Doping in cycling

RobFowl

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/exclusive-anne-gripper-breaks-silence-on-blood-passport

If this was coming from anyone but Ann Gripper I'd be sceptical but looks like a very good news story (at last)

Chips Lovell

I like Gripper a lot and she has always seemed like one of the few people in the sport serious about cleaning it up. But...

Ah, I’m an optimist by nature but when I look at the 840 riders in the passport programme the vast majority of the peloton have very normal blood values. So I’m really confident that we have a far higher number of clean riders than ever before. Those that choose not to ride clean are being exposed. The sport looks like it’s chaotic but we knew when we started this programme that we’d have two or three difficult years but the number of riders needing to be exposed is getting smaller and smaller and our ability to expose that number is getting better.

She's choosing her words carefully there, but even with that I think she's a little overly optimistic. Just on Bernie Kohl's statements alone, there's still a lot of funny business going on.

I do think that 1.) less people are doping and 2.) those that are can't do it to the degree they used to. But I'm very suspicious that a lot of riders have simply adapted to the new regime and are taking measures to avoid detection. What I'd really like to see is people pulled at random from the start line of big stages (and I'm not talking about hours beforehand like we do now). and tested on the spot. We might find some very interesting stuff. The question is whether anyone wants to do that.

lukester

el tonto wrote: »

I do think that 1.) less people are doping and 2.) those that are can't do it to the degree they used to. But I'm very suspicious that a lot of riders have simply adapted to the new regime and are taking measures to avoid detection.

What I'd really like to see is people pulled at random from the start line of big stages

Because doping is so entrenched, and no-one competing for top honours wants to lose their edge against a rival, it's surely going to come down to even more stringent and effective controls, like pulling people at the start of big stages (which I don't see happening), or a cultural shift.

The latter seems to be happening to some extent with specific teams, but you will always have people looking to cheat. There are many top pros whom I imagine most of us suspect are still on something.

RobFowl

el tonto wrote: »

I like Gripper a lot and she has always seemed like one of the few people in the sport serious about cleaning it up. But...

She's choosing her words carefully there, but even with that I think she's a little overly optimistic. Just on Bernie Kohl's statements alone, there's still a lot of funny business going on.

I do think that 1.) less people are doping and 2.) those that are can't do it to the degree they used to. But I'm very suspicious that a lot of riders have simply adapted to the new regime and are taking measures to avoid detection. What I'd really like to see is people pulled at random from the start line of big stages (and I'm not talking about hourse beforehand like we do know). and tested on the spot. We might find some very interesting stuff. The question is whether anyone wants to do that.

Verbruggen's 50% haematocrit was a disaster. In reality legitimised EPO abuse . I see alot of blood results including elite cylists and have never (yes never) seen one abouve 46%.
It does seem alot cleaner now thank god though.
When she says she's an optomist I know she is one hard nut and her view of being an optomist would probably make you an LA fan

TinyExplosions

RobFowl wrote: »

Verbruggen's 50% haematocrit was a disaster. In reality legitimised EPO abuse . I see alot of blood results including elite cylists and have never (yes never) seen one abouve 46%.
It does seem alot cleaner now thank god though.
When she says she's an optomist I know she is one hard nut and her view of being an optomist would probably make you an LA fan

Agreed on the 50% being a level to aim for with the doping nowadays.

Also think that testing right before a stage would be a very good way of doing things -would only take one or two tests before people started getting very scared, which is really what's needed

deeno1975

I'm holding judgement until I see Le Tour... Last years Tour looked fairly clean, riders coming in at the stage finish looking wrecked, no one team dominating and also the doped riders (Kohl/Schumacker etc) looking suspiciously super strong.

If I see Astana sitting at the front of the peleton every day (ala US Postal/Discovery) I'll get suspicious... and wonder what the new recipe is...

Chips Lovell

deeno1975 wrote: »

Last years Tour looked fairly clean

You're having a laugh?

RobFowl

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/368979/the-wednesday-comment.html

Nice commentary in the comic

Liked this quote especially
"Remember, folks. Only the small fry and the has-beens dope.

Except when they win a couple of Tour de France stages.

Or finish on the podium in Paris.

Or win the king of the mountains jersey.

But then the passport will catch them. No, really, it will.

The passport would have caught Riccardo Ricco and Bernhard Kohl eventually, and, y’know, any other riders achieving results by unfair means. Look, it helped catch Antonio Colom, didn’t it?

But there’s definitely nothing suspicious about any of the famous riders you’ve seen on the telly. They’re all squeaky clean."
:rolleyes: