peter_n
Veteran
No problemo, Rich. I'm a VeloNews reader. Link is below.
Greatest Tour moment may be its worst says McQuaid
Greatest Tour moment may be its worst says McQuaid
R
Rich Silfver
Guest
Thanks Peter
DougK
This space left blank
Maybe I just want to believe, but Floyd does not seem like a guy who would be doping. I'll wait for the investigation.
John Camp
Well-known
Presumably -- and I have no basis for this except what I think of as common sense -- the leading tour riders would have been tested several times in the past few weeks, before and during the race, especially after the recent scandals. And I don't believe that testosterone is something that you get a shot of now, and it helps you this afternoon. It's not like an amphetamine, but more of a long-duration thing to help build muscle, is it not? So even if Floyd were doping with testosterone, shouldn't it have been caught much sooner?
I don't know if he's guilty or not -- I hope not -- but I have been getting some seriously bad vibrations about this Paris lab, especially after what happened with Lance.
JC
I don't know if he's guilty or not -- I hope not -- but I have been getting some seriously bad vibrations about this Paris lab, especially after what happened with Lance.
JC
fitzihardwurshd
Spiteful little devil
John Camp said:
The only thing which still amazes me in this context is that now in the year 2006 there are still people, who believe in any clean riders. There are no !
It is not a question of eating that sh*t but getting caught, and the art of these voodoo doctors like Ferrari is not to chose the right cocktail but the advice how to mask it perfectly for the tests.
Simple logic should tell us that it is not possible to do a Tour without any kind dope, not to speak of winning it . And it was said already 100 times, by those who got caught, but nobody wants to hear it..
As for Landis, Testosterone works as the one shot in the evening before the next day , helps to recover faster and and makes agressive for the next day.
So close to the victory, why shouldn't he have risked it as a last chance ?
And btw it makes no sense to blame the riders, they just do what a system forces them to do, a system built by business men .Tour de France is No 3 among the sportive super events in Europe and there are some hundred millions of Euros in this business.
The money spoils it all, first football, now Le Tour and the rest of the sports isn't better either. Doping is everywhere and everybody does it.
Fitzi
N
Nick R.
Guest
Unfortunately, avascular necrosis of the hip is a symptom of steroid abuse. It doesn't mean he's guilty, but it doesn't look good.
Joerg
Dilettant
Hi,
my 2c:
Teststorone is given for enhanced muscle regeneration and applied as a patch. it also heightens the aggressiveness (and pain tolerance i believe).
So propbably after the disastrous stage he applied a few to many patches...;-(
i am also not holding my breath for the B sample. these labs are run to very high satndards and lab errors are very very rare.
IMHO he just got too ambitious for his natural abilities....
Ciao
Joerg
my 2c:
Teststorone is given for enhanced muscle regeneration and applied as a patch. it also heightens the aggressiveness (and pain tolerance i believe).
So propbably after the disastrous stage he applied a few to many patches...;-(
i am also not holding my breath for the B sample. these labs are run to very high satndards and lab errors are very very rare.
IMHO he just got too ambitious for his natural abilities....
Ciao
Joerg
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Nick R. said:
Floyd's hip problems began when he broke it in a crash at the Tour 2 or so years ago.
N
Nick R.
Guest
Yes, but plenty of people break their hips and don't develop necrosis afterwards. If they're taking steroids, however, it is a real possibility. Not that you can't get necrosis after breaking a hip without steroids.
kbg32 said:
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
Landis had to have known that any testosterone he injected or ingested would have been detected -- and all stage winners are subjected to testing. It goes beyond all sense to think he was taking testosterone.
What bothers me greatly is that if sample B is consistent with the A sample (and I bet it will be; why would it not?), then that's it -- he's banned, and has to prove his innocence. It seems the testing is all that's taken into consideration, and he gets no chance to challenge the samples before the discipline is imposed.
At the same time, I find it curious that Floyd's comments are along the lines of "I should be considered innocent until proven guilty." That sounds like more of a lawyerly response. Why hasn't he simply said "I have used no banned drugs"? If he has made such a statement, I certainly haven't heard it.
What bothers me greatly is that if sample B is consistent with the A sample (and I bet it will be; why would it not?), then that's it -- he's banned, and has to prove his innocence. It seems the testing is all that's taken into consideration, and he gets no chance to challenge the samples before the discipline is imposed.
At the same time, I find it curious that Floyd's comments are along the lines of "I should be considered innocent until proven guilty." That sounds like more of a lawyerly response. Why hasn't he simply said "I have used no banned drugs"? If he has made such a statement, I certainly haven't heard it.
traveller
Learning how to print
I had a nice talk with some researchers who work with human hormons. If sample A has been tested according to the protocol Landis has a real problem.
Normaly the proportion from testosterone and and epistestosterone, at least when he's a normal human, is 1. It's not considered to be doping with a quotient of 4, that's quite gracious. If the sample B shows the same results as sample A there will be no doubt because the quotient of sample A seems to be 11. Maybe the will also use a new mass spectrometry method (IRMS), this method detects if the testosterone in your body is your own or not.
I personally think that fitzihardwurshd is right, as the tour is getting more difficult every year it is not possible to have good results without doping. If they would be able to test the samples from the last 20 years with new analysis methods I wouldn't be shocked if every one would prove to be positive.
But you get what you pay for. Humans, even if genetically selected and superb trained have limits and to expand the limits they use doping. As long as we want them to get faster, jump higher, have more endurance and a recovery capability beyond human means we will have doping scandals.
just my 2c
Normaly the proportion from testosterone and and epistestosterone, at least when he's a normal human, is 1. It's not considered to be doping with a quotient of 4, that's quite gracious. If the sample B shows the same results as sample A there will be no doubt because the quotient of sample A seems to be 11. Maybe the will also use a new mass spectrometry method (IRMS), this method detects if the testosterone in your body is your own or not.
I personally think that fitzihardwurshd is right, as the tour is getting more difficult every year it is not possible to have good results without doping. If they would be able to test the samples from the last 20 years with new analysis methods I wouldn't be shocked if every one would prove to be positive.
But you get what you pay for. Humans, even if genetically selected and superb trained have limits and to expand the limits they use doping. As long as we want them to get faster, jump higher, have more endurance and a recovery capability beyond human means we will have doping scandals.
just my 2c
Last edited:
S
Socke
Guest
Every year we have one of the biggest indoor cycling events here and I work for the organizer. The sports director is Patrick Sercue who told me two years ago that winning the Tour de France is impossible without doping nowadays. I believe him.
fitzihardwurshd
Spiteful little devil
traveller said:
Actually this IS part of the test, done already in the A test, the results day it is NOT his own testerosone. It is identified as an exogenous gift yet.
As far as I know the A-test says this level was 300% over the limit.
Knowing this, how can he insist in a personal over-production ?? I take this as an attempt to take the piss outta me and all other biking fans.
Fitzi
John Camp
Well-known
Floyd has said repeatedly that he hasn't taken drugs -- and very specifically in an interview in Spain yesterday or the day before -- and Lance Armstrong, with whom Floyd had a major falling-out, has even said that while Floyd was with the team, he was clean, that there were never any problems or suspicions about drug use. Armstrong also went on to say that he thought this lab, which has a history of going after Armstrong, should be disqualified from doing the test as it apparently has some issues with American riders.
If you will google around a bit (I was doing it yesterday) you'll also find a statement by a doctor -- an endrocrinologist? -- who made the interesting comment that Floyd's testosterone level wasn't especially high. What the lab detected was a ratio between two hormones, testosterone and some other one, that is usually 1:1. If it's more than 4:1, it's considered suspicious for testosterone abuse. But what this guy was apparently saying was that Floyd's testosterone wasn't particularly high in itself, it was only the ratio that was out of whack -- that the other hormone was lower than typical.
JC
If you will google around a bit (I was doing it yesterday) you'll also find a statement by a doctor -- an endrocrinologist? -- who made the interesting comment that Floyd's testosterone level wasn't especially high. What the lab detected was a ratio between two hormones, testosterone and some other one, that is usually 1:1. If it's more than 4:1, it's considered suspicious for testosterone abuse. But what this guy was apparently saying was that Floyd's testosterone wasn't particularly high in itself, it was only the ratio that was out of whack -- that the other hormone was lower than typical.
JC
Joerg
Dilettant
Hi,
as far as Landis claimed that he has been tested multiple times, then why did his natural levels/imbalance NOT show up repeatedly?
IMHO his excuses are BS.
Ciao
Joerg
as far as Landis claimed that he has been tested multiple times, then why did his natural levels/imbalance NOT show up repeatedly?
IMHO his excuses are BS.
Ciao
Joerg
Last edited:
R
Richard Black
Guest
Until they conduct a test of the type of testosterone, natural or artificial, I think I'll withhold any opinion. Given all the hype, I think in the end the test will reveal any discrepancy. I haven't seen the results of these tests, so what's reported in the media is just hype.
John Camp
Well-known
Good points (from Flyfisher Tom.) But (1) I'm not sure that it is impossible for testosterone to show a large one-time variation immediately after a person has been through extreme and almost unprecedented stress. I'm not arguing with you; I literaly don't know.
(2) You're right about the lawyer-speak, and the reason for this is that, assuming the test was done with any acceptable level of competency, it's gonna be the same. They really don't have any other defense other than that I mentioned above (that the absolute level of testosterone was not high; that only the ratio was high, as though he'd eliminated some of the other other hormone, rather than having increased the testosterone.)
(3) I'm also a Lance fan, and would agree that he'd have to say this, but only if he felt compelled to say *something* about Landis back then. I'm not sure that he was -- he could have taken Greg LeMond's attitude. After all, if Landis falls, that leaves Lance as the last and greatest American bike racer... I'm suggesting that Lance easily could have said nothing at all.
The huge question that everybody seems to talk around is that most sports medicine guys say that testosterone doesn't work over night. It does you no good to get the night before a race. In the world of bike racing, which is hyper-aware of drugs, and their effects, and how tests works, and about masking, that must have been well known. So why would he take a drug that simply doesn't help? And one that is routinely checked, and where he was certain to be detected? That doesn't make any sense.
JC
(2) You're right about the lawyer-speak, and the reason for this is that, assuming the test was done with any acceptable level of competency, it's gonna be the same. They really don't have any other defense other than that I mentioned above (that the absolute level of testosterone was not high; that only the ratio was high, as though he'd eliminated some of the other other hormone, rather than having increased the testosterone.)
(3) I'm also a Lance fan, and would agree that he'd have to say this, but only if he felt compelled to say *something* about Landis back then. I'm not sure that he was -- he could have taken Greg LeMond's attitude. After all, if Landis falls, that leaves Lance as the last and greatest American bike racer... I'm suggesting that Lance easily could have said nothing at all.
The huge question that everybody seems to talk around is that most sports medicine guys say that testosterone doesn't work over night. It does you no good to get the night before a race. In the world of bike racing, which is hyper-aware of drugs, and their effects, and how tests works, and about masking, that must have been well known. So why would he take a drug that simply doesn't help? And one that is routinely checked, and where he was certain to be detected? That doesn't make any sense.
JC
Flyfisher Tom
Well-known
I agree John. I would have thought testosterone is more of a long-term muscle/power development tool.
In any event, Floyd has a, uhmm, uphill legal battle ahead. The only real way to exonerate himself is to show either that past tests have recorded the 11:1 ratio, or, absent past records, to consistently show in future tests that his testosterone levels are abnormally high. Since neither he nor his attorney have cited past tests, I'm assuming they don't exist. Or worse yet, they exist and actually show markedly lower levels.
As for future tests, if the only way to detect abuse is through the ratio test, it begs the question of whether you can even detect cause and effect. The best evidence is still with past tests, if they exist.
Quite a mess. When Taylor Hamilton was suspended for 2 years for doping, I was shocked. He seemed like a clean guy (whatever that means). I guess I'm less naive now, sadder certainly.
Did you hear Barry Bonds is racing in the Tour next year?
In any event, Floyd has a, uhmm, uphill legal battle ahead. The only real way to exonerate himself is to show either that past tests have recorded the 11:1 ratio, or, absent past records, to consistently show in future tests that his testosterone levels are abnormally high. Since neither he nor his attorney have cited past tests, I'm assuming they don't exist. Or worse yet, they exist and actually show markedly lower levels.
As for future tests, if the only way to detect abuse is through the ratio test, it begs the question of whether you can even detect cause and effect. The best evidence is still with past tests, if they exist.
Quite a mess. When Taylor Hamilton was suspended for 2 years for doping, I was shocked. He seemed like a clean guy (whatever that means). I guess I'm less naive now, sadder certainly.
Did you hear Barry Bonds is racing in the Tour next year?
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
I have to disagree about the lawyer-speak -- that's probably actually the correct medical way to articulate it (which has been adopted by the lawyer, of course).
I do agree with Flyfisher Tom and John Camp, though -- a spike like that in the testosterone ratio overnight can't be explained by a one-time intake of the hormone, and furthermore that it needs to be administered over time to make a difference in performance. (And if indeed they were planning to administer the testosterone, they had to know it would be detected immediately.)
For me, things point to a lab screwup (or tampering), so I too am surprised Floyd and his advisers are seemingly conceding this point.
I do agree with Flyfisher Tom and John Camp, though -- a spike like that in the testosterone ratio overnight can't be explained by a one-time intake of the hormone, and furthermore that it needs to be administered over time to make a difference in performance. (And if indeed they were planning to administer the testosterone, they had to know it would be detected immediately.)
For me, things point to a lab screwup (or tampering), so I too am surprised Floyd and his advisers are seemingly conceding this point.
fitzihardwurshd
Spiteful little devil
John Camp said:
This is not a huge question but, sorry, plain wannabe expert sh*t . Actually they sometimes wear it as a plaster, DURING the race, if necessary.
The only thing which did not work, from what reason ever , was the masking of the testerosone. This is done usually with tiny pills, pushed into the urethra befor peeing into the bottle. And this is not a fairy tale for your old grandma but what a Spanish pro explained last saturday publicly in German TV.
Women usually use condomes btw in the vagina with urine from another person for the test. Works even if another person watches them directlly while "peeing".
What Landis does is what they all do when they are caught in the act, the usual defense startegy, a pack of lies. We had a long distance runner here , this nerd wanted to make us believe that some personal enemies have mixed the stuff into his tooth paste....:bang:
The usual defense strategy is not to admit anything, never, ever. They expect a very little rest of doubt does not allow others to call them defrauders. It happened too often here, nobody wants to listen to such impudent statements any longer in Europe.
Come on guys, babies don't come from kissing. :bang:
Fitzi