the same lab (and probably the same technicians) as the first sample? It would seem to me that to avoid false positives due to either incompetance or anyone intentially biasing the results, you would want that second sample analysis done at another lab. In addition to this, the handling of the sample from the time Landis produced it until analysis is critical. I've never seen any report on this case that fully documents how the lab maintained chain of custody for this sample to avoid any contamination. I don't know if Landis is guilty of doping or not. But I'd sure feel better about the outcome if I could trust the procedures in place weren't in any way suspect.
posted by BikeNut at 11:17 AM on August 05
The solution is more effective enforcement. While I do not agree with the "let them take whatever they want" group, I think the science of enforcement will always lag behind the science of enhancement. In the not to distant future, gene therapy will allow a competitor to boost his natural hematocrit level, improving the oxygen carrying capacity of his blood. Unlike EPO use, this will be undetectable. How will WADA and UCI monitor this?
posted by BikeNut at 01:07 PM on June 30
I've followed cycling for over 25 years, and I've never been more dismayed and discouraged about the state of the sport. What amazes me is there are no statements from presumably "clean" riders and their teams criticizing the dopers. Or is it that there are no truly clean riders?
posted by BikeNut at 09:08 AM on June 30
NFL's Dirtiest Player: Hines Ward
So defensive players don't like Ward cause he hits back, and that makes him dirty?
Sounds like sour grapes to me.