You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I wonder if this is affecting sales of quorn foods.
.There is a fear that the systemised culture of doping within cycling, as starkly revealed by the Lance Armstrong US Anti-Doping Agency dossier, has spread to track and field
Its been in track and field for many many many years.
As with many sports you don't get fame and fortune for finishing 4th or 5th. So to compete you often need to go all out to win..
I wonder if this is affecting sales of quorn foods.
Every cloud etc...
There is a fear that the systemised culture of doping within cycling, as starkly revealed by the Lance Armstrong US Anti-Doping Agency dossier, has spread to track and field
It's widely agreed that widespread, systematic doping spread to pretty much all sports when the iron curtain came down, and east German and Russian coaches started to work around the world, passing on their 'techniques'....
FFS look at Berties and Nibbles at Astana for the smoke in cycling at the moment
Oh I am, don't worry about that. Astana particularly are a whole world of "interesting" at the moment, have a read of the [url= http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/06/the-secret-pro-on-the-giro-there-were-days-when-youd-just-despair/ ]Secret Pro[/url] for a take on that.
Chhers for the link and the decision and performances surprised [ and yet did not] everyone
This generations Postal sadly.
It's widely agreed that widespread, systematic doping spread to pretty much all sports when the iron curtain came down, and east German and Russian coaches started to work around the world, passing on their 'techniques'....
By who? Just as an example it's well known many US athletes at the LA Olympics were doping. We know that cycling was riddled with it in the 50's and 60's. West Germany won the world cup on dope in 1954.
As soon as a sport becomes professional and people make a living from it, there will be pressure to maintain your career at all costs, so doping is just a natural extension from hiring the best coaches / physios etc. I would expect there is doping in all professional sports. To get to the top you still need genetics combined with a huge amount of hard work and dedication. Many won't make it very far even with drugs (plenty of low level cheats caught).
Froome rode for years with bilharzia and started winning once healthy
Yeah, just as well doper 'doctor' Bobby J spotted this and diagnosed it for him. Otherwise somebody coming down with a dodgy blood disease (to explain wild bloods?) and having a miracle transformation from somebody about to get dropped from his team to the podium of a major tour and becoming the best cyclist [i]ever[/i] might look a tad, well, suspicous, eh? Especially as virtually everybody else is cured with just one treatment. Kind of unlucky for it to drag out for years...
Keep on drinking the koolaid.
I'm with cbmotorsport on this one, first thing I thought of was tyler dodging the 'vampyres'...
[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/11666512/Mo-Farahs-fall-from-grace-continues-apace.html ]Just read this[/url] which I found interesting. Its all very disappointing tbh....at least no one is pointing the finger at Paula Radcliffe. That would be the end for me!
Its like watching a car crash in slow motion - sadly when anyone wins now I just see a cheat. Cycling, Athletics etc.
at least no one is pointing the finger at Paula Radcliffe
Not used Google much then? TBF I don't there is any direct evidence and it is more circumspect than that against Mo.
@ metal heart not sure what your argument is here beyond mud throwing- have you some evidence here? If you have I am happy to read it.
You seem to suggets he was doping whilst accepting he was so crap he was about to be dropped.
explanation of "duck and dodge" or "duck and dive" here
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/athletics/7403158.stm
makes the doorbell story look unconvincing
It is unconvincing. Testers don't show up, ring quietly once and then leave if the person doesn't answer.
There are two things they want to ensure - first that the test takes place if at all possible so that dopers get caught, second that the athlete doesn't miss a test for silly reasons like not hearing the door bell.
It is unconvincing. Testers don't show up, ring quietly once and then leave if the person doesn't answer.
He/she records a 'strike' and leaves.
Its nearly as damaging as a positive test as we can see now with Mo and the 'totally innocent British female Athlete' with three strikes...
anti-doping officials would have been under orders to make several attempts to raise him
UK Anti-Doping officials would have been instructed to ring the bell of his Teddington home again or knock on the door around once every 15 minutes during the hour in which Farah was required to be available to provide an out-of-competition sample.
I wonder if this is affecting sales of quorn foods.
it takes a certain kind of person to purposefully take that horrible synthetic stuff into their bodies
Oh dear... 'Didnt hear' or hid?
Can someone revive the 'Mo Farah running away from things' meme to serve this purpose please?
And given that Mo's team (including lawyer as I understand it) challenged the 'missed test', you have to assume that the testers followed procedure as set out above.
This one?
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
I'd not seen that Victor Conte letter. Really good that. Just highlights the benefits and focus of doping on training. Interesting bit about the benefit of EPO to sprinters too.
@junkyard re. Froome: Seriously? After all the US Postal revelations et al you dont find such a dramatic transformation even a little suspicious?
Of course there's no 'proof' if there was he'd be banned (obviously). I d suggest you have a look at the cyclingnews clinic forum on Froome and/or Sky but that's not a sane proposal on anybody's behalf. I cant help but feel that if froome rode for any team other than sky that people would be calling him out as ridiculous....
That linked secret pro article appears to be indicating pro-cycling is pretty much 'business as usual' I'm afraid. 🙁
Being brutal, he did seem to turn from a good but not great distance athlete to a world beater
His progression was "quite" linear and he has been consistently world class for quite some time before his "big" wins
I don't there is any direct evidence [s]and it is more circumspect than that against Mo.[/s]
FFY. I have not "seen" any creditable evidence of Radcliffe taking drugs except for people who think good performance=cheat. Plenty of under performing and embittered such types on this thread.
Working in a job that involves knocking on 100+ doors per day, where people are actually expecting me to call, it's surprising how many people don't hear the doorbell ring, and the subsequent couple of knocks on the door. The number of times I've gone back later in the day, to hear "Well you're late today!" is significant. When I point out I did in fact call earlier, it's always the same response "Well I've not left the house all day".
I'm not saying that means he's telling the truth, but I can believe it as a possible reason for a missed test. Maybe the tester didn't make much effort to make his presence known for some reason, maybe the doorbell was playing up and the guy didn't bother to knock as well. I think part of the problem now with the so called newspapers is they've been bitten once with buying what Armstrong said for so many years, and now they're just going to assume guilt.
[i]Plenty of [s]under performing and embittered such[/s] people who realise how easy it is to cheat "drugs testing" types on this thread.[/i]
Listening to an ex athlete yesterday his remedy was for hugely more off season testing, completely randomly with a 3 strikes over 5 year period (rather than just 1)
@junkyard re. Froome: Seriously? After all the US Postal revelations et al you dont find such a dramatic transformation even a little suspicious?
To repeat the sport is so tainted that every time anyone wins their will be suspicions. I asked for any sort of evidence - Bertie failed a test, Astana is full of cheats etc. There is at least direct proof and/or smoke there. All you have here is look he wins he got better therefore he must be a cheat. Whilst I can see why you, and many many others, think like this I dont think it is ALWAYS true.
I dont know if he is clean [ nothing in cycling would surprise me tbh] but I wont damn him just because he wins and he once was not as good.
No offence but you did not even give me anything that could be called evidence and you did not even give me much smoke/mud. You mentioned a dr in the last post you did not even flesh that claim out for example.
Just reading Mo's defence, he's basically saying he's "never tested positive" isn't he?
😐
if froome rode for any team other than sky that people would be calling him out as ridiculous....
I'm all for scepticism about some of the performances we see in road cycling, but is there really any credible evidence on Froome? Apart from asthma TUEs was it?
I thought his performances were considered credible for a very gifted athlete who trained a lot.
And the team a rider is on is a big part of the puzzle. I mean I wouldn't expect that everyone on Astana is a doper, but it does seem like there's a more permissive culture there than at Sky.
Just reading Mo's defence, he's basically saying he's "never tested positive" isn't he?
Thing is, it's pretty near impossible for a clean athlete to actually [b][i]prove[/i][/b] they're clean.
That's a good point Ben and it must be very frustrating for some athletes.
It's just from my position as an armchair pundit, Mo's reaction to the story looks a bit weak and cliched.
I know that doesn't prove anything, but I'm keeping the pitchfork handy anyway.
I'm curious, junkyard & chakaping, have you read the following:
USADA reasoned report on Armstrong
Tyler's book (The Secret Race)
Transcript of Kimmages (7 hour) interview with Landis
?
Personally I'm awaiting credible evidence that pro-cycling has [i]actually[/i] mended its ways. I remember being wowed by Roche on La Plange, Riis on Hautacam, Armstrong on Seistriere, Pantani on the Alpe, etc. yeah, these days, I'm cynical.
To repeat we are all cynical have you got any evidence beyond the fact he wins and once did not?
Feel free to try and suggest that Chap and I are saying all sport is clean if you really must be it is not making me thing you are great at handling data/evidence.
I'm awaiting credible evidence that pro-cycling has actually mended its ways
It hasn't and the UCI clearly can't do anything about it, if you look at Astana and Kreuziger from recent months.
I just don't see any remotely convincing evidence against Froome.
I've read the secret race and there was none in there, I doubt there'll be any in the other docs you listed.
[i]yeah, these days, I'm cynical.[/i]
It's very hard not to be. Any professional athlete with anything more than room temperature IQ can obtain and administer EPO and similar PEDs with what amounts to a tacit policy of "looking the other way" from many countries governing bodies.
The knowledge of how to avoid drugs testing has been well understood for decades now, even Conte in 2008 understood that so little drug testing was done "qtr 4" of training, that it raised questions about how keen some governing bodies actually were to find drugs cheats that would expose their sports to unfavourable headlines and raise questions from sponsors.
Junkyard, I've already answered that question, can you answer mine?
I do not buy the bilharzia as credible. It's just, uh, a little too [i]convenient[/i] for my liking. plus performing at theoretical non-PED maximum human performance, all his & Portes 'extra' training bullshit, it just doesn't ring true for me.
Cheating the system appears to be pretty simple. Nothing I've read or seen since reassures me otherwise. sadly, past 'miraculous' transformations have usually had more mundane explanations.
I'm [i]deeply[/i] cynical. I've read all the named documents btw, I was curious whether you had.
However if it makes perfect sense to you, fine. I don't want to enter into a slagging match. Neither of us are going to convince the other are we?
Just to remind people which posters were still Armstrong fans when anyone one using Google could find he'd already tested positive:
A thread from [url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/armstrong-contador/page/2 ]2010[/url]
Chaka, you are correct, there is absolutely nothing about Froome in either of the two documents. Just everything about the state of procycling. Do you think it has changed? Do think that this time, no really, they meant it (not like all the other times) when they said cycling is clean now?
Nickc, thanks, that's pretty much my view/point.
I've already answered that question, can you answer mine?
Where? I asked for evidence WHERE IS IT ?All you do if repeat your claim as you have just done again. Basically you do not believe him that is the "evidence".
My answers have no bearing on your claim but readEdukators link and you will see what side I was on
OH to save time.
Read USADA- hardly news beyond, perhaps, the systematic nature , read Kimmage not read Tyler and wont be either
Hated LA, knew he was dirty as few, if any, could beat Il pirata and no one clean could beat a juiced Pirata. No one. It was obvious even before the EPO tests they traced back to LA via "anonymous" samples.
Only believe/support in Wiggo and Cuddles tbh.
I am happy to fence sit on Froome [ though I defer to innocence in the absence of evidence] hence the ask for evidence.
As I originally said Contador and Nibali look more obvious cases of dopers with bertie beef being LA and Astana Postal
Junkyard - lazarusarmstrong looked like he could have tried to follow and he had certainly not cracked at that point. He was following team orders at the time unlike Contrador. I supect Armstrong will push him hard but not quite win it
Either way very impressive given age and break. Do the doubters still suspect he was just a drug cheat or actually a great athlete?
Posted 5 years ago # Report-Post
Your claim to have hated LA doesn't fit well with your above post, Junkyard. In answer to your question, he was never a great athlete and always just a drug cheat.
The evidence on Froome is one of the fastest rates of climb ever. T'aint natural.
Edit: and the close relationship between Sean Yates and motoman when Yates was DS at Sky (despite their policy of never recruiting athlete who had tested positive). I'd post the pics but my posts are always deleted when I do.
And the doctors employed by team Sky and... .
Can you give a post reference to thread for context please?
When you have perhaps we can discuss why asking a question is not stating an opinion?
It's your only post on the 2010 thread I linked above.
A question is stating an opinion when it's a loaded question that indicates that the person asking the question thinks that Armstrong is a great athlete even if he's a drug cheat.
The context at the time being that many fans pointed to Armstrong being nearly as fast riding clean with Astana as before when he was doped. Which was of course nonsense as he was still doped with Astana.
Edit to add:
And here's the evidence you considered Armstrong clean with Astana, Junkyard, and a "phenomenal athlete without drugs".
Junkyard - lazarusCant be a drug cheat he cant even drop Bush.
Tough call and can see both sides. I do find it hard to believe he was able to beat all these juiced up talented athletes whilst he was the only clean one around. However his return and third at his age and clean does mean he is a phenomenal athlete without drugs. He could easily clear his name with retrospective testing if he chose. I doubt he will change his mind on that front which makes me suspicious. That said he still has relatively plausible deniability.
Posted 4 years ago # Report-Post
If you want to see the thread it's from, Google it.
Thanks JY. I appreciate your answering.
My answer was this:
Of course there's no 'proof' if there was he'd be banned (obviously). I d suggest you have a look at the cyclingnews clinic forum on Froome and/or Sky but that's not a sane proposal on anybody's behalf. I cant help but feel that if froome rode for any team other than sky that people would be calling him out as ridiculous....
BITD there were timetrialists and climbers. Then the 'fat boy' timetrialists started to leave the climbers for dead on the climbs. Turns out it was EPO and blood bags Now it's (almost skeletal) climbers In the time trials.... Plus ca change. Wonder what that'll be, eh? Being able to lose all that weight yet retain the power...
You know what? I don't actually believe you're cynical at all.... 😉
And with that I'll bow out as this is going to go nowhere but even further downhill. fast....
Missing drugs tests is bad you say?
I would like to know what the drug testing agencies response is to a missed test, other than just marking it down as a missed test. Do they just continue on the normal schedule, or are they all over any athlete who misses a test like a cheap suit for the next 12 months.
I'd also like to know what the average missed test rate is - and who the worst offenders are.
forgive the noob question but...does the athlete know roughly when the testers may turn up? (in which case CF was a bit sloppy there) Or is it completely random and he has to let the testers know where he is at any moment and make sure they will be allowed into wherever he is with zero notice?And on the first morning we were down there the authorities pitched up at 7am
The athlete notifies the testers a location where they will be for an hour everyday. The normal thing is to notify a time early in the morning where they will pretty much be guaranteed to be at that location pending an emergency.
Dont do drugs kids. Not even once.
https://twitter.com/lancearmstrong/status/467896522714017792
[img] 
:large[/img]