 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Tour de France, Anyone?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: GUEST,TIA Date: 22 Jul 06 - 11:13 AM Well, don't die, but arntcha happy now?!?! Kloden came on like a madman. A sprint into Paris may decide it. I'm getting up early to watch live. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: wysiwyg Date: 22 Jul 06 - 11:43 AM LOL, thanks, TIA. I'm half happy, and my favorite among the Bishop nominees is within a vote of prevailing. On the other hand, you never know what may transpire over the lunch break they may have begun! :~) ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Wolfgang Date: 22 Jul 06 - 12:30 PM A fine competition today. Cunedo has surprised me. Some team managers will retrospectively rue their wrong decisions. First, they should have known that Pereiro was better then his rank showed when they let steal him 30 minutes at one etappe. Each of the teams could easily have halved that time in the last hour. Second, they (Kloeden's team and Sastre's team) made the wrong decision not to go after Landis the day before yesterday. In interviews they said that they didn't believe he could keep up his speed for so long. He actually couldn't, for he was a bit slower on the last ascent than the others, but only so slightly. In this case, I'm not so sure that the teams could have prevented Landis taking so many minutes from them, strong as he was that day. The mistake was that they didn't even try and instead relied upon Landis having miscalculated his strength. Both team managers said that they looked at the respective other team and when that team didn't react they relied upon that judgement. It's a classical case of if you don't do the hard work I also can't be bothered and in the end both lose. Again, nothing will happen tomorrow that could change the first ten positions. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 22 Jul 06 - 01:15 PM I wondered the last 2 days about why there so ready to 'declare' a winner after the time trial....then FINALLY one of the commentators on OLN said.. "You may be wondering about tomorrow's race...I suspect that if Pererio were to mount a breakaway tomorrow and try to win, the Cycling Gods would come down out of the clouds and smack him on the side of the head! That's just the way it IS in cycling!" So, the only race tomorrow is for the sprinters to get the honor of winning the Paris stage. The rest is just a parade. Maybe that's for the best. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Cats Date: 23 Jul 06 - 05:32 AM So, yesterday, just before the finish, my sister phones up and says, this cycling race thingy... do both of you want a bed for the first weekend next year or just Jon? It's only going to pass her house by 10 miles.. yippee... Now, can I pull a sickie on the Monday so I can get home..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Wolfgang Date: 24 Jul 06 - 02:14 PM The last day is an honours day in many respects. Have you seen how Ekimov was the first to enter the Champs Elysees, 100 m in front of all others then waved to the spectators and went back into the peloton again? Why? Because he is the doyen of them all now being 40 years old and on his 15th and last Tour. I loved those little gestures. The Tour is full of them when you know where to look. But though I'm fond of traditions, next year we really should have a new thread. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: artbrooks Date: 24 Jul 06 - 02:29 PM An honors days, true...but all it would have taken would be for Landis to have flatted out on the Champs d'Elysse to change everything. Now he's off for his hip replacement, and I hope we see him again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: wysiwyg Date: 24 Jul 06 - 02:34 PM Various bits from cyclingnews:
Landis to ride two Dutch crits
Phonak's Tour riders extend contracts
Ekimov retiring in September ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 24 Jul 06 - 02:51 PM Indeed, I watched live as Ekimov was sent to the front for that well-deserved tribute. Not only did he finish 15 consecutive Tours, but he was well up in the standings many times. I am not impressed by the sprinters who can't (or don't bother) even finishing. Robbie McEwen at least rides the whole thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Dave Masterson Date: 25 Jul 06 - 04:10 AM And the next stage is…. London! Stage 1 actually passes the end of our lane, so we'll stake our claim outside the local pub and enjoy the day. I think this year has been the best for years, so open. Landis fully deserved his victory, really showing his mettle after blowing on La Toussuire. Pereiro proved to himself he's got what it takes and will be interesting to watch in the future. One of the stars of the race for me was Michael Boogerd. Seeing him burying himself in the mountains day after day for team-mates was awesome, and still managing 14th overall. Pure class. I thought David Millar acquitted himself very well considering he hadn't raced for 2 years, coming straight back into racing at the Tour. It was interesting to see the poor performance of certain 'stars', Mayo in particular. He may well have been having an off time, but it does make you think what 'help' he may have had in the past. Roll on 2007. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: wysiwyg Date: 27 Jul 06 - 02:31 PM News today: Phonak confirms Landis positive The Phonak team has confirmed the speculation that Floyd Landis returned a positive A sample after his win in stage 17 of the Tour de France. "The Phonak Cycling Team was notified yesterday by the UCI about an unusual level of Testosterone/Epitestosterone ratio in the test made on Floyd Landis after stage 17 of the Tour de France," said the team in a statement. "The team management and the rider were both totally surprised of this physiological result. "The rider will ask in the upcoming days for the counter analysis to prove either that this result is coming from a natural process or that this is resulting from a mistake in the confirmation. In application of the Pro Tour Ethical Code, the rider will not race anymore until this problem is totally clear. "If the result of the B sample analysis confirms the result of the A sample, the rider will be dismissed and will then pass the corresponding endocrinological examinations." The World Anti-Doping Agency has lowered the limit for the maximum T/E level from 6:1 to 4:1. Some athletes have naturally high levels, and can prove this through a series of tests. Background: Jaksche's doctor: drug use common German doctor Kurt Moosburger, who has looked after Jörg Jaksche (among others) for the past two years, has told dpa that he believes that performance enhancing drugs are "indispensable" for high level cycling In a frank interview, Moosburger pointed to the average speeds of modern professional races, especially hard tours. "The average in last year's Tour was 41 kilometres per hour - that is incredible. You can do a hard Alpine stage without doping. But after that, the muscles are exhausted. You need - depending on your training conditions - up to three days in order to regenerate." To help recover, testosterone and human growth hormone can be used. "Both are made by the body and are therefore natural substances," he said. "They help to build muscle as well as in muscle recovery." Dr Moosburger explained how it was done. "You put a standard testosterone patch that is used for male hormone replacement therapy on your scrotum and leave it there for about six hours. The small dose is not sufficient to produce a positive urine result in the doping test, but the body actually recovers faster." ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 27 Jul 06 - 02:56 PM Oh, crap!....I sure hope it proves to be natural. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: wysiwyg Date: 27 Jul 06 - 03:09 PM I think this is the "everybody does it" drug of choice, and I can see why. It's not considered perfomance-enhancing directly, but is more of a recovery strategy. (I still think it's wrong.) I can well imagine the patch was left just a moment too long..... but damn, I regret this news so much! ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: John Routledge Date: 27 Jul 06 - 03:52 PM When Landis was riding in Stage 17 not one of the three experienced Eurosport commentators said that they were wrong when they predicted the previous day that there was NO WAY Landis could recover from his blow up. :0( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 27 Jul 06 - 05:03 PM well, it's been on TV with an interview with a guy who knows more...what he says is that Landis actually has LOWER than normal testosterone, and that it was only a ratio that was abnormal. He also said there are two factors that might have caused this....the cortisone shots he had been getting for the hip pain (all approved and noted), and his having had some beer to celebrate the stage. Alcohol sometimes alters the endocrine system. Anyway, they now have to test the 'B' sample to see if it was perhaps a faulty test...then debate the results. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: wysiwyg Date: 27 Jul 06 - 09:27 PM Landis denies Floyd Landis has broken his silence about his high T/E ratio that could cost him the Tour de France, as well as hammering cycling's already battered image. Landis, who has requested a B sample analysis to confirm his A test, told Sports Illustrated, that he "can't be hopeful" that the B sample will be any different than the A. "I'm a realist," he added. When asked whether he had used a testosterone patch for recovery, Landis denied it straight out. But even if the B sample confirms the A result, Landis is not necessarily guilty of taking an illegal performance enhancing drug to boost his testosterone. Some riders can prove that they have an elevated Testosterone/Epitestosterone (T:E) level, if they undergo an endocrine test performed by a credible doctor. Landis said he will use Spanish doctor Luis Hernández, who has helped other riders prove a high T:E count. "In hundreds of cases, no one's ever lost one," Landis told SI. In 1999, Colombian rider Santiago Botero was able to prove his elevated testosterone levels (over four times the allowed limit) were natural. His doctor at the time was Kelme's Dr Eufemiano Fuentes. Landis is looking for other answers too. He is allowed to take cortisone for his degenerating right hip, although he said during the Tour that he had only had a couple of injections this year. But he also told SI that he'd been taking daily doses of a thyroid hormone to treat a thyroid condition. Even if either of these can explain his high T:E ratio, Landis realises that it will be hard to convince people. "I wouldn't hold it against somebody if they don't believe me," he said. Others have looked at explanations such as the beer Landis had the night before his stage 17 exploit, citing a study in the American Association for Clinical Chemistry (Vol 34, 1462-1464, 1988) by Swedish researchers O Falk, E Palonek and I Bjorkhem. In it, they investigated the effects of the ingestion of between 110-160 g of ethanol (2 g/kg bodyweight). They showed that it "increased the ratio between testosterone and epitestosterone in urine from 1.14 +/- 0.07 to 1.52 +/- 0.09 in four healthy male volunteers. The increase ranged from 30% to 90% in the different subjects studied (mean 41%). In cases where doping with testosterone is suspected, the possibility should be considered that at least part of an observed increased testosterone/epitestosterone ratio in urine is ascribable to previous ingestion of ethanol." As a caveat, Landis was quoted at the time as saying that he'd only had one beer. A pint of normal strength beer generally doesn't contain more than 20 g of alcohol - a much lower level than was studied by the Swedish researchers. ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: ard mhacha Date: 28 Jul 06 - 04:30 AM How many more past "champions" were pure?, that would have been a long time ago. Landis was caught, the fool, why didn`t he ask for advice from those "greats" that went before, the Tour de Farce in all it`s glory. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: wysiwyg Date: 28 Jul 06 - 07:58 AM Floyd Landis positive: Was it the beer? Floyd Landis's "adverse analytical finding" for testosterone in stage 17 of the Tour de France sent shock waves round the cycling world. Landis claims he is innocent and plans to defend himself. John Stevenson and Jeff Jones examine the testosterone test and Landis' possible defences. On Wednesday, the UCI announced that a rider at the Tour de France had returned an "adverse analytical finding", indicating the use of performance-enhancing drugs in a stage of the Tour. Yesterday, after the cycling rumour mill had gone into overdrive, the Phonak team announced that rider was race winner Floyd Landis. The analysis of Landis' A sample from stage 17 of the Tour de France returned an abnormal ratio for the amounts of testosterone to epitestosterone. Testosterone is a naturally occurring hormone which stimulates muscle growth. Epitestosterone is also produced by the body, and while its role is less clear, it is normally present in urine in a ratio of between 1:1 and 3:1 testosterone:epitestosterone (T:E). That normal range gives the basis for the detection of testosterone use in athletes. A T:E ratio of more than 4:1 is considered a positive test; that ratio was lowered from 6:1 at the beginning of 2006. Tests for naturally-occurring substances present a problem for anti-doping authorities. The situation with stimulants such as amphetamines and cocaine is simple: there's no way these substances should be in the body, and so any amount of them or their metabolites in a urine sample is considered proof of doping. But when the substance occurs naturally, anti-doping authorities have to devise a test that detects abnormalities caused by the illegal use of the substance. The problem is that such abnormalities may not be that abnormal after all. For example, a 1996 study of Swedish athletes[1] analysed 8946 urine samples, and found 28 with T:E ratios higher than 6:1, the ratio used to determine a doping infraction at the time. Researchers concluded that only one of those samples could be regarded as a clear case of testosterone doping. Over the years, athletes accused of doping after failing a T:E test have attempted to demonstrate, often successfully, that the elevated ratio had a natural cause[2]. In 1999, for example, Santiago Botero was exonerated of using testosterone because his doctor was able to convince authorities that he had a naturally high T:E ratio after he had returned levels well over 6:1. (Unfortunately for Botero, that doctor was Eufemiano Fuentes, the former Kelme team doctor at the centre of the Operacion Puerto blood doping investigation in Spain; Botero's Phonak team benched him in early June when his links with Fuentes were revealed). Landis is unlikely to rely on that defence, but it may be his only option. He has been tested too many times this year, without problems, to have much chance of claiming he suddenly has a naturally elevated T:E ratio. But it's those previous tests, and especially the ones at the Tour de France, that may help him now. In 1997 mountain bike racer Paola Pezzo tested positive for Nandrolone at a race in Annecy, France on September 6. Pezzo was eventually cleared because tests of samples she gave on August 30 and September 21 were both negative. As the race leader, Landis would have been tested after stage 15 of the Tour, and again after regaining the yellow jersey in stage 19. Those tests are not being reported by the anti-doping authorities as positives. Pezzo relied on evidence from Professor Guido Norbiato of the Faculty Of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Luigi Sacco University Hospital, Milan who claimed that she could have ingested the Nandrolone in meat while in Belgium. Landis will need a convincing explanation of how his T:E ratio came to be elevated on stage 17 of the Tour. The first, and probably weakest, explanation that springs to mind is "Nobody would be dumb enough to dope and then win a stage of the Tour de France by six minutes." Techniques for evading detection are sufficiently well-known that it's not unreasonable to accuse the current anti-doping regime of being an intelligence test. Landis and his staff would know that if he won the stage he would be tested. It's hard to believe that he would take the risk at all; harder still to think that if he did dope, he would do so at a detectable level. German doctor Kurt Moosburger recently detailed the use of steroids for recovery. "You put a standard testosterone patch that is used for male hormone replacement therapy on your scrotum and leave it there for about six hours," Moosburger told German press agency dpa. "The small dose is not sufficient to produce a positive urine result in the doping test, but the body actually recovers faster." Recovery during training has been the traditional use for steroids in sport, but Moosburger implies that it could be used during competition as well. However, one Cyclingnews reader who uses testosterone for legitimate medical reasons points out that the technique does have drawbacks. "Androderm patches are useless they fill your body with water and make the legs heavy," he writes. "They will however cause a big stiff painful erection and it lasts for hours. (Me missus loves it)." However, when he attempted to blame his 2004 EPO positive on contaminated supplements, Belgian rider Dave Bruylandts tried the 'nobody would be dumb enough to dope these days' defence. An unimpressed Belgian cycling federation recommended he be suspended for four years; he eventually copped an 18 month ban. Two other factors have been shown to elevate T:E levels: alcohol and intense effort. A 1988 study [3] found that ingestion of alcohol could increase the T:E ratio, though the effect is relatively small even for a large amount of alcohol. The subjects ingested between 110-160 g of ethanol (2 g/kg bodyweight), and researchers found that it "increased the ratio between testosterone and epitestosterone in urine from 1.14 +/- 0.07 to 1.52 +/- 0.09 in four healthy male volunteers. The increase ranged from 30% to 90% in the different subjects studied (mean 41%)." Landis was quoted at the time as saying that he'd only had one beer and a small amount of Jack Daniels later on. Even a pint of normal strength beer generally doesn't contain more than 20 g of alcohol, while a shot of whiskey contains about 10 g - a much lower level than was studied by the Swedish researchers. After the stage Photo ©: AFP Certain types of intense effort have also been shown to increase the T:E ratio[4]. It's hard to imagine a more intense effort than Landis' extraordinary escape in stage 17, but the studies that found high T:E after intense effort refer to the kinds of workout undertaken by bodybuilders. It's not clear whether these findings translate to hours-long aerobic efforts, where strength plays a small part in performance. It's important to note that the above explanations have not been put forward by the Landis camp, but mostly by fans who desperately want to believe that Landis' stage 17 ride and his subsequent Tour de France victory was "real". Landis probably knows that if his B sample is positive, then he'll need something stronger than the above to convince the US Anti-Doping Association that he did not take exogenous testosterone to help him recover after stage 16. [1] Increased urinary testosterone/epitestosterone ratios found in Swedish athletes in connection with a national control program. Evaluation of 28 cases. Garle M, Ocka R, Palonek E, Bjorkhem I. - J Chromatogr B Biomed Appl. 1996 Dec 6;687(1):55-9. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=9001952&query_hl=3&itool=pubmed_DocSum [2] Performance Characteristics of a Carbon Isotope Ratio Method for Detecting Doping with Testosterone Based on Urine Diols: Controls and Athletes with Elevated Testosterone/Epitestosterone Ratios Aguilera, R., Chapman, T. E., Starcevic, B., Hatton, C. K., and Catlin, D. H. Clin Chem. 2001; 47: 292-300. www.clinchem.org/cgi/content/full/47/2/292 [3] Effect of ethanol on the ratio between testosterone and epitestosterone in urine. Falk O, Palonek E, Bjorkhem I. Clin Chem. 1988 Jul;34(7):1462-4. www.clinchem.org/cgi/reprint/34/7/1462?ijkey=f5c2e269a70b2808e91787e399f2030aa32cb7a0 [4] Resistance Training Increases Possibility Of A Positive Drug Test Kraemer, W. J., & Ratamess, N. A. (2005). Hormonal responses and adaptations to resistance exercise and training. Sports Medicine, 35, 339-361. coachsci.sdsu.edu/csa/vol116/kraemer.htm |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: ard mhacha Date: 28 Jul 06 - 08:09 AM WYSIWYG, and what is your opinion?. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: wysiwyg Date: 28 Jul 06 - 08:42 AM I'm waiting to see what happens, like everyone else. ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 28 Jul 06 - 11:48 AM The problem is, the officials are making noises like they're gonna be harsh, even if there are 4-5 reasons that this test could be a false positive....just to 'send a message'. I sure hope not. I can't believe Landis' team managers would carry around a testosterone patch.."just in case". I'd bet that most of the other riders don't believe he is guilty. We shall see. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: GUEST,Hate To Be Picky, BUT Date: 28 Jul 06 - 07:28 PM Wasn't there something on Mudcat not too terribly long ago about cutting and pasting long articles, long being more than one screen full? How about a link? HTBP |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 28 Jul 06 - 09:05 PM it was stated that articles longer than Joe's BIG monitor were subject to editing...obviously, he has editorial discretion about borderline cases. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 28 Jul 06 - 09:08 PM still, it is a valid point, and I would also ask EVERYONE to watch the length of posts. |
|
Subject: Tour De France From: GUEST,John Gray in Oz Date: 06 Aug 06 - 03:17 AM Seems like we've all been taken for a ride. I cheered the winner wholeheartedly and now I'm left feeling silly. JG / FME |
|
Subject: RE: Tour De France From: Wolfgang Date: 06 Aug 06 - 03:31 AM Go for the long thread Tour de France, anyone in the non music section. No reason at all to be surprised. All of the last 10-15 winners were at least suspected to be doped or actually found out to be at one point in their career. Five times Tour winner Delgado was even found out to be doped after his Tour win, but not punished due to a technicality (the substance was not on the list yet by four weeks). One other (Dutch) Tour winner was found out to be doped but only got a time penalty. One yellow jersey wearer (Belgian) with a big overall lead was disqualified and stripped of his jersey for delivering the (clean) urine from a little container concealed at his body (in the armpit) . He was nicknamed "Mannekin piss" then. Wolfgang Threads combined -- JoeClone |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: ard mhacha Date: 06 Aug 06 - 04:24 AM A very short post, to validate my long standing opinion that the Tour de Farce is all of that, two years ban for drug taker Landis, as a former competitior who took part in the 1965 Tour, states,"You can`t win this race on mineral water". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 06 Aug 06 - 06:49 PM If I read the news correctly, there must still be a process of investigation and appeal before anything is 'decided'. Landis says what I wondered,,"Why would I do anything so stupid? I KNEW I would be tested!" There is STILL reasonable doubt about the relevance of this test. No one can seriously explain HOW an overnight dose of Testosterone could make that much difference. *IF* he did it, someone else knows about it....no one just 'happens' to have a testosterone patch handy in case they feel tired. Let's wait and see before we decide that a great bike ride was a fake....or that NO ONE can win the Tour without cheating. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: ard mhacha Date: 07 Aug 06 - 07:42 AM NO ONE, can win this race without cheating. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 07 Aug 06 - 10:33 AM They used to win without cheating...are you saying that everyone NOW cheats? Or that everyone who is considered a contender cheats? No one was tested more than Armstrong the last 7 years....so you insist that HE cheated? Where do you get your information? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: ard mhacha Date: 07 Aug 06 - 01:12 PM Not from the US , certainly he was a cheat , but with a bit mor savvy than Landis. Every aspect of sport in the US is fueled by drugs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 07 Aug 06 - 01:30 PM We wouldn't want to make any sweeping generalizations, would we? what is this "certainly"? I ask again...how do YOU know? Is it just your belief? I DO know that there have been various drug scandals...in the US as well as elsewhere...but "every aspect"??? C'mon...Soccer? Swimming? Golf? Tennis? ....not all baseball players used steroids. Even the ones who admitted using agree that it was not universal. I don't deny the problem; I just don't accept that any winner is automatically a cheater. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: ard mhacha Date: 07 Aug 06 - 01:58 PM You can be sure of one fact, that throughout all US sport the amount of chemicals taken by your sportspeople will keep the Pharmaceutical companies and their shareholders in big bucks in our life time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: GUEST,Guest Date: 07 Aug 06 - 02:07 PM Greg Lemond a former winner told Bycyclist Online,-`I don`t think there`s a rider in the pack that prefers to take drugs. It`s simply what they are doing to keep up with the competition, and if they think everyone`s getting away with it, they feel like they need to use it too`- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 07 Aug 06 - 02:13 PM no, ard, I cannot "be sure" of any such thing. What I am sure of is that you have a strong opinion, and that you'd prefer it not be confused by extra facts or evidence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Big Mick Date: 07 Aug 06 - 02:45 PM Ard, you know I like ya, but lay off. If I made the kinds of sweeping generalizations you are making, you would come uncorked. Stop, please. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: ard mhacha Date: 08 Aug 06 - 04:33 AM Mick I never realised you cared , but lets face it and unfortunately the US cannot, have you read the letters in the US Press?, all blaming France for picking out Landis as a scapegoat. Please read again Greg Lemonds statement, and really he should know. So Mick, open both eyes to what is taking place in US sport, drugs are part and parcel of it, how many more examples do you need?. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: ard mhacha Date: 08 Aug 06 - 05:02 AM US Olympic committee chairman Peter Ueberroth said,"doping is like a cancer, we are committed to winning this battle, but, the cold reality is this, we are not winning the battle, good progress is being made, but a great deal more has to be done". Argue with Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Big Mick Date: 08 Aug 06 - 08:53 AM I don't want to argue with Peter, and I am not trying to argue with you. I am not even arguing that doping isn't a curse. I am suggesting to you that in your zeal to paint all things US as demonic, you sometimes make some pretty sweeping generalizations. The same kind that, if a Yank made them, you would be pointing the finger and chastising me for. The US isn't at the root of doping. I believe that started with the old Soviet Union, if I am remembering correctly. It is now a worldwide epidemic. If you read Lemond's and others comments, you would find that they all indicated that this is a problem common to all athletes in their sports. And yes I do care about your opinion. Despite the fact that we tangle from time to time, I always look for your posts as I find them thought provoking and interesting. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Paul Burke Date: 08 Aug 06 - 09:58 AM "The US isn't at the root of doping. I believe that started with the old Soviet Union" said Big Mick. No, a quick investigation will tell you it has been going on for many years. Britain had an early shock when Tommy Simpson died in the 1967 Tour de France, and was found to have taken amphetamines. Look up doping in Wikipedia for other examples going back forever. What has changed is the detection technology, and the resulting wide eyed innocence of those caught taking a chance is wonderful to behold. I see one of Britain's best hopes for the European Games is banned after "accidentally" missing three test dates. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Big Mick Date: 08 Aug 06 - 10:07 AM Thanks for the correction, Paul. I was just working from my recollections from years ago about the Soviet Olympic athletes. Seems that there was a fair amount of scandal that spawned a lot of todays testing. The fact is that this is a problem for all nations. It is not something that one can lay on the US. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 08 Aug 06 - 11:04 AM The problem is that, in the effort to 'catch' as many cheaters as possible, they are rushing more & more new tests into use. Some of the tests are pretty straightforeward, and there are drugs no one would seriously consider using, as they are too easy to find. But there are other tests that rely on VERY delicate and often debatable testing procedures. This is what happened with Landis. The very standards of what should be considered 'high' testosterone, or what is is an 'acceptable' ratio is not universally agreed on. In the past few years, several riders who tested out of the 'normal' range were finally cleared after doctors showed that their bodies produced the results normally!!! Should we ban riders who have an unfair advantage due to their own inner workings? Lance Armstrong has an unusually high ability for his blood to carry oxygen, and a pulse rate that allows him to exert himself with less adverse effects....like many Ethiopian distance runners. Should races be open only to athletes within a certain range of body types, like boxing? There is a lot of circumstantial evidence and accounts that say Floyd did NOT cheat...and 'some' that say he might have cheated. I do not KNOW...and neither do you! Let the investigators do their work and hope that they make the RIGHT decision....not just a decision based on some policy to punish vague suspicions. (and if they give the title to Pererio or Kloeden, they will just be pushing the issue downward, hmmm? Are their tests available?) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Big Mick Date: 08 Aug 06 - 11:12 AM Bill, what I will be watching are the tests for the synths. I can accept that his body might produce naturally occurring Testosterone at a higher rate, and that should be more easily verified. But I want to hear about the testing protocols for the synthetic testosterone. If that is verified in an unchallengable method, the game is up. For me, that is the Sword of Damocles for Floyd's arguments. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 08 Aug 06 - 12:08 PM Yep...*IF* that test is verified and not just some 62% accurate 'maybe' thing, it would be a serious matter. I will wait & see. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: ard mhacha Date: 08 Aug 06 - 01:34 PM A short extract from a paper on drugs use in the US, this from Barry R McCaffrey, Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, "Drugs use in sport has reached a crisis level, both among elite athletes and young American people", McCaffrey advises, "the US government should take the lead in the fight against drugs". McCaffrey should have quite a knowledge of what is going on in US sport. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 08 Aug 06 - 01:37 PM He does...in **general**....that does not mean he is aware of details in a specific case! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Big Mick Date: 08 Aug 06 - 01:55 PM ard, sometimes you don't do yourself credit. You are taking that comment out of context. A read of the comments shows they were made in a discussion of the problem in the US. It does not acknowledge or allege that we are the source of the problem, or even the worst of the lot. It is a problem in the US, just as it is everywhere. If you would confine you remarks to the problem, instead of trying to use it to further your "USA is the Great Satan in the world" slant, you would have more credibility. In short, confine your remarks to the topic as opposed to advancing your anti anything USA and you will come off better. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: Bill D Date: 08 Aug 06 - 01:58 PM I assume, ard, that YOUR country (which one was that?) is always upright and sensible in all its endeavors. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: ard mhacha Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:32 AM If you get your head out of the sand and look around the US, you will find no country come close in drug violation than your own. This should be your worry and what faces your youth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Tour de France, Anyone? From: GUEST,Bikes Date: 09 Aug 06 - 09:00 AM Yikes! |
