Dublin Girl Accuses Tour Hero

Discussion in 'Doping in Cycling' started by limerickman, Jun 27, 2004.

  1. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,130
    Likes Received:
    115
    Bernard Hinault - his comments sound a bit defensive to me, don't you think ?
    Hinault as you know is a highly visible figure at the TDF and ASO
    (the company that organises a lot of the major races).
    Hinault is clearly worried about all of the bad press at the TDF.
    There is severe pressure now being applied about the very nature of the TDF from goverment circles in France.

    For those of you who live outside France, the TDF is but a part of their "En fete" (national holiday) each July.
    France goes on holiday for the month of July and knowing that their national sport is given international prominence, the French people want their national race to be free of scandal.
    The French goverment realise that the public backing of the TDF is waning - and they have applied pressure to ensure that the
    race and it's organisers clean up their act.

    Bernard knows that the pressure is on.
     


  2. gntlmn

    gntlmn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm glad it is because if they don't watch it, it will collapse of it's own weight. Can you imagine all the sponsors abandoning the Tour en masse?
     
  3. tafi

    tafi Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Messages:
    1,038
    Likes Received:
    17
    Your mathematical foundations have been shaky from the start.

    Firstly you have plucked a figure out of your arse for the probability of being caught in any one individual test. Than you have assumed that the results of the next test are independant of those of the first. If a method of avoiding a positive result had been applied to stage 16 of the Tour then the residual of that method will affect the result of a test conducted the very next day and for some days afterwards.
    There is no way you can no either the probability of an outcome or the covariance between events.
    You cannot quantify this.

    You have completely ignored the fact (and continue to do so) that there are methods of avoiding detection no matter what the drug used.

    The level of accountability is really quite low. David Millar is known for having an anti drug stance similar to that of Armstrong. He has never been tested positive but has admitted to using EPO and EPO vials have been found. You conveniently ignored the fact that Millar has alos been undergoing tests for a long period of time.
    Jesus Manzano has also avoided detection for many years and detailed exaclty how earlier this year.

    You have also ignored the possibility that a rider may not be on a drug for a significant part of the season. If they are only on a particular drug for a short period of time (and timed correctly so that benefits coincide with major competitions), then they can avoid detection all together more easily because the are only doped for the necesary period of time.
     
  4. gntlmn

    gntlmn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    1
    Clearly, what has been derived is a loose estimate. That's how you begin to see probabilities in the real world--by using estimates. This is not a math class; it's a real world problem. It's how actuaries make estimates to determine the insurance rate when they want to insure against an event that has never occurred or only rarely occurred or for which the facts are not necessarily reliable. It's a lot better to be approximately right than 100% wrong, and so I am trying to approximate. As for my anatomy having anything to do with this process of approximation, I assure you that it has nothing to do with it.

    You might be interested in the thread that I started on Grand Tours forum entitled "A Way to End the Drug Controversy".

    Instead of trying to poke holes in my approximations, why don't you propose how to get a better estimate? I come up with odds of 3 out of 10,000 for a 5 year random testing program. This might be, and I think very strongly that it is, a guess on the HIGH side. Yes, I said HIGH side. In other words, the probability of Lance doping is I suspect way lower than this. He's been riding more than 10 years. 3/10,000 times 3/10,000 is 9/100,000,000 or 9 out of 100 million, roughly 1 out of 10 million. This is the highest rate of assurance you can get for non doping using the rather rosy assumptions I have made about the accuracy. You don't buy the rosiness of the assumptions, and I don't blame you. It's a starting point.

    Note that I have assumed that the random drug testing program is the only drug testing I am focusing on. This is another error on my part which understates the level of assurance. But I did this intentionally because I don't want to fool myself on the strength of this level of assurance. I was focusing only on the times when a test is unexpected. If you include the other tests, the level of assurance also goes way up. To think that he can successfully dodge all those other tests to test false negative that whole time is not a very reliable thought. It doesn't ring true. Even if he is 99% effective at getting false negatives, he is going to get caught in 10 years of tests. The odds would be way against him, and this would be for the non random tests--the ones they do at races.

    When you factor in the adjustments you propose, I suspect that I wouldn't be far off to propose that this figure will still be way lower than 1 out of 100 odds of being a doper. This would be giving up a factor of 100,000 to account for the uncertainties.

    I'm sorry if you may be getting upset judging by your language. I don't get that way. All this is just numbers and logic, nothing personal.

    Feel free to make some quality adjustments to this process. Can you imagine having less than 99% assurance that he is a clean rider? I have already adjusted the assurance level downward by a factor of 100,000 for estimates instead of certainties. It would be a very safe guess with a LOT of room for error. To think otherwise is very obviously (to me) ludicrous.

    As for doping only in specific instances, this is not borne out by the facts, most notably that Lance's performance has been consistent ever since he lost weight from cancer. So this argument doesn't make much sense. If he were doping periodically, he would have sensational performances and mediocre ones as well. He doesn't have that much variation in his riding.
     
  5. JAPANic

    JAPANic New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    0

    This reminds me of Michael Jackson a little bit...

    If there was going to be a cover-up O'reilly would have been paid off by now...

    I suspect that there probably is some doping going on with Lance..

    All be it, minimal....

    We all take caffeine, aspirin, amino acids.... if you had access to something that is going to give you more red blood cells you'd probably try it too....

    If Lance got his extra red blood cells from altitude training then that is the answer to the doping allegations.... (if he has extra red blood cells).


    I say if he hasn't been caught, then he hasn't done anything illegal....

    If the bitch is going to write a damaging defaming book without proof then she should have her arse sued....

    I hope is doesn't all turn bad... My Trek 5500 will depreciate quickly and I'll have to throw all those Lance training books away I have.....

    :mad:
     
  6. steve007

    steve007 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2004
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just Hope Lance wins!
     
  7. gntlmn

    gntlmn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    1
    The tent manufacturers brag that Lance uses a hypoxic (low oxygen) tent to sleep in. This raises red blood cell count significantly, and it's legal. I think top athletes have been using these about 10 years now, which could explain increases in endurance and O2 uptake.
     
  8. gntlmn

    gntlmn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    1
    This year's Tour de France, it appears, will have even tougher drug testing. As more riders are eliminated who flunk, the spread between those with natural advantages and the cheaters grows. I bet Lance is happy the tests get tougher, although his top contenders are probably not doping either.

    Here's an article which describes some of the advances in testing that will be employed in this year's Tour. Notice that they are going to be freezing some samples for later testing. I am happy to see these new developments. It's great for the survival of the sport (and the riders).

    From http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/6399.0.html

    UCI and Tour promise rigorous testing
    Riders on this year's Tour de France could become the first in any sport to undergo new blood tests which will target the use of banned synthetic blood boosters and growth hormones.

    The three-week Tour starts in Liege, Belgium, on Saturday in the wake of several doping controversies.

    However, UCI medical director Mario Zorzoli says new tests have been developed for synthetic blood plasma products and previously undetectable growth hormones.

    "It would be a first in any sport if we introduced these tests," he said. "French law already allows any kind of biological sample to be taken from riders with a view to testing them for banned drugs. We are very confident we can introduce them on the Tour de France."

    The new tests could be carried out both in the morning prior to racing at riders' hotels, or in the doping control near the finish line of each stage.

    The UCI, which has been battling doping claims and controversies involving some of the sport's top names this year, including Britain's David Millar and American five-time Tour winner Lance Armstrong, has sent letters to all Tour riders warning them of recent advances in detecting synthetic hemoglobin (blood plasma), blood transfusions and growth hormones.

    Samples from riders could be frozen and, in the case of growth hormones, tested at a later date, according to the UCI.

    Zorzoli said they had also made significant progress in detecting illegal blood transfusions which some riders claim has made a return to the sport.

    However the UCI doctor said no samples taken so far this season showed any use of synthetic hemoglobin - a product which can boost performance by increasing the oxygen in the blood.

    The current EPO screening involves both testing for hematocrit levels which indicate the volume of red blood cells and a urine test designed to distinguish the isoforms - proteins produced by different genes - present in synthetic EPO from the natural form of erythropoietin which is produced in the human body.

    Synthetic - or recombinant - erythropoietin is derived from the cells of hamster ovaries and the resulting isoforms produce a measurably different electrical charge than do the isoforms produced by human erythropoietin. Nonetheless, both tests have limits and, according to medical experts, are actually easy to beat.

    The new tests, said Zorzoli, may offer more assurances of accuracy and are less likely to be defeated by riders able to employ relatively sophisticated means to beat them.

    French court promises Armstrong ruling by Friday
    A Paris court said it will make a decision on Friday on Lance Armstrong's appeal against a ruling denying him the right to insert a denial against accusations of doping published in a book released last week.

    The five-time Tour de France winner's lawyer Christian Charriere-Bournazel has taken action over the book "L.A. Confidential: The Secrets of Lance Armstrong" by award-winning Sunday Times journalist David Walsh and Pierre Ballester, a cycling specialist formerly with French sports daily L'Equipe, which alleges he used banned drugs.

    The book focuses on statements attributed to Emma O'Reilly, a soigneur who worked with Armstrong from 1998-2000. O'Reilly claims Armstrong used the banned blood booster EPO.

    Armstrong, who starts his bid for a sixth successive Tour de France victory on Saturday, has never tested positive for banned substances and has always strenuously denied taking any such products.
     
  9. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,130
    Likes Received:
    115
    AS REPORTED AT EUROSPORT 1ST JULY 2004
    (LAST PARAGRAPH IS INTERESTING)

    The Tour de France starts from the Belgian city on Saturday.

    The American rider's request that his firm denial of the allegations be included in the book were rejected by a French court last month. An appeal court is expected to rule on the case on Friday.

    The book, "L.A. Confidential, the secrets of Lance Armstrong", written by journalists David Walsh and Pierre Ballester, contains testimonies by a former U.S. Postal team masseuse hinting at possible wrongdoing.

    "In my view, extraordinary accusations should be followed up by extraordinary proof," Armstrong said.

    "Ballester and Walsh have worked for five years on this book and did not come up with any proof," he added.

    Whereas in the past the American had stopped short of suing the authors of previous allegations, he decided to fight back this time.

    "I've engaged a legal case both in France and in England. It's a long and complicated case," Armstrong said, adding he had received letters of support from both fans and other cycling personalities.

    The U.S. Postal team leader, who is bidding for a record sixth Tour victory, said the doping controversy had not affected his preparation for what he foresees as his "hardest Tour".

    Armstrong has had to face doping allegations in the past. In 1999, he tested positive for corticoids but produced a medical prescription for a cream used to treat lower back pains.

    In 2000, traces of a performance-enhancing drug were found in plastic bags thought to have been thrown away by U.S. Postal staff but the team were cleared by a French police investigation.
     
  10. gntlmn

    gntlmn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    1
    I have been watching the leadup to the Tour de France on OLN today, and I see where Phil Liggett was asked what he thought of the coauthors of the book alleging doping. Phil said he greatly admired both authors. They are both highly respected and well reknowned, both working for very respectable companies.

    However, Phil said that he had a conversation with David Walsh a few years ago, and had a very glaring disagreement with him. He said that David was convinced that no winner of the Tour de France can win without being on drugs. It was just a matter of time to come up with the proof. With this statement, Phil voiced his disagreement, but David remained convinced.

    I suppose that the constant 5 year grovelling for evidence against Lance is a result of this gut level feeling that no one can win without drugs. It has resulted in no concrete evidence, and now David has still followed through to print a book when he failed to confirm his belief. Maybe he wants to recoup some of the costs he has incurred in his failure. Perhaps now he will lose more in court. We shall see. I don't know why he can be so convinced without first having concrete proof. It seems that it would have been wiser to begin a full investigation after he already had some real proof, but he chose to rely instead on his preconceived notions. He may find that this will be a very costly mistake on his part.
     
  11. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,130
    Likes Received:
    115
    First off, Armstrong lost his appeal to have the book amended
    with an addition stating that LA denies all use of performance enhancing drugs - he appeal was rejected in France yesterday.

    Let me give another radio interview which David Walsh and
    Geoffrey Wheatcroft gave to Today FM in Ireland yesterday
    with Matt Cooper, the shows host :

    MC :"Welcome to DW and GW for our TDF preview.DW - you were at the LA press conference - how did it go ?"
    DW "LA had his press conference here yesterday and I was there as part of the press entourage"
    MC :"And his appeal against your book LA Confidential ?"DW "His appeal was dismissed by a French judge"MC "Do you still feel that you have provided compelling evidence in your book, David ?"
    DW "I do, Matt, there is 375 pages of details about LA - a lot of which was unknown and we have extensive interviews with people who have been with LA throughout his career - so yes I believe my evidence is compelling"
    MC : "Geoffrey Wheatcroft are you looking forward to this TDF ?"GW "well I am very much torn now.The TDF is a wonderful event but like David I don't know if what I am watching is genuine and this is a great difficulty for me
    Every cyclist has passed their drug test but this no means nothing.
    Drug testing has no credibility as far as I am concerned.
    Every test showed that Virenque, Millar and Armstrong are clean and have been clean.
    We now know that Virenque wasn't clean - we no know Millar wasn't clean - is it fair to think that Armstrong isn't clean ?
    My view is yes, it is fair to think that LA isn't clean - given what
    we know about the peloton"

    GW "No one appears to fail a drug test these days.In 1998, Festina passed their drug tests and a couple of days later a bootfull of drugs were uncovered on it's way to Ireland - so no I am tornabout the entire TDF and cycling"
    MC "And the Scottish rider David Millar ?"GW "Indeed seeing the news about Millar is just crushing. Every time we seem to make progress, another case is uncovered"
    MC "And Marco Pantani dying earlier this year ?"GW "Yes, it has been a terrible year"
    DW "If I could just add, the cost in human life in cycling has been too high.No one in the sport appears to care - managers, organiser or journalists. It is horrible.If I could focus on Millar - he told the judge yesterday about EPO. He told him that he kept the syringes as souvenirs at home - it's almost as if cyclists cannot function without EPO these days"

    MC "You mean to tell me that he actually got up in front of a judge and told him that he kept these syringes as a keepsake ?!!You can picture him in his retirement with his grandchild, saying "well son here are my syringesthat I used when I was racing".It's sick.Surely this is how low cycling has come ?"DW "Indeed I am afraid that it is how far it has sunk"
    MC " Well I was going to ask each of you who you think was going to win the 2004 Tour but I second thoughts I don't really care about it anymore - do you ?
    "GW "It is now very hard to reatian any enthuiasm for the TDF given what has been uncovered and Davidsbook"
    DW "Poeple are sceptical now - the sports credibility is in trouble I think".
    MC "I think we have to leave the interview at that.We'll talk again next week but to be honest given all this doping, I'm not sure it's worth it.DW and GW, thank you"

    This is the view of the people commentating on the sport.

    This morning BBC's John Inverdale said "The TDF and cycling is in
    a terrible state, is it credible anymore"
    Chris Boardman "In a word - no"

    That is the view now - LA's credibility is openly being questioned
    now as never before.
     
  12. gntlmn

    gntlmn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    1
    In "Lance Chronicles" on OLN, they showed Lance submitting a droplet of blood from his finger to one of his trainers as he was riding up a mountain. The trainer deposited the blood into a lactate tester, and it was as he said, much lower than the rest. The reading pulsed up to 4 and winked at 5. Lance said most cyclists have readings above 10, like 11. He said he is at anaerobic threshold at around 5. That's a huge difference.

    This is why as the drug tests become more and more advanced, as they are this year, it will be harder and harder for others to keep up with Lance. As you know, I don't think he's doping. He has a natural advantage which becomes a greater advantage as the dopers are eliminated from the Tour.
     
  13. Flyer

    Flyer Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,961
    Likes Received:
    0
    The greatest natural advantage an athlete can have is a public that believes in advertising themes and refuses to study or understand sports as a business.


    It is easy to throw stones and discredit whistleblowers. Unkind, meanspirited and ignorant, but very easy nonetheless.

    I did not start this thread, but I wish I had.

    Ciao
     
  14. Holocaust

    Holocaust Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amazing how Nike can invent the Yellow LIVE WRONG bracelet and co-op Cancer patients in order to sell $300 sneakers. Amazing mass media deception.

    Lance is a confirmed drug cheat with numerous drug busted alumni teammates and a convicted doper doctor, still he heads a Tax Exempt Foundation with ambiguous wellness goals, yet clear commercial marketing designs---to drive up Nike and Amercian Century product sales.

    Cancer research for more drug sales or an elusive cure???
    http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/online/research/cancer.html

    http://radio.weblogs.com/0135129/2004/03/17.html

    Maybe Charles Manson should head the American Red Cross?
     
  15. Hein-Verbruggen

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    188
    Likes Received:
    0
    Have to agree with these institutaion scams.

    Anything and anyone receiving money from Nike is comprimised into deception.

    Nike even funds dog fighting and animal torture. (Michael Vick, NFL QB)
     
  16. tommyadrian5

    tommyadrian5 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    0
    wow, Doctor House = Hein Verbruggen.

    New name, same old bullshit.
     
  17. Hein-Verbruggen

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    188
    Likes Received:
    0
    Emma O'Reily is bullshit, eh?
    I strongly disagree---Nike & Lance Pharmstrong are the supreme cycling fraud.

    Greg Lemond agrees with this sentiment.

    Thanks for coming. Bah bye!
     
  18. 1Easyrider

    1Easyrider New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    So LA's taken a Law Suit out has he?

    Come on we all know he's riddled with the stuff
     
  19. Bolter03

    Bolter03 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    t

    Rhetorically, lets consider a couple things and see how the discussion goes.

    If it was you and you just got done battling for my life with a bout of cancer would you allow anything near my body that could have an adverse effect?

    However, let's say for example that he was using a testosterone supplement. Seeing as how he had both testicles removed would it be unusual for a doctor to prescribe it (I'm not a doctor so I don't know)? In that case if it is a part a medical treatment that any other person would have would it really be cheating? Would it be wrong if it was only he was only replacing something his body no longer produces?

    On the other hand. I had a friend who managed to get poison ivy directly into his blood stream and was put on a massive dose of steroids to counteract it. Should he excuse himself from racing until it is cleared from his system? For my part, if it was me I would have to ask the doctor if it provides me with an athletic advantage and if so would have to bite the bullet and sit out.
     
  20. 1Easyrider

    1Easyrider New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Absolutely NO! Out of order. If it was me I'd ask my doctor if it was on the banned list. If he said it was then you make the decision to either not to take it and compete or to take it and sit out of the comprtitions. It's not rocket science. Serious illness does not mean you can flaunt the laws.

    Who was the silver winning British Downhill ski-ier who had his Silver medal withdrawn simply because he took an American VIC nasal spray for a cold. The British version of VIC was clean but you Americans beggar belief and he was hung out to dry. But Hey, our Lance was Ill so he can take dodgy substances.... it's medication.

    Come on.
     
Loading...
Loading...