Do you have to use perfromance enhancers to be a pro?

[Brizza]

I'm just concerned by your willingness to paint a broad picture that all AIS athletes are doppers.

French and associates were dopping while in Europe, does this make all AIS athletes doppers?

I'm not saying there arn't doppers out there (and I agree the TDF covers it up) but we can't make broad statements that certain bodies produce doppers.

 

[Flyer]

I am concerned too. Gravely concerned.

I believe it was Mark French's personal dormintory room at the AIS camp---on your own soil which got Parliament involved. And broad statement apply nicely to the AIS scandal. It was an absolute bomb.

It was right under your nose---and it was obvious that the boys were using Mark's room for group injecting. equine hormones and syringes---lots of spent syringes. Mark implicated five (5) others too.

But because; 1) we wanted a full team at the Olympics and Junior Worlds 2) his word over the others denials 3) a lack of evidence was the result.

The problem was the waste disposal. Never, ever leave your trash behind. A rule that Lance Armstrong's USPO never forgot after the 2000 fiasco.

It is just a political cover up. That's all.

I would say that 2004 summer episode alone disgraced the AIS. I will always supect them now.

I'm just concerned by your willingness to paint a broad picture that all AIS athletes are doppers.

French and associates were dopping while in Europe, does this make all AIS athletes doppers?

I'm not saying there arn't doppers out there (and I agree the TDF covers it up) but we can't make broad statements that certain bodies produce doppers.

 

[Brizza]

And that's reason enough to abuse the image of all athletes from their country?

 

[Dead Star]

And that's reason enough to abuse the image of all athletes from their country?

Apart from Millar he hasn't touched the British yet

 

[VeloFlash]

I do. That is why I am convinced that there are dozens of doped AIS athletes.

In an earliy post you speculated that maybe a 'couple' of AIS were dopers.

But we already know there are far more than that.

Mark French ratted out five others (names not released for obvious political reasons in an Olympic year)

So that makes 6, unless 3-time Champion French is to be discredited as any rat might be.

Then your friend Sean Eadie and his Pituitary Gland juice issue.

Then the 1994 World Champion Shane Perkins, a confirmed doper at the Los Angeles Worlds. A Gold Metal winning 200 meter sprinter, now DQed.

Then the bi-polar suffering ex-trackies, Neiwand & Pate.

Hell, that is 10 dopers and I haven't even got started with deep research.

None of the 2004 Juniors went positive for drugs until Perkins did months after his Gold Medal in LA.

And we do NOT test them for the drugs that are abused. hGH, insulin, some EPOs, designer THG/nandrolone. So no conclusions can be made.

So the tests are meaningless and unhelpful.

To the extent that the public actually believes that 48 hour testing somehow prevents cheating, it actually aids the cheaters by adding cover.

Now wonder Lance Armstrong supports WADA, yet loathes Richard Pound.

Flyer, you have gone off half-cocked and speculated over the sacrificial lynching of one rider that there exists a systemic doping program within the AIS.

Sport in Australia is assisted by taxpayer funding through a body known as the Australian Sports Commission (ASC). They provide individual and sporting organisation funding (about 75 different sports). All funding is based on a zero tolerance drug policy. If an individual or a sports organisation gets caught doping or being party to doping their funding is withdrawn. This happened with weight lifting.

The Australian Sports Drugs Agency (ASDA) is the independent body that is the bloodhound for ASC anti drugs policy and pioneered this role in world sport. It is only the recent establishment of WADA that enforced countries to follow what Australia has been carrying out for about 20 years.

The AIS is funded and managed through the ASC and is accountable to the ASC and their political masters. The government controls the appointment of ASC Commissioners (management). Generally, politicians are not sports orientated except towards elections and for photo opportunities. They take great glee, as in the French case, of using parliamentary privilege (not legally accountable) to expose events if they are not of the political colours of the government.

Your allegation that AIS is part of an organised doping system is absurd given the structure and enforced policies of that organisation. If an athlete dopes in Australia it would be a personal decision using private resources.

 

[Flyer]

Full-cocked and on the bullseye.

One? No ten and counting.
It's a hornets' nest. No zero tolerance whatsoever. French is on appeal and he will be back. What of Shane Perkins? What of Mark French's five other teammates? Why not suspend them too? Somebody is lying. French did not use two dozen syringes.

Shoot the housekeeper, not the messenger.

If that housekeeper had informed authorities outside the AIS--we never would have know about equine growth hormone injection for JUNIORS at AIS. btw: these drugs are not detectable!

Australia's Parliament shares my sentiments--although, like our Congress, little will come of it.
Whe money is involved, that's what drives doping.

Stay tuned.

Flyer, you have gone off half-cocked and speculated over the sacrificial lynching of one rider that there exists a systemic doping program within the AIS.

Sport in Australia is assisted by taxpayer funding through a body known as the Australian Sports Commission (ASC). They provide individual and sporting organisation funding (about 75 different sports). All funding is based on a zero tolerance drug policy. If an individual or a sports organisation gets caught doping or being party to doping their funding is withdrawn. This happened with weight lifting.

The Australian Sports Drugs Agency (ASDA) is the independent body that is the bloodhound for ASC anti drugs policy and pioneered this role in world sport. It is only the recent establishment of WADA that enforced countries to follow what Australia has been carrying out for about 20 years.

The AIS is funded and managed through the ASC and is accountable to the ASC and their political masters. The government controls the appointment of ASC Commissioners (management). Generally, politicians are not sports orientated except towards elections and for photo opportunities. They take great glee, as in the French case, of using parliamentary privilege (not legally accountable) to expose events if they are not of the political colours of the government.

Your allegation that AIS is part of an organised doping system is absurd given the structure and enforced policies of that organisation. If an athlete dopes in Australia it would be a personal decision using private resources.

 

[Flyer]

I never said the AIS has a conspiracy to commit illegal doping upon their Olymic hopefulls.

But the AIS cannot help it, nor stop it from occuring intependendly of their best intentions.

Whether the AIS as an institution is corrupt, I do not know.

In the USA, a former director, Wade Exum claims the our Olympic sporting federation is corrupt and that we sent 60 dopers to the Sidney Games.

We still do not have the names--but Marian Jones and Tim Montgomery come to my mind as probables.

Wade Exum says, the positive drugs tests were covered up and the athletes were cleared to go to the 2000 Olympic Games.

If true, that is institutional corruption. Who is more guilty, the federation or the doped athlete?

I'll let you decide.


btw: If Wade Exum is just another jealous liar (a term often used to describe truth teller) then our USA Olympic Federation are still tainted with embarassment. Why associate with so many liars?

Something is terribly wrong in sport with so many liars.

No matter how you slice it, liars seem to dominate sport at the highest level.

Thanks for reading VeloFlash

Flyer, you have gone off half-cocked and speculated over the sacrificial lynching of one rider that there exists a systemic doping program within the AIS.

Sport in Australia is assisted by taxpayer funding through a body known as the Australian Sports Commission (ASC). They provide individual and sporting organisation funding (about 75 different sports). All funding is based on a zero tolerance drug policy. If an individual or a sports organisation gets caught doping or being party to doping their funding is withdrawn. This happened with weight lifting.

The Australian Sports Drugs Agency (ASDA) is the independent body that is the bloodhound for ASC anti drugs policy and pioneered this role in world sport. It is only the recent establishment of WADA that enforced countries to follow what Australia has been carrying out for about 20 years.

The AIS is funded and managed through the ASC and is accountable to the ASC and their political masters. The government controls the appointment of ASC Commissioners (management). Generally, politicians are not sports orientated except towards elections and for photo opportunities. They take great glee, as in the French case, of using parliamentary privilege (not legally accountable) to expose events if they are not of the political colours of the government.

Your allegation that AIS is part of an organised doping system is absurd given the structure and enforced policies of that organisation. If an athlete dopes in Australia it would be a personal decision using private resources.

 

[Brizza]

We do more drug testing than the US, yet we don't even have a pro competition

There is no money in Australian cycling until you get overseas.

Our pros work in poorly paying bike shops and are given a frame or bike each year as sponsorship until they get a reputation they can take overseas.

Where is the money causing all this corruption coming from?

OK a few individuals made a private decision, does that make every Australian dirty?

We have 364 days of warm weather. Is it any suprise we produce good athletes?

More bad news for Australian track fans---the truth does smart. The appearence of the AIS progaram is 1) it's a huge success 2) doping is required 3) doping has been confirmed 4) the cover stories are embarrassing and ongoing even in your Parliament.

When you consider the small population to draw from, Australia excels at track cycling. But only by keeping pace with pharmacology.

 

[VeloFlash]

I am concerned too. Gravely concerned.

I believe it was Mark French's personal dormintory room at the AIS camp---on your own soil which got Parliament involved. And broad statement apply nicely to the AIS scandal. It was an absolute bomb.

It was right under your nose---and it was obvious that the boys were using Mark's room for group injecting. equine hormones and syringes---lots of spent syringes. Mark implicated five (5) others too.

But because; 1) we wanted a full team at the Olympics and Junior Worlds 2) his word over the others denials 3) a lack of evidence was the result.

The problem was the waste disposal. Never, ever leave your trash behind. A rule that Lance Armstrong's USPO never forgot after the 2000 fiasco.

It is just a political cover up. That's all.

I would say that 2004 summer episode alone disgraced the AIS. I will always supect them now.

You make the above statement and this statement:

"More bad news for Australian track fans---the truth does smart. The appearence of the AIS progaram is 1) it's a huge success 2) doping is required 3) doping has been confirmed 4) the cover stories are embarrassing and ongoing even in your Parliament."

Then you withdraw from the above direct accusations about the AIS and say:

"I never said the AIS has a conspiracy to commit illegal doping upon their Olymic hopefulls."

Can you elaborate?

Mark French made two fatal legal flaws. He went to the hearing unrepresented and was torn to shreds. He was told he would be given a reduced sanction if he opened up on his fellow competitors.

However, his biggest mistake was to finger two riders who were doping at the training facility at a time when those riders were with teams in Europe. After that exposure no Court or Tribunal would give him any credibility for his evidence.

But you may be interested to know, Flyer, that at no time whatsoever did he implicate the AIS or Cycling Australia has having any contribution into the allegations he made.

By the way, it was only brought up once in parliament. And that was an election year when the opposition party wanted to score some pre election brownie points on the government. Many opposition members of parliament would prefer sporting funding to be re-directed to environment and social welfare issues.

 

[kennf]

You guys are getting sidetracked on the Australian issue. Flyer isn't singling out Australians, he has stated that he believes EVERY pro rider dopes. In particular, EVERY pro rider who wins a grand tour. He also believes that Lance started doping when he was a 16 year old triathlete. You will note that about half of the threads in the "doping" category are started by Flyer. It is his raison d'etre.

 

[Flyer]

WRONG!!!!! Yet another feeble attempt to discredit the messenger of a tired, to blur the blatantly correct analysis of doping by pro athletes.

I never said Lance doped when he was a 16 year old triathlete just starting out.

You said that and I, for one, do not believe it. We have no evidence of that.

However, when Lance became acquainted with Colorado Springs and the US National Team methods---sometime after his 17th birthday, things developed from there.

His former teammates have already gone on public record to confirm injections in 1990 & 1991. We do have their stories as evidence. (Lance was age 18 & 19 at that time)

Just as the USCF had a doping problem---we know for a fact that the AIS had one too---in 2004.

French & Perkins are proof positive.

No country or rider is singled out here and thus far I only know of one 16 year old who used EPO, a South African.

Get it straight.

You guys are getting sidetracked on the Australian issue. Flyer isn't singling out Australians, he has stated that he believes EVERY pro rider dopes. In particular, EVERY pro rider who wins a grand tour. He also believes that Lance started doping when he was a 16 year old triathlete. You will note that about half of the threads in the "doping" category are started by Flyer. It is his raison d'etre.

 

[Brizza]

We're pointing out that he isn't correct in everything he's asserted.
He had no response to his allegations of widespead dopping in the AIS and didn't have an answer to why Australia tests more than the US when we don't even have a Pro competition.

Many of the riders tested in the US arn't even Americans, while we have no competition worth travelling for (we get a very small number of international riders at some of our big races).

I think flyier is correct in many of his suggestions but he needs to be more careful in his allegations.

 

[Flyer]

With respect to the smeared AIS I have been spot on, but perhaps understated the case.

Mark French and Shane Perkins have won four (4) Junior World Sprinting Championships and were members of AIS.

Both have either admitted to doping (French)---or were tested positive (Perkin's in LA).

This is utter validation that successful AIS memebers, who were also juniors, take drugs.

What does that say about the AIS?

An organization is only as good as its members. French and Perkins alone have shown a bright laser light onto that group. And now we know the truth.

The AIS has a problem, obviously. So too does our whole sport. The AIS is not any more pure than other programs. We know that for an absolute fact thanks to Mark French and Shane Perkins.

There may be many more dopers at AIS, but I'll let you guys find them.

We're pointing out that he isn't correct in everything he's asserted.
He had no response to his allegations of widespead dopping in the AIS and didn't have an answer to why Australia tests more than the US when we don't even have a Pro competition.

Many of the riders tested in the US arn't even Americans, while we have no competition worth travelling for (we get a very small number of international riders at some of our big races).

I think flyier is correct in many of his suggestions but he needs to be more careful in his allegations.

 

[kennf]

WRONG!!!!! Yet another feeble attempt to discredit the messenger of a tired, to blur the blatantly correct analysis of doping by pro athletes.

I never said Lance doped when he was a 16 year old triathlete just starting out.

You said that and I, for one, do not believe it. We have no evidence of that.

.

Flyer, on March 1, 2005 you said:

"According to Greg Strock & Erich Kaiter, Lance's former USA National Teammates the "injections" had already begun by 1990, when Lance was 18 years old. Perhaps he did start a few years earlier. The dope is free for promising talent."

I'm sorry I so drastically misrepresented your claims. I guess I should have realized that when you said "a few years earlier", the word "few" meant "one year or less", that is, age 17, not 16. And of course, you did preface your statement with "perhaps", which I guess means "I have no proof of this, but I'll just say it". Do I have it straight now?

 

[Flyer]

Until one gets put into the vortex that is National & International level of competition, the pressure to dope, the means, and the methods are less likely.

We know Lance's teammates admitted to the teamwide injections. It is, therefore, quite reasonable that the senior member by age, would be included in this practice.

Not a whole different than Mark French, Shane Perkins and the AIS scandal, eh?

Last September South Africa had a 16 year old who was busted for EPO--but because his doctor injected him, no suspension was metted out.

Thanks for the correction.

Flyer, on March 1, 2005 you said:

"According to Greg Strock & Erich Kaiter, Lance's former USA National Teammates the "injections" had already begun by 1990, when Lance was 18 years old. Perhaps he did start a few years earlier. The dope is free for promising talent."

I'm sorry I so drastically misrepresented your claims. I guess I should have realized that when you said "a few years earlier", the word "few" meant "one year or less", that is, age 17, not 16. And of course, you did preface your statement with "perhaps", which I guess means "I have no proof of this, but I'll just say it". Do I have it straight now?

 

[VeloFlash]

Until one gets put into the vortex that is National & International level of competition, the pressure to dope, the means, and the methods are less likely.

We know Lance's teammates admitted to the teamwide injections. It is, therefore, quite reasonable that the senior member by age, would be included in this practice.

Not a whole different than Mark French, Shane Perkins and the AIS scandal, eh?

Last September South Africa had a 16 year old who was busted for EPO--but because his doctor injected him, no suspension was metted out.

Thanks for the correction.

"Not a whole different than Mark French, Shane Perkins and the AIS scandal, eh?"

Flyer, you and you alone refer it as an 'AIS scandal.'

The AIS have never been implicated, unlike the USCF, as being party to any athlete who has failed a drug test. French was granted the opportunity for a reduced sanction if he exposed other parties to the 'shooting gallery'. The AIS never figured in his accusations even though French adopted a scorched earth policy to take as many with him as he could.

The AIS is a government funded and publicly accountable agency. The USCF is not nor is USOC. An individual citizen of Australia (usually referred to as a taxpayer) can raise issues through the political process of any taxpayer funded organisations.

The only complaints I have heard about the AIS through the political process is an alleged waste of government resources in promoting athletic elitism at the expense of environmental and social welfare funding. If there was even a slight hint or rumour about the AIS preparing athletes for competition in breach of the anti doping rules then it would have been exposed.

Ever heard of the expression: "One swallow does not make a summer?"

In your rationale about the AIS you would refute and say "Summer is here, I saw a swallow."

 

[Flyer]

OK, OK I raise the white flag.

The AIS program is a tremendous success, I certainly agree that it is.

The Mark French (on AIS scholarship) and Shane Perkins examples are still a concern that a 'wiff' is in the air.

Whether, the issue is dead, I don't know.

Let's assume it is and no more AIS members get caught up with illegal drugs.

btw: USCF is dead and was morphed into USA Cycling in the wake of the doping lawsuits of Strock & Kaiter and other political changes (financial scandal of EDS) and Thom Weisel's influences and friendly board appointments.

USA Cycling still has a 'black box feel' to it.

Peace.

"Not a whole different than Mark French, Shane Perkins and the AIS scandal, eh?"

Flyer, you and you alone refer it to an 'AIS scandal.'

The AIS have never been implicated, unlike the USCF, as being party to any athlete who has failed a drug test. French was granted the opportunity for a reduced sanction if he exposed other parties to the 'shooting gallery'. The AIS never figured in his accusations even though French adopted a scorched earth policy to take as many with him as he could.

The AIS is a government funded and publicly accountable agency. The USCF is not nor is USOC. An individual citizen of Australia (usually referred to as a taxpayer) can raise issues through the political process of any taxpayer funded organisations.

The only complaints I have heard about the AIS through the political process is an alleged waste of government resources in promoting athletic elitism at the expense of environmental and social welfare funding. If there was even a slight hint or rumour about the AIS preparing athletes for competition in breach of the anti doping rules then it would have been exposed.

Ever heard of the expression: "One swallow does not make a summer?"

In your rationale about the AIS you would refute and say "Summer is here, I saw a swallow."

 

[Brizza]

Keep to the allegations you can sustain and you will receive alot more support in your move against drugs in sport.

By raising allegations without substance many readers are getting defensive when considering your claims and are writing off your other points.

That said I think you have some points our sport and it's spectators should be giving more thought to.

 

[Billsworld]

I have been around elite powerlifters most of my life. I hate the broad brush painted over every guy that is better, faster, stronger must be on something. BUT....when an Aussie or Brit or Yank track star is posting lifting numbers of elite powerlifters AND doing all their bike training some questions arise for me.

Keep to the allegations you can sustain and you will receive alot more support in your move against drugs in sport.

By raising allegations without substance many readers are getting defensive when considering your claims and are writing off your other points.

That said I think you have some points our sport and it's spectators should be giving more thought to.

 

[Meek One]

I have been around elite powerlifters most of my life. I hate the broad brush painted over every guy that is better, faster, stronger must be on something. BUT....when an Aussie or Brit or Yank track star is posting lifting numbers of elite powerlifters AND doing all their bike training some questions arise for me.

C'mon Bill, don't you know it is all about genetics, perfect training and clean eating. Elite powerlifters are obviously lacking in one of those variables since many bike riders are just as strong . You could make millions by figuring out which one it is. Don't be so negative, everyone is clean. Why people would bring up the subject is beyond me. Just because they are trying to be the best in their sport they wouldn't cross the line to attain that goal. No bad apples. Just remember pro bodybuilders just started dabbling in drugs a few years ago. But they are drug tested too. According to my M&F's in the basement no one in the 80's or early 90's took drugs either and Lee Haney and Gary Strydom looked pretty good back in the day.

PS I've been wondering how the bench press record has increased by about 300 pounds in the last 10 years since Ted Arcidi broke 700 and now EVERYONE in the Arnold classic could do 800+. I heard someone is attempting 1000. It was so ridiculous I almost decided to try to lift 800, it was all so surreal.