Hell, now I don't trust Lance nor WADA

IMKen said:

This entire doping thing has demonstrated that the system is screwed up and
need re work. I no longer trust WADA or Lance.

Ken

So whom do you like, Ken

a definitely evil Corporation which would harm hundreds of riders without
just cause, which definitely harmed accused athletes who turned out to be
innocent and did not make them whole afterwards.

-or-

a possibly untruthful individual who could potentially cheat three other
potentially cheating riders out of their placings in a bicycle race?

I kid in that there's no good justification for immoral behavior. The
irony, however, is ...

-jet

Jet said:

IMKen said:

This entire doping thing has demonstrated that the system is screwed up and
need re work. I no longer trust WADA or Lance.

Ken

So whom do you like, Ken

a definitely evil Corporation which would harm hundreds of riders without
just cause, which definitely harmed accused athletes who turned out to be
innocent and did not make them whole afterwards.

-or-

a possibly untruthful individual who could potentially cheat three other
potentially cheating riders out of their placings in a bicycle race?

I kid in that there's no good justification for immoral behavior. The
irony, however, is ...

-jet

I'm sorta with Ken on this one. It's not a matter of "like". It's a
matter of trust.

The "Testing for EPO" thread I started yesterday brought Robert Chung
linking the EPO testing procedure outline at:
http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/document/td2004epo_en.pdf

After reading it I pretty much don't trust any labs either. There is
WAY too much room for not only error but sabatoge.

It wouldn't change anything for me to find out he did "play the game".
But then again I'm a big Pantani fan so my expectations are probably
lower than most.

IMKen said:

This entire doping thing has demonstrated that the system is screwed up and
need re work. I no longer trust WADA or Lance.

It seems that WADA was great while those dirty French riders tested
positive, but their testing methods have suddenly become much more suspect
now that Hamilton and Armstrong are in trouble.

Alvin Ryder said:

IMKen wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Also that lab did not follow the proper protocol and procedures, they
are suppose to obtain the permission of atheletes to test the B
samples. They should then report the results to the appropriate
governing bodies not to the tabloids! This behavior is no small breach
of conduct, its a major deviation of the correct medico-legal
procedures.

And I would have thought the WADA should get their pathology results
directly from the lab, not via the newspapers.

Anyway the bottom line for me is would you guys let someone chop your
kidney's out based on tests done on frozen 1999 urine samples? Nope
didn't think so.

Cheers.

Hey Chipmunk,

The lab did follow the correct procedure for doing RESEARCH. It was the
newspaper who made the link between the RESEARCH result and the athlete,
not the WADA lab. And the WADA lab doesn't need the permission of the
athlete to test the B sample. Once they have the sample, the athlete
already gave consent to test it.

Magilla

So, Dave, what was it you do for a living again?

I wonder why no one finds it curious that out of five days of testing
the first two are positive and the last two are positive and right
smack in the middle is a negative test.

Just out of curiosity - didn't those "dirty" French riders confess to
doping? And hasn't Lance and Tyler both ADAMENTLY denied it?

Oh, wait, the French are famous for their honesty and truthfulness
whereas those damned Americans are known liars.

Tom Kunich said:

Just out of curiosity - didn't those "dirty" French riders confess to
doping? And hasn't Lance and Tyler both ADAMENTLY denied it?

Oh, wait, the French are famous for their honesty and truthfulness
whereas those damned Americans are known liars.

If the (dutch) cap fits, wear it.

On 29 Aug 2005 08:02:10 -0700, "Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I wonder why no one finds it curious that out of five days of testing
the first two are positive and the last two are positive and right
smack in the middle is a negative test.

Modified Bell curve?

On 29 Aug 2005 07:56:31 -0700, "Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

So, Dave, what was it you do for a living again?

I'm a professional bicycle racer. So far I've made exactly $0 at it.

I moonlight as a chiropractor between races.

Curtis L. Russell said:

On 29 Aug 2005 08:02:10 -0700, "Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I wonder why no one finds it curious that out of five days of testing
the first two are positive and the last two are positive and right
smack in the middle is a negative test.

Modified Bell curve?

Inverted nipple effect? Sign of cancer.
This is becoming a circular discussion.

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I wonder why no one finds it curious that out of five days of testing
the first two are positive and the last two are positive and right
smack in the middle is a negative test.

Unless it was one of the 'unsure' cases.

Jonathan v.d. Sluis said:

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I wonder why no one finds it curious that out of five days of testing
the first two are positive and the last two are positive and right
smack in the middle is a negative test.

Unless it was one of the 'unsure' cases.

There are two "unsure" cases (out of five samples) on what appears to be
stage 2: flasks 186585 and 186586.
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/rbr/equipe23aug05.jpg

D. Ferguson said:

On 29 Aug 2005 07:56:31 -0700, "Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

So, Dave, what was it you do for a living again?

I'm a professional bicycle racer. So far I've made exactly $0 at it.

I moonlight as a chiropractor between races.

Just remember that if you show no profit from your cycling in 3 years,
you can't deduct your equipment expenses.

Steve

--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

D. Ferguson said:

I moonlight as a chiropractor between races.

Odd practice hours...

Mark & Steven Bornfeld said:

Just remember that if you show no profit from your cycling in 3 years,
you can't deduct your equipment expenses.

Steve

Not exactly. Making the occasional profit certainly helps your case,
but if you can show that you were operating to make a profit during
the period, even if you were unsuccessful, you can continue to take
deductions. You just might have to go downtown to prove it.

The trick is to show the difference between a pro that spends a lot of
money on bikes, kit and entry fees and makes no money and your typical
USCF rider that spends a lot on bikes, kit and entry fees and makes no
money.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

Curtis L. Russell said:

Mark & Steven Bornfeld said:

Just remember that if you show no profit from your cycling in 3 years,
you can't deduct your equipment expenses.

Steve

Not exactly. Making the occasional profit certainly helps your case,
but if you can show that you were operating to make a profit during
the period, even if you were unsuccessful, you can continue to take
deductions. You just might have to go downtown to prove it.

The trick is to show the difference between a pro that spends a lot of
money on bikes, kit and entry fees and makes no money and your typical
USCF rider that spends a lot on bikes, kit and entry fees and makes no
money.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

I hate those trips downtown.

Steve

--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

Alvin Ryder said:

Armstrong has passed over 300 tests but apparently fails one based on
1999 samples, this makes that lab look extremely dodgy.

The lab tested the 1999 samples using more sensitive technology than was
available at the time. He passed the test because he managed to squeak
under the detection threshold.

By the way, he didn't fail one test, he failed SIX.

Oh please, Lance has never doped...now get off his case.