Page 30 of 83

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:56 pm
by toolonglegs
Yes it is a hypothetical speculation ... but he certainly wouldn't be in as good a position as he is now.
"Suspect" in 2004 doesn't mean "Suspect" in 2013 ... the tests have improved a lot, but by 2004 or 2013 standards, if he had finished using even a very high dose of EPO before the tour it would have long since cleared his system by the 2nd week ... that lie is pretty obvious.
"just ask Matt White and Stephen Hodge" ... personally I find it wrong that ex-dopers ( ones who only come clean when there is no other way out ) are in support roles to a younger generation. If my son or daughter ever makes it that far I would hope they would have mentors with better morals than someone that cheats and lies so blatantly in the public eye.
Only my opinion...moving on now :-)

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:59 pm
by biker jk
cyclotaur wrote:Surely the fact it was only 'suspect' and not 'positive' somewhat corroborates, rather than invalidates, his version. If he'd continued to use EPO into the tour he'd have tested positive. You say he's lying, but can't prove it. I'm taking him at his word for now, unless or until there is evidence to the contrary.


This has already been explained (perhaps you missed it?) but both positive and suspect indicated the presence of EPO with the difference being its concentration. In 2004 when the samples were re-tested there was a very high hurdle for the EPO test, so "suspect" indicated the presence of EPO just not as high a concentration as "positive". So O'Grady still has to explain why EPO was found in his urine 11-days after the Festina scandal broke and he claimed to have stop using it.

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:13 pm
by vander
It was the day after I thought TLL. Definitely hit the news after. Lied to Vance in her interview, still lieing about it only being once.

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:14 pm
by vander
biker jk wrote:
cyclotaur wrote:Surely the fact it was only 'suspect' and not 'positive' somewhat corroborates, rather than invalidates, his version. If he'd continued to use EPO into the tour he'd have tested positive. You say he's lying, but can't prove it. I'm taking him at his word for now, unless or until there is evidence to the contrary.


This has already been explained (perhaps you missed it?) but both positive and suspect indicated the presence of EPO with the difference being its concentration. In 2004 when the samples were re-tested there was a very high hurdle for the EPO test, so "suspect" indicated the presence of EPO just not as high a concentration as "positive". So O'Grady still has to explain why EPO was found in his urine 11-days after the Festina scandal broke and he claimed to have stop using it.


Yep suspect in 04 is actually a positive. You have it right about how it works.

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:18 pm
by cyclotaur
biker jk wrote:
cyclotaur wrote:Surely the fact it was only 'suspect' and not 'positive' somewhat corroborates, rather than invalidates, his version. If he'd continued to use EPO into the tour he'd have tested positive. You say he's lying, but can't prove it. I'm taking him at his word for now, unless or until there is evidence to the contrary.


This has already been explained (perhaps you missed it?) but both positive and suspect indicated the presence of EPO with the difference being its concentration. In 2004 when the samples were re-tested there was a very high hurdle for the EPO test, so "suspect" indicated the presence of EPO just not as high a concentration as "positive". So O'Grady still has to explain why EPO was found in his urine 11-days after the Festina scandal broke and he claimed to have stop using it.

Fair enough then, I'm not that interested in the technicalities of testing to have understood that. So thanks for explaining it.

On the other hand we only have a few grabs from the news today to go on rather than a comprehensive explanation from him. I'm happy to wait and see if any more detail comes out on this point. But it's still 3-4 weeks in 1998, opposed to 15 more years of (taking his word for it) clean riding since.

I think if anyone wants to draw a line in history after which we should judge dopers more harshly than before, that line should be July 1998 and the Festina affair. If O'Grady and others doped then and not since I have no problems with his subsequent career. We are only talking about him now precisely because he was still relatively young at the time and was able to prosper the longer he rode and the playing field gradually levelled out.

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:34 pm
by find_bruce
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
Joeblake wrote:I try and keep a sense of proportion. I don't condone the use of drugs in any sport, but firstly, it was in 1998, when circumstances of testing were different. Secondly, I'll be prepared to give Stewie the presumption of innocence when he says he didn't do it again.

Yeah, except for the fact that his claimed one and only use of EPO was before the Tour, and he said "smashed them" when the Festina Affair broke (on 15 July Festina team hotel searched and 2 officials were taken into police custody) but his EPO positive was detected from a sample provided at the end of the second week of the Tour (26 July). Detection time is 2-3 days after stopping use.

Do you have a source for the date of the EPO positive Alex ? Not doubting you, just haven't seen any report that gives detail beyond the fact of the positive

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:49 pm
by Chris249
Disappointed but not surprised, since Stu is said by David Millar to be a mate but Millar's book did not say that O'Grady was clean, whereas it does state that some other riders such as Moncoutie were clean. The hint from Millar (as I read it) is that McEwen was clean - does anyone know whether he was one of those tested?

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:51 pm
by yarravalleyplodder
looking at it you would say the vast majority of the pro tour was using peds from the mid 90's to what the late 00's so it would be foolish to think that none of the aussie riders in that era used them.

I am disappointed in O'Grady and he does drop down quite a number of pegs in my eyes. I guess many had the view if you cant beat them you join them.

I am hoping the sport is cleaner now and that the cheats will be caught and punished, not with 2 year bans but 5 & 10 year bans. I would be devastated if it turned out that Cadel, Porte and Froome were on the juice. I would still go out riding but I would still like to marvel at their magnificent efforts in climbing mountains i dont think I could walk up, let alone get a bike up, that they did that off good old fashioned hard work not having the best chemist

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:09 pm
by }SkOrPn--7
thecaptn wrote:
}SkOrPn--7 wrote:O'Grady is a disgrace and should be stripped of all awards...... A crime unpunished goes unnoticed.

Ricky

I think O'Grady is brave to come clean and makes him even more of a champion in my eyes.


I'm old school I was raised to have honesty,integrity,ethics and know right from wrong. So thanks Mum and Dad for giving me that upbringing of being tough on me with no second chances it's made me a better person today and I'm pleased when looking back on my childhood you did......

Ricky

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:19 pm
by thecaptn
}SkOrPn--7 wrote:
thecaptn wrote:
}SkOrPn--7 wrote:O'Grady is a disgrace and should be stripped of all awards...... A crime unpunished goes unnoticed.

Ricky

I think O'Grady is brave to come clean and makes him even more of a champion in my eyes.


I'm old school I was raised to have honesty,integrity,ethics and know right from wrong. So thanks Mum and Dad for giving me that upbringing of being tough on me with no second chances it's made me a better person today and I'm pleased when looking back on my childhood you did......

Ricky

Praise the Lord!

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:28 pm
by AUbicycles
I am disappointed. Unfortunately not surprised as sometimes you hear things but it is not my place to speculate.

While it is possible that it was a once-off unfortunately there is a thing of 'credibility' and lying which casts very reasonable doubt on how much the details in the admission to doping can be trusted.


Lance has become holier-than-thou
"If we don't come together, have the conversation and draw a line in the sand and then move on, we're all screwed."
This is the same Lance who only tells half the truth and defrauds others for millions and ruined a lot of peoples lives.

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:16 am
by Alex Simmons/RST
find_bruce wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
Joeblake wrote:I try and keep a sense of proportion. I don't condone the use of drugs in any sport, but firstly, it was in 1998, when circumstances of testing were different. Secondly, I'll be prepared to give Stewie the presumption of innocence when he says he didn't do it again.

Yeah, except for the fact that his claimed one and only use of EPO was before the Tour, and he said "smashed them" when the Festina Affair broke (on 15 July Festina team hotel searched and 2 officials were taken into police custody) but his EPO positive was detected from a sample provided at the end of the second week of the Tour (26 July). Detection time is 2-3 days after stopping use.

Do you have a source for the date of the EPO positive Alex ? Not doubting you, just haven't seen any report that gives detail beyond the fact of the positive

The testing documents were released as part of the senate report and details summarised here:

https://twitter.com/dimspace/status/360 ... 70/photo/1

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:53 am
by AndyRevill
I don't know if anyone else saw the interview with Phil Bates on ABC News24 Grandstand last night but I was left thinking they just don't get it :cry:

Andy

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 10:32 am
by Alex Simmons/RST
AndyRevill wrote:I don't know if anyone else saw the interview with Phil Bates on ABC News24 Grandstand last night but I was left thinking they just don't get it :cry:

Andy

It wasn't pretty.

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 10:44 am
by RonK
AndyRevill wrote:I don't know if anyone else saw the interview with Phil Bates on ABC News24 Grandstand last night but I was left thinking they just don't get it :cry:

Andy

See it here...

Wasn't it Bates that Vinnicombe was implicating...

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 10:47 am
by schroeds
toolonglegs wrote:Yes it is a hypothetical speculation ... but he certainly wouldn't be in as good a position as he is now.
"Suspect" in 2004 doesn't mean "Suspect" in 2013 ... the tests have improved a lot, but by 2004 or 2013 standards, if he had finished using even a very high dose of EPO before the tour it would have long since cleared his system by the 2nd week ... that lie is pretty obvious.
"just ask Matt White and Stephen Hodge" ... personally I find it wrong that ex-dopers ( ones who only come clean when there is no other way out ) are in support roles to a younger generation. If my son or daughter ever makes it that far I would hope they would have mentors with better morals than someone that cheats and lies so blatantly in the public eye.
Only my opinion...moving on now :-)

I dunno...if an ex heroin user who had been convicted was teaching my kids, I wouldn't assume they were being given drugs. Maybe an extreme example but....

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 10:57 am
by RonK
schroeds wrote:I dunno...if an ex heroin user who had been convicted was teaching my kids, I wouldn't assume they were being given drugs. Maybe an extreme example but....

Would you be happy for him to be your kids ethics teacher then?

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:22 am
by singlespeedscott
RonK wrote:
schroeds wrote:I dunno...if an ex heroin user who had been convicted was teaching my kids, I wouldn't assume they were being given drugs. Maybe an extreme example but....

Would you be happy for him to be your kids ethics teacher then?

There is nothing like a reformed smoker to be heavily anti-smoking though.

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:46 am
by scotto
RonK wrote:
Joeblake wrote:The problem stems from the expectations the "sports lovers" of this (and other) countries places on its stars.

You're making excuses. There is no way you can blame pressures from sports fans.

In the 90's hardly any Australians knew who O'Grady and the other Aussies in the peleton were.



ROFL

most still dont !!

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:48 am
by Chuck
AUbicycles wrote:Lance has become holier-than-thou
"If we don't come together, have the conversation and draw a line in the sand and then move on, we're all screwed."
This is the same Lance who only tells half the truth and defrauds others for millions and ruined a lot of peoples lives.


Calling for Truth and Reconciliation when there's nothing stopping him from having the "conversation" with WADA or USADA right now.

Putting that to one side, I doubt that T & R will have any real impact. Look at the reaction that O'Grady is getting. While it's completely understandable I don't think that anybody will be rushing to out themselves who is not forced to. Take Jens for instance, arguably the most popular rider in the peloton, does anybody think he's going to burn it all down for the sake of cycling without evidence prompting him to?

Even when riders who haven't failed controls come forward they're met with derision.

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:57 pm
by vander
Those that come forward completely and dont lie like Hamilton and Landis are met with a lot more forgiveness. It is the lies that the public want to stop. Stuey is the perfect example of that. Continues to lie and is copping the backlash. Its about time people opened up properly.

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:15 pm
by Joeblake
singlespeedscott wrote:
RonK wrote:
schroeds wrote:I dunno...if an ex heroin user who had been convicted was teaching my kids, I wouldn't assume they were being given drugs. Maybe an extreme example but....

Would you be happy for him to be your kids ethics teacher then?

There is nothing like a reformed smoker to be heavily anti-smoking though.


Back in the early '80s I was involved with a community group which worked with unemployed and drug-addicted teenagers. One of the counsellors was this fellow, who had been a drug user himself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Gerritsen

He did very well with the young people, but did even better for himself, if you read the link.

Sure, he's only one individual, but so is SO'G.

Joe

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:27 pm
by BastardSheep
vander wrote:Those that come forward completely and dont lie like Hamilton and Landis are met with a lot more forgiveness. It is the lies that the public want to stop. Stuey is the perfect example of that. Continues to lie and is copping the backlash. Its about time people opened up properly.


This is very true of how I feel, and it also accurately describes most people I've spoken to. It's not so much that they took PED's we care about, but that they lied so brazenly about it. If they could say without flinching back then that they were always clean and always will be, then why should we believe them now when they say they only took it during certain periods? That is why I have zero respect for Armstrong these days, in fact negative respect. It's why I've lost a large chunk of the respect I had for Stuart O'Grady. I still do respect him, just nowhere near as much.

There's some arguing that we should just make these PED's legal because there's so many other things that enhance performance too from natural genetic ability through to legal supplements. The point is that a line had been drawn in the sand by the officiating body as to what was allowed and what wasn't, and these people knowingly took something that wasn't. They violated the rules that were in place. There's also rules about minimum bike weight, you can make bikes 1-4kg below that weight that are still strong enough to be safe, but using anything below the officially sanctioned weight is still cheating because that's where the line was drawn.

For the most part people would be ok with someone's past actions if they had reformed but not lied so boastfully and with zero hesitation.

I read this morning that there were considerations to take away Stuart's Olympic gold medals from 2004. That's a whole six years later and in a completely different competition - what does that have to do with trying PED's temporarily in 1998? Removing his 2004 gold medals would be revenge, not justice. Unless they have good reason to suspect he was doping in 2004, leave him with those medals, they were earned fairly and squarely. The calls for revoking his OAM and his position at AIS etc I can understand, though.

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:03 pm
by warthog1
Chuck wrote: Look at the reaction that O'Grady is getting. While it's completely understandable I don't think that anybody will be rushing to out themselves who is not forced to. Take Jens for instance, arguably the most popular rider in the peloton, does anybody think he's going to burn it all down for the sake of cycling without evidence prompting him to?

Even when riders who haven't failed controls come forward they're met with derision.


+1

The holier than thou outrage from people who have no idea of the culture and pressure to succeed that existed, gets a bit hard to stomach.

When there is a lifetime ban in place for PED use we may see the sport become cleaner.

Re: Crapola!!!....P.E.D's in Cycling

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:14 pm
by Dr_Mutley
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
find_bruce wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:[quote="Joeblake"]I try and keep a sense of proportion. I don't condone the use of drugs in any sport, but firstly, it was in 1998, when circumstances of testing were different. Secondly, I'll be prepared to give Stewie the presumption of innocence when he says he didn't do it again.

Yeah, except for the fact that his claimed one and only use of EPO was before the Tour, and he said "smashed them" when the Festina Affair broke (on 15 July Festina team hotel searched and 2 officials were taken into police custody) but his EPO positive was detected from a sample provided at the end of the second week of the Tour (26 July). Detection time is 2-3 days after stopping use.

Do you have a source for the date of the EPO positive Alex ? Not doubting you, just haven't seen any report that gives detail beyond the fact of the positive

The testing documents were released as part of the senate report and details summarised here:

https://twitter.com/dimspace/status/360 ... 70/photo/1[/quote]

Alex:
Can u clarify as I'm too time poor to troll through documents, but I assumed from the reporting that when O'Grady fell into the "highly suspicious" category, that he did NOT infact test positive for EPO. He did however have highly suss blood parameters, ie markedly elevated reticulocyte counts, which was SUGGESTIVE of recent EPO administration....

Semantics I know in the scheme of things, but important if your building a time line of lies...