Mount DeCanio erupts again

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Alan Atwood, Aug 12, 2004.

  1. Alan Atwood

    Alan Atwood Guest

    Tags:


  2. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

  3. RWM

    RWM Guest

    "Alan Atwood" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Check out the latest article on racelistings.com:
    >
    > http://www.racelistings.com/rzone/articles/article.asp?recid=348
    >
    > Wow. S*** is hitting the fan now.....
    >
    > Alan


    I like the concept of stopping doping but it didn't seem that Matt really
    thought through all of the issues very well. The first thing that I have an
    issue with is the use of the polygraph. It has been shown many times that a
    polygraph is not accurate enough for this type situation. What happens to a
    rider that has a false positive? I also have problems with the DS getting
    suspended for having a rider test positive. If a rider chooses to dope why
    does the DS pay a penalty? I don't know of any sport where a team manager
    gets a penalty for violation than an athlete commits. I do like the
    aggressive stance against doping in the article.
     
  4. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:LVOSc.142[email protected]
    >
    > "Alan Atwood" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > Check out the latest article on racelistings.com:
    > >
    > > http://www.racelistings.com/rzone/articles/article.asp?recid=348
    > >
    > > Wow. S*** is hitting the fan now.....
    > >
    > > Alan

    >
    > Wonderful! But he's right about one thing in particular. Nothing's going

    to
    > change. It's all about making money and big money at that. Hence, Omerta.


    Some interesting perspective from Mark Spitz :
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics_2004/swimming/3913609.stm
     
  5. TritonRider

    TritonRider Guest

  6. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > >From: "B. Lafferty" [email protected]

    >
    > >Some interesting perspective from Mark Spitz :
    > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics_2004/swimming/3913609.stm
    > >
    > >

    >
    > I just got this in an update today.
    > http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996265
    > If verified this is going to make catching them even tougher.
    > Bill C


    Yup! So test them every day for three months prior to the Tour. For
    classics riders, three months prior to April.
     
  7. Tom Paterson

    Tom Paterson Guest

    >From: "B. Lafferty"

    >Some interesting perspective from Mark Spitz :
    >http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics_2004/swimming/3913609.stm
    >


    Yeah, he said if you take the money out, there will be no problems. He doesn't
    know about high school athletes taking performance enhancing substances? Bull.

    Well, he's not the only champion of yesteryear (remember his televised comeback
    failure?) who is comparing oblivion with the modern sportsman's paycheck, it
    would seem. That must really, really hurt, having to _work_ for a living, like
    the little people, when you can't swim fast enough anymore. "Real Estate
    Agent"-- not quite the thrills and adulation of old. (See, it's *not* the
    money.)

    I loved "We had steroids but they were only used in other sports". ("We"?
    Wouldn't "they" have been a little more consistent with denial of use?) He won
    _eleven_ medals? "He must have been on something"! (did I get that right,
    Brian?)

    "I might have been tempted". Snort, guffaw. --TP
     
  8. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "Tom Paterson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > >From: "B. Lafferty"

    >
    > >Some interesting perspective from Mark Spitz :
    > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics_2004/swimming/3913609.stm
    > >

    >
    > Yeah, he said if you take the money out, there will be no problems. He

    doesn't
    > know about high school athletes taking performance enhancing substances?

    Bull.

    Two of the reasons high school football players use steroids is to get
    football scholorships to college and in the hope (absurd for most) of making
    it to the pro level. Both are money drivers. Money is a pervasive driver
    for most organized sports with doping problems. Would there be fewer dopers
    if there was no money. Fewer perhaps, but human nature being what it is,
    some will still dope. We see it at the local races all the time. Come big
    race day, some riders suddenly have rocket power.

    >
    > Well, he's not the only champion of yesteryear (remember his televised

    comeback
    > failure?) who is comparing oblivion with the modern sportsman's paycheck,

    it
    > would seem. That must really, really hurt, having to _work_ for a living,

    like
    > the little people, when you can't swim fast enough anymore. "Real Estate
    > Agent"-- not quite the thrills and adulation of old. (See, it's *not* the
    > money.)


    Sounds like you have the inside track on mark Spitz. Have you ever met him,
    Tom?


    >
    > I loved "We had steroids but they were only used in other sports". ("We"?
    > Wouldn't "they" have been a little more consistent with denial of use?) He

    won
    > _eleven_ medals? "He must have been on something"! (did I get that right,
    > Brian?)


    He never tested positive, did he. IIRC, back then it was the Chinese swim
    team that was heavy into steroids, and obviously so. I guess the US gold
    medal hockey team must have been pumped up on roids, too. Right, Tom?

    >
    > "I might have been tempted". Snort, guffaw. --TP


    But your man Lance is clean. Snort, guffaw.
     
  9. Andy Coggan

    Andy Coggan Guest

    "Alan Atwood" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Check out the latest article on racelistings.com:
    >
    > http://www.racelistings.com/rzone/articles/article.asp?recid=348


    "when you use EPO and live at altitude it pushes the synthetic proteins out
    of your system that cause you to test positive. You will never fail a test
    for EPO if you live at altitude or sleep in an altitude tent."

    DeCanio is hallucinating: living/sleeping at altitude/simulated altitude is
    a very mild stimulus to EPO secretion, at least compared to the levels
    achieved when you inject the drug. The ratio of synthetic vs. natural EPO in
    blood or urine would therefore be little affected by the approach he
    proposes.

    Andy Coggan
     
  10. Dan Connelly

    Dan Connelly Guest

    B. Lafferty wrote:

    > Two of the reasons high school football players use steroids is to get
    > football scholorships to college and in the hope (absurd for most) of making
    > it to the pro level. Both are money drivers. Money is a pervasive driver
    > for most organized sports with doping problems. Would there be fewer dopers
    > if there was no money. Fewer perhaps, but human nature being what it is,
    > some will still dope. We see it at the local races all the time. Come big
    > race day, some riders suddenly have rocket power.
    >
    >


    The only way to take the money out of cycling is to take the interest from cycling.
    Is that what you want?

    Even if you did, do you think master's athletes dope? Heck, even gym rats
    take steroids, and that's not even formally competitive. No, it would change
    nothing.

    Dan
     
  11. TritonRider

    TritonRider Guest

    >From: Dan Connelly [email protected]_e_e_e.o_r_g

    > Heck, even gym rats
    >take steroids, and that's not even formally competitive. No, it would change
    >nothing.
    >
    >Dan
    >
    >


    And a whole lot of other stuff. You are a master of understatement.
    Bill C
     
  12. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "Dan Connelly" <[email protected]_e_e_e.o_r_g> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > B. Lafferty wrote:
    >
    > > Two of the reasons high school football players use steroids is to get
    > > football scholorships to college and in the hope (absurd for most) of

    making
    > > it to the pro level. Both are money drivers. Money is a pervasive

    driver
    > > for most organized sports with doping problems. Would there be fewer

    dopers
    > > if there was no money. Fewer perhaps, but human nature being what it

    is,
    > > some will still dope. We see it at the local races all the time. Come

    big
    > > race day, some riders suddenly have rocket power.
    > >
    > >

    >
    > The only way to take the money out of cycling is to take the interest from

    cycling.
    > Is that what you want?


    I haven't proposed anything. The comment was Tom's relating to high school
    athletics. I think I made it clear there would still be dopers, though
    perhaps not as many. We'll need to do a survey. ;-)
    >
    > Even if you did, do you think master's athletes dope?


    I know that they do. I've done masters races with a 50+ year old with fresh
    acne on his back.

    Heck, even gym rats
    > take steroids, and that's not even formally competitive. No, it would

    change
    > nothing.




    >
    > Dan
     
  13. Mark Fennell

    Mark Fennell Guest

    "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:p[email protected]
    >
    > Two of the reasons high school football players use steroids is to get
    > football scholorships to college and in the hope (absurd for most) of

    making
    > it to the pro level. Both are money drivers.


    <snip>

    Those may be two of the reasons but, IMHO, they are very minor. I think it's
    all about competition, on the field and to get girls.
     
  14. Tom Paterson

    Tom Paterson Guest

    >From: "B. Lafferty"

    >Two of the reasons high school football players use steroids is to get
    >football scholorships to college and in the hope (absurd for most) of making
    >it to the pro level. (snip)


    > Would there be fewer dopers
    >if there was no money. Fewer perhaps, but human nature being what it is,
    >some will still dope. We see it at the local races all the time. Come big
    >race day, some riders suddenly have >rocket power.


    So you agree that at least some of the Spitz article you posted the link for is
    bull: people take steroids when there is little/no money at stake ("amateur"
    bike racing) and/or when the rewards are iffy, as for scholarships and pro
    careers. "Taking the money out" is a dumb thing to say. Spitz isn't dumb.
    Disingenuous, maybe. Not dumb.

    >Sounds like you have the inside track on mark Spitz. Have you ever met him,
    >Tom?


    What's the matter, Brian? I'm obviously playing off you here. Sarcasm lost?
    Turnabout a little hard to take?

    Met him? No. Parallel to your (longstanding) treatment of Lance Armstrong
    nearly completed. Bear with me a moment:

    Mark Spitz a *hero* of yours or something? Are you indeed a Spitz tifiosi? Do
    you believe everything he says, even when he won all those medals in a
    scurrilously suspicious display of superiority? Why didn't he swim in more
    events? What about that non-competitive, post-testing comback attempt in 91-92?
    And all those high-paying commercials that kept him out of the pool!!! (etc.
    etc.)

    >He never tested positive, did he.


    Nor did anyone until '76 if my sources are correct. Nice try (not): one Olympic
    alcohol positive in 68, seven unspecified positives in 72.

    <S> (for Sarcasm, Brian, I'll start doing that; anything to help): Is that
    improved testing for '76 *really* why Spitz quit, not the "lost his amateur
    status" cover story? I find myself unsatisfied with the answers given <S>. It
    would seem that Mr. Spitz has a deeper, more detailed story to tell <S>.
    Perhaps we can find people who swam with him or worked with organizations he
    was affiliated with <S>, perhaps some people whose employment or team slots
    were terminated, so we can get a more accurate <S> picture of what really
    happened all those years ago.

    I think I'm grasping the basics pretty well, here!

    >I guess the US gold
    >medal hockey team must have been >pumped up on roids, too. Right, Tom?


    Making assumptions based on performance and association is your prime area,
    Brian. Remember? "Lance wins races and consults with Ferrari, so Lance is a
    doper?"

    (I posted):

    >> "I might have been tempted". Snort, guffaw.


    (reply):

    >But your man Lance is clean. Snort, >guffaw.


    I'm snorting at the self-serving, chicken-shit "might". I know that didn't
    really go over your head. Lance? What about Lance, Brian? Any news? They didn't
    find his name in the Balco stuff, no post-Tour "revelations" from Walsh, no
    nothing (including, of course: A&B sample positive tests, possession, uncoerced
    confession).

    (snip from previous):

    >IIRC, back then it was the Chinese swim
    >team that was heavy into steroids, and >obviously so.


    If this is true it only pokes a nice big hole in Spitz's statement that
    "steroids were only used in other sports" (along with the fact that steroids
    were in common use from approx. 1954 in the USA:
    <http://www.methodistsports.com/Images/Item/bin11705.pdf>

    That would be real close to 20 years that steroids were known about and used
    right here in the USA, not just behind the Iron Curtain. Spitz: "We had
    steroids...". His own recent words.

    Damn, Brian, you dragged poor old Mark Spitz in here and he got all dirty,
    whether he ever doped or not. Tsk tsk. I hope you can still look at that fading
    picture on your bedroom wall with the same rosy adulation <S><g>. --TP
     
  15. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "Mark Fennell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:p[email protected]
    > >
    > > Two of the reasons high school football players use steroids is to get
    > > football scholorships to college and in the hope (absurd for most) of

    > making
    > > it to the pro level. Both are money drivers.

    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > Those may be two of the reasons but, IMHO, they are very minor. I think

    it's
    > all about competition, on the field and to get girls.


    I can tell you that I've had conversations with students who were playing
    football and using steroids, creatine and probably more. They were very
    competitive and all looking for scholarships to college. The social aspect
    was important too, but the steroids went along with a tremendous amount of
    hard work nearly year round to try to score that college ticket.

    And then there was the senior woman, who was using steroids to keep her body
    fat low so as to star in soccer and track. She did quite well and got what
    she wanted.
     
  16. TritonRider

    TritonRider Guest

    >From: "B. Lafferty" [email protected]

    >I can tell you that I've had conversations with students who were playing
    >football and using steroids, creatine and probably more. They were very
    >competitive and all looking for scholarships to college. The social aspect
    >was important too, but the steroids went along with a tremendous amount of
    >hard work nearly year round to try to score that college ticket.
    >
    >And then there was the senior woman, who was using steroids to keep her body
    >fat low so as to star in soccer and track. She did quite well and got what
    >she wanted.
    >

    Were back to the link I posted a while ago about kids down to age 10, GET
    THAT? 10.
    Doing performance enhancing drugs. I know that coach, mom and dad are looking
    at the money but this shit has just gotten sick.
    Bill C
    >
    >
     
  17. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "Tom Paterson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > >From: "B. Lafferty"

    >
    > >Two of the reasons high school football players use steroids is to get
    > >football scholorships to college and in the hope (absurd for most) of

    making
    > >it to the pro level. (snip)

    >
    > > Would there be fewer dopers
    > >if there was no money. Fewer perhaps, but human nature being what it is,
    > >some will still dope. We see it at the local races all the time. Come

    big
    > >race day, some riders suddenly have >rocket power.

    >
    > So you agree that at least some of the Spitz article you posted the link

    for is
    > bull: people take steroids when there is little/no money at stake

    ("amateur"
    > bike racing) and/or when the rewards are iffy, as for scholarships and pro
    > careers. "Taking the money out" is a dumb thing to say. Spitz isn't dumb.
    > Disingenuous, maybe. Not dumb.
    >
    > >Sounds like you have the inside track on mark Spitz. Have you ever met

    him,
    > >Tom?

    >
    > What's the matter, Brian? I'm obviously playing off you here. Sarcasm

    lost?
    > Turnabout a little hard to take?


    Oh. You're playing off me? Now I'm confused.

    >
    > Met him? No. Parallel to your (longstanding) treatment of Lance Armstrong
    > nearly completed. Bear with me a moment:



    >
    > Mark Spitz a *hero* of yours or something? Are you indeed a Spitz tifiosi?

    Do
    > you believe everything he says, even when he won all those medals in a
    > scurrilously suspicious display of superiority? Why didn't he swim in more
    > events? What about that non-competitive, post-testing comback attempt in

    91-92?
    > And all those high-paying commercials that kept him out of the pool!!!

    (etc.
    > etc.)


    What's your point? You don't like Mark Spitz? I don't have any opinion
    about him either way.

    >
    > >He never tested positive, did he.

    >
    > Nor did anyone until '76 if my sources are correct. Nice try (not): one

    Olympic
    > alcohol positive in 68, seven unspecified positives in 72.


    Does that mean he and everyone else was clean?

    >
    > <S> (for Sarcasm, Brian, I'll start doing that; anything to help): Is

    that
    > improved testing for '76 *really* why Spitz quit, not the "lost his

    amateur
    > status" cover story? I find myself unsatisfied with the answers given <S>.

    It
    > would seem that Mr. Spitz has a deeper, more detailed story to tell <S>.
    > Perhaps we can find people who swam with him or worked with organizations

    he
    > was affiliated with <S>, perhaps some people whose employment or team

    slots
    > were terminated, so we can get a more accurate <S> picture of what really
    > happened all those years ago.


    Sounds like you're really a very frustrated person. I suggest that if you
    have that much bile for Mr. Spitz, start researching and interviewing.

    >
    > I think I'm grasping the basics pretty well, here!
    >
    > >I guess the US gold
    > >medal hockey team must have been >pumped up on roids, too. Right, Tom?

    >
    > Making assumptions based on performance and association is your prime

    area,
    > Brian. Remember? "Lance wins races and consults with Ferrari, so Lance is

    a
    > doper?"


    And if Spitz or any other swimmer today had used a Ferrari type of
    trainer/coach, I'd be asking the same questions and seeing the same warning
    flags I and others see with Armstrong. The issue is, as Spitz, Lemond and
    numerous others have pointed out, that not testing positive proves nothing.

    >
    > (I posted):
    >
    > >> "I might have been tempted". Snort, guffaw.

    >
    > (reply):
    >
    > >But your man Lance is clean. Snort, >guffaw.

    >
    > I'm snorting at the self-serving, chicken-shit "might". I know that didn't
    > really go over your head. Lance? What about Lance, Brian? Any news? They

    didn't
    > find his name in the Balco stuff, no post-Tour "revelations" from Walsh,

    no
    > nothing (including, of course: A&B sample positive tests, possession,

    uncoerced
    > confession).


    Have you read the Walsh & and Ballester book yet? I have. Talk to me about
    Walsh and Lance after you've read it. Until then you're just blowing smoke
    out of your bung hole. If you want to borrow the book let me know.

    >
    > (snip from previous):
    >
    > >IIRC, back then it was the Chinese swim
    > >team that was heavy into steroids, and >obviously so.

    >
    > If this is true it only pokes a nice big hole in Spitz's statement that
    > "steroids were only used in other sports" (along with the fact that

    steroids
    > were in common use from approx. 1954 in the USA:
    > <http://www.methodistsports.com/Images/Item/bin11705.pdf>
    >
    > That would be real close to 20 years that steroids were known about and

    used
    > right here in the USA, not just behind the Iron Curtain. Spitz: "We had
    > steroids...". His own recent words.


    Steroids were around. Did Spitz use them? I certainly don't know. He never
    tested positive and he says he didn't use them. Maybe he just has a great
    VO2 Max--higher than Lance's 82 (not the 83.5 that his web site suddenly
    changed to).

    >
    > Damn, Brian, you dragged poor old Mark Spitz in here and he got all dirty,
    > whether he ever doped or not. Tsk tsk. I hope you can still look at that

    fading
    > picture on your bedroom wall with the same rosy adulation <S><g>. --TP


    Thanks Tom. You made my day. Have a great evening.
     
  18. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > >From: "B. Lafferty" [email protected]

    >
    > >I can tell you that I've had conversations with students who were playing
    > >football and using steroids, creatine and probably more. They were very
    > >competitive and all looking for scholarships to college. The social

    aspect
    > >was important too, but the steroids went along with a tremendous amount

    of
    > >hard work nearly year round to try to score that college ticket.
    > >
    > >And then there was the senior woman, who was using steroids to keep her

    body
    > >fat low so as to star in soccer and track. She did quite well and got

    what
    > >she wanted.
    > >

    > Were back to the link I posted a while ago about kids down to age 10, GET
    > THAT? 10.
    > Doing performance enhancing drugs. I know that coach, mom and dad are

    looking
    > at the money but this shit has just gotten sick.
    > Bill C


    I agree that it's completely sick. I think a lot of the parents just don't
    want to know if the kid is using. And some do see the kid as a financial
    way up and out.
     
  19. WooGoogle

    WooGoogle Guest

  20. Tom Paterson

    Tom Paterson Guest

    >From: "B. Lafferty"

    >Oh. You're playing off me? Now I'm >confused.


    Hardly. You could have said you were flattered.

    >What's your point? You don't like Mark Spitz? I don't have any opinion
    >about him either way.


    Just imitating your style. Don't play dumb.

    >Sounds like you're really a very frustrated person.


    Mirroring Walsh who you can bet is really, really frustrated. Hope he's okay.

    > I suggest that if you
    >have that much bile for Mr. Spitz, start >researching and interviewing.


    Obviously imitating. Research sufficient for that completed.

    >And if Spitz or any other swimmer today had used a Ferrari type of
    >trainer/coach, I'd be asking the same questions and seeing the same warning
    >flags I and others see with Armstrong.


    "Questions" you lifted from Walsh. "Accusations" is the word. "We don't prove
    anything here". That's right, you haven't.

    >The issue is, as Spitz, Lemond and
    >numerous others have pointed out, that >not testing positive proves nothing.


    It proves you can pass tests over and over. So don't say "nothing", because
    some have been caught by these same tests. And some have been caught in
    possession. And some have admitted using illicit substances to improve
    performance.

    >Have you read the Walsh & and Ballester >book yet?


    Only if you promise you haven't left anything out when posting here.

    >If you want to borrow the book let me >know.


    I'm sure I can do that locally and save postage. Thanks for the trust and the
    offer, though.

    >Steroids were around. Did Spitz use >them? I certainly don't know.


    How about Lance? Do you know if he did?

    >Thanks Tom. You made my day.


    Thought you'd like the one about the picture on your bedroom wall. I felt
    inspired there-- well, slightly anyhow.

    >Have a great evening.


    You too. Demain. --TP
     
Loading...
Loading...