Jump to content








Photo

The Index of Suspicion


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 jamie72

jamie72

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 02:20 PM

 

 What does anybody think of this??

 

http://www.cyclingne...-tour-de-france 

 

 Personally I'm not convinced as all journalists are obviously biased!  This guy is no different but I'd like to hear other theories!

 

 















#2 steve

steve

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 4,626 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 02:25 PM

0 Mario Aerts, Yukiya Arashiro, Stephane Augé, Michael Barry, Francesco Bellotti, Jose Alberto Benitez, Edvald Boasson Hagen, Lars Boom, Maxime Bouet, Pavel Brutt, Fabian Cancellara, Manuel Cardoso, Dries Devenyns, Samuel Dumoulin, Julien El Farès, Simon Gerrans, Anthony Geslin, Bert Grabsch, Christopher Horner, Robert Hunter, Kristjan Koren, Burt Lancaster, David Le Lay, Christophe Le Mével, Adriano Malori, Koes Moerenhout, Amael Moinard, Lloyd Mondory, Damien Monier, Juan Jose Oroz, Remi Pauriol, Mathieu Perget, Gregory Rast, Mark Renshaw, Nicolas Roche, Jurgen Roelandts, Pierre Rolland, Anthony Roux, Jeremy Roy, Mathieu Sprick, Rein Taaramae, Sebastien Turgot, Niki Terpstra, Brian Vandborg, Kristof Vandewalle, Ivan Velasco, Thomas Voeckler, Fabian Wegmann, David Zabriskie

 

1 Marcus Burghardt, Sandy Casar, Anthony Charteau, Sylvain Chavanel, Julian Dean, Mickael Delage, Martin Elmiger, Johannes Fröhlinger, Jakob Fuglsang, Robert Gesink, Xavier Florencio, Adam Hansen, Ryder Hesjedal, George Hincapie, Andreas Klier, Roger Kluge, Alexander Kuchinsky, Daniel Lloyd, Mirco Lorenzetto, Martijn Maaskant, Aitor Pérez, Alan Pérez, Jerome Pineau, Ruben Plaza, Alexandre Pliuschin, MaartenTjallingii, Rafael Valls, Maarten Wynants

 

2 Eros Capecchi, Mark Cavendish, Stephen Cummings, Remy Di Gregorio, Arkaitz Duran, Mathias Frank, Oscar Freire, John Gadret, Francesco Gavazzi, Volodymir Gustov, Thor Hushovd, Christophe Kern, Thomas Löfkvist, Sebastien Minard, Daniel Navarro, Grischa Niermann, Stuart O'Grady, Rubén Pérez, Christophe Riblon, Thomas Rohregger, L. L. Sanchez, Carlos Sastre, Fränk Schleck, Simon Spilak, Bram Tankink, Stijn Vandenbergh, Benoit Vaugrenard, Jens Voigt, Eduard Vorganov

 

3 Ivan Basso, Grega Bole, Brent Bookwalter, Dimitri Champion, Gerald Ciolek, Rui Costa, Damiano Cunego, Mauro Da Dalto, Francis De Greef, Markus Eibegger, Imanol Erviti, Tyler Farrar, Fabio Felline, Juan Antonio Flecha, Maxim Iglinskiy, Vasil Kiryienka, Roman Kreuziger, Matthieu Ladagnous, Robbie McEwen, Maxime Monfort, Sergio Paulinho, Joaquin Rodriguez, Andy Schleck, Chris Anker Sörensen, Sylvester Szmyd, Paolo Tiralongo, Amets Txurruka, Johan Van Summeren, Gorka Verdugo, Charles Wegelius

 

4 Lance Armstrong, Janez Brajkovic, Bernhard Eisel, Cadel Evans, Pierrick Fédrigo, Juan Manuel Garate, Andriy Grivko, Jesus Hernandez, Ignatas Konovalovas, Sebastian Lang, Levi Leipheimer, David Millar, Daniel Moreno, Serge Pauwels, Manuel Quinziato, Luke Roberts, Samuel Sanchez, Christian Vande Velde, Nicolas Vogondy

 

5 Alessandro Ballan, Matti Breschel, Alberto Contador, Cyril Gautier, Inaki Isasi, Sergei Ivanov, Vladimir Karpets, Alexandr Kolobnev, Karsten Kroon, Steve Morabito, Benjamin Noval, Jose Rojas, Nicki Sörensen, Alexander Vinokourov, Bradley Wiggins

 

6 Linus Gerdemann, Christian Knees, Egoi Martínez, Alessandro Petacchi, Francesco Reda, Mauro Santambrogio, Geraint Thomas

 

7 Jeremy Hunt, Andreas Klöden, Tony Martin, Christophe Moreau, Michael Rogers, Wesley Sulzberger

 

8 David De la Fuente, Ivan Gutiérrez, Danilo Hondo, Matthew Lloyd, Iban Mayoz, Dmitriy Muravyev, Rinaldo Nocentini, Daniel Oss, Kevin Seeldraeyers, Kanstantsin Siutsou, Jurgen Van Den Broeck

 

9 Denis Menchov

 

10 Carlos Barredo,Yaroslav Popovych



#3 steve

steve

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 4,626 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 02:26 PM

 

Originally Posted by jamie72 View Post

 

 What does anybody think of this??

 

 Personally I'm not convinced as all journalists are obviously biased!  This guy is no different but I'd like to hear other theories!

 


 

I thought Wes Sulzberger scoring a 7 was a big surprise.



#4 jamie72

jamie72

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 02:40 PM

Exactly!



#5 tonyzackery

tonyzackery

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,516 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 02:42 PM

What's your opinion?  What are you "not convinced' of?

 

The list is subjective, but it's (supposedly) based on empirical evidence collected over the course of several years.

 

IMO, "it is what it is".  I'm suprised there are so many zero scores, personally.  That the French riders scored the most low scores can be explained by France's extremely strict (relatively speaking) laws against using doping products.

 

That the bastion of cleanness himself, Cadel Evans, rates a 4 (same as Lance) is an interesting topic for discussion in itself... 


Do, or do not - there is no "try".

#6 steve

steve

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 4,626 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 02:50 PM

 

Originally Posted by tonyzackery View Post

 

That the bastion of cleanness himself, Cadel Evans, rates a 4 (same as Lance) is an interesting topic for discussion in itself... 


Says a lot for Lance doesn't it  played the game fairly. 



#7 jamie72

jamie72

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 02:53 PM

^ Having said that some of those on the list with high scores come as no surprise though.



#8 jamie72

jamie72

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 02:55 PM

Call me naieve but I didn't think doping was this widespread Tony..



#9 jamie72

jamie72

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 02:58 PM

 

 And like I said in the original post, Journalists have their own agenda. This bloke is the "anti doping expert" from L'equipe. Hardly a newspaper renowned for it's objectivism!!



#10 tonyzackery

tonyzackery

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,516 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 03:14 PM



Originally Posted by jamie72 View Post

 

 And like I said in the original post, Journalists have their own agenda. This bloke is the "anti doping expert" from L'equipe. Hardly a newspaper renowned for it's objectivism!!


??? The journalist in this matter did not compile the list - this is the UCI's own list.  I think you may be confused somewhere...

 


Do, or do not - there is no "try".

#11 jamie72

jamie72

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 03:26 PM

Yes but the UCI ain't saying that this is a list of dopers. L'equipe are. Yes I am confused!



#12 pennstater

pennstater

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 323 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 04:11 PM

Very interesting, but I would like to know more about this rating system.  I would like to know all of the variables that were used to determine where riders scored on this scale.  Also, how were the variables weighted?  One of the variables for instances was suspicion of epo use during the 2009 giro.  What about the riders who didn't ride the giro?  I would like to see how each rider was rated and why they had a high score or low score.  I understand this is leaked information, but now I want to know how the list was made.  This does make for a good forum topic though

 

Here is another article with some rider comments about the leak/list.

http://www.roadcycli...ed_004269.shtml 



#13 tonyzackery

tonyzackery

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,516 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 04:36 PM



Originally Posted by jamie72 View Post

Yes but the UCI ain't saying that this is a list of dopers. L'equipe are. Yes I am confused!


Just as anyone, the journalist/L'Equipe is entitled to his/her opinion/interpretation of the information they are presenting.  Journalists/periodicals aren't mandated to be objective - it's a bonus if they are.  Nowadays, first and foremost newspapers/televised news see themselves as another form of entertainment.  It's incumbent on you to try to discern BS from truth...That's just the nature of information - you don't know exactly what can be relied upon, and what can't.

 

Don't lose sight of the forest because of the tree in front of you.  The issue for discussion is the riders on the list, and their suspicion ranking according to the UCI - not the journalist's spin in order to create a more salacious story.  The story is the list itself...
 

 


Do, or do not - there is no "try".

#14 tonyzackery

tonyzackery

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,516 posts

Posted 14 May 2011 - 09:28 PM

What I also find interesting in this list is the fact that even though a couple guys rate a 10, the UCI is not pursuing a case against them for being in violation of the passport.  Do they gotta catch 'em with the needle still stickin' outta their rump?  What does that say for the guys they have pursued cases against?  They must've rated 13 or 14.  LOL!  Further, what does this say about the UCI's confidence in their passport system to catch cheaters?  Apparently, their confidence could use a little propping up... 


Do, or do not - there is no "try".

#15 sitzmark

sitzmark

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 472 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 06:15 AM

In itself, the idea of a list is of little concern.  Obviously some key criteria were identified that would be measured and correlated - basically the same as physicians do when interpreting diagnostic test results.  Outliers and conflicting results are common in diagnostic testing - especially for indirect methodologies.  The bigger picture of everything in context is what allows physicians to diagnose the "true" cause of a patient's illness.   

 

What is interesting to me is that objectively established thresholds for individual biologic passports seem to evolve into the traditional team-oriented usual suspects groupings when tallied up as L'Equipe did.  Maybe the bigger (subjective) picture is more of a factor than the biologic profile itself.  Team Radio Shack opined on a training center/athlete correlation ... 

 

I did have a chance to ride and talk with Chris Horner for a few hours once and if anyone struck me as the cleanest of athletes it was he.  Even being American and on Radio Shack he scored a zero, so maybe the rest of the list is just as accurate???  :wink: 

 



#16 tonyzackery

tonyzackery

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,516 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 08:58 AM



 

Originally Posted by sitzmark View Post

In itself, the idea of a list is of little concern. 

 


http://www.cyclingne...-for-defamation

 

I wonder if these athletes agree with your non-concern...
 

 


Do, or do not - there is no "try".

#17 sitzmark

sitzmark

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 472 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 12:21 PM



Originally Posted by tonyzackery View Post

http://www.cyclingne...-for-defamation

 

I wonder if these athletes agree with your non-concern...
 



I said the idea of a list in and of itself is of little concern (to me) ... never said anything about allowing it to become public.  
 
The pro circuit tacitly accepted that the testing and resulting biologic passport would be used to monitor evidence of illegal performance enhancement when all agreed to the program.  Measure and display is a key part of any task/objective, and the UCI is on a mission.  Prioritizing where/how to focus resources is a part of any plan of action.  Whatever legal agreements have been executed will determine to what extent (if any) the UCI failed the riders/teams.  Almost certainly there would be an expectation that each rider's passport/medical history would be kept confidential, but whether or not that is spelled out in a binding legal agreement is speculation on my part.   If riders and teams sue that question will be answered for them.
 
From what has been published, the ranking system was not an indictment of an athlete's guilt ... rather an indication of the degree to which individual profiles fell outside of established norms and the additional sampling and scrutiny that resulted.  If it was completely objective and applied equally across the board (I have my doubts, but neither here nor there), then the UCI should have little problem defending itself against instituting such a ranking system to administer the program.  That is a completely separate issue from responsibility for failing to keep the results confidential.

 



#18 tonyzackery

tonyzackery

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,516 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 12:40 PM

Good on you for the clarification of your own personal non-concern. 

 

Your opinions on the matter are noted and I imagine the OP appreciates your sharing...


Do, or do not - there is no "try".

#19 jamie72

jamie72

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 03:03 PM

Interesting indeed. See also the response from the AIGCP.

http://www.cyclingne...-to-leaked-list

 

 According to them a riders score could be increased simply by riding particularly well at the time, not just blood values. (see point 3) So would Cancellara for example recieve a zero during the April of 2010?? Still confused!!

 

 

 

 

 



#20 tonyzackery

tonyzackery

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,516 posts

Posted 15 May 2011 - 03:15 PM

AIGCP is trying to do damage control by, perhaps, "educating" the public as to how the rankings were derived.  They are preaching to the choir where the UCI is concerned because I have to believe the officials at the UCI are astute enough to have already taken these listed factors into account before they compile their suspicion rankings.

 

The UCI did not publish nor publicize this list - it was "leaked" to L'Equipe...it was meant to remain internal...


Do, or do not - there is no "try".




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users