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

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Those involved in the sport should note that they are bound by the anti doping requirements, and violations include Rule 8:
http://www.asada.gov.au/rules_and_viola ... tions.html

8. Administration or attempted administration to any athlete in-competition of any prohibited method or prohibited substance, or administration or attempted administration to any athlete out-of-competition of any prohibited method or any prohibited substance that is prohibited out-of-competition, or assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, covering up or any other type of complicity involving an Anti-Doping Rule Violation or any attempted Anti-Doping Rule Violation.

[MichaelB]

Interesting table Alex, thanks. If it wasn't for the 2009 year fro the BBuilders, cycling would be 3rd on the list ...

Whilst your stance is hard line, I tend to agree. You have a choice - NO ONE is forcing you. The choice may be hard, but it is there.

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Interesting table Alex, thanks. If it wasn't for the 2009 year fro the BBuilders, cycling would be 3rd on the list ...

Whilst your stance is hard line, I tend to agree. You have a choice - NO ONE is forcing you. The choice may be hard, but it is there.

Yeah I put it together recently. i have another about # of tests below. this is only ASADA, I don't know what world numbers are.

[Chuck]

Systemic dopers and those that aid them are scum and need to be removed from our sport forever.

I have no respect for those that do irrespective of what results they have attained.

I also think having people who were dopers still involved in influencing the sport and the newer riders coming through via directing, managing, coaching, medical assistance etc is completely wrong.

Wrong role models, poor choices, poor advice.

This is the only attitude you can have if we're going to see real change. Not sure that everyone's on the same page though.

[brentono]

Systemic dopers and those that aid them are scum
and need to be removed from our sport forever.

Take away the money, and you will remove the dopers.

But will you still have, sponsors, followers, even a sport.

Would you even still be involved, Alex, if there was no money.
(you will have to be honest with yourself)

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Systemic dopers and those that aid them are scum
and need to be removed from our sport forever.

Take away the money, and you will remove the dopers.

But will you still have, sponsors, followers, even a sport.

Would you even still be involved, Alex, if there was no money.
(you will have to be honest with yourself)

This is a poor argument. In fact doping is losing the sport its sponsors, not keeping them.

You do not need dopers to have high quality sport and money.

You invest a sizeable proportion of the money to clean the sport up, instead of wasting time on administrative rubbish banning lycra booties.

Given your logic, then there is no industry on the planet in which one could work, because they all have crooks and frauds involved somewhere.

We take action to minimise their influence and impact and eradicate as much as possible.

[MichaelB]

Plan to ban past dopers from Italaian Nat Champs

I think this is a great move, and may be a good way to start the lifetime bandwagon rolling - What do you think Alex ?

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Plan to ban past dopers from Italaian Nat Champs

I think this is a great move, and may be a good way to start the lifetime bandwagon rolling - What do you think Alex ?

It may well be challenged though CAS, but I can't see why such a rule should not be in place. If all National federations, UCI and IOC implemented same for all championship events, it would certainly be a strong signal. Pro cycling then has to decide on its path.

One example of how this issue really causes problems:

In some countries, riders can perform very well up to their National level, but frequently under perform when they go to UCI/world level events because the testing regimes at world level are better than at state/national level. IOW the wrong riders get selected and it means that these countries never get ahead in the world rankings (which means more places at world events, more money for support etc). The best clean riders miss out on the chance to move up to the next level of competition and gain that valuable exposure/experience.

Inadequate doping control is holding back development of the sport in such countries.

[brentono]

Systemic dopers and those that aid them are scum
and need to be removed from our sport forever.

Take away the money, and you will remove the dopers.

But will you still have, sponsors, followers, even a sport.

Would you even still be involved, Alex, if there was no money.
(you will have to be honest with yourself)

This is a poor argument. In fact doping is losing the sport its sponsors, not keeping them.

You do not need dopers to have high quality sport and money.

You invest a sizeable proportion of the money to clean the sport up, instead of wasting time on administrative rubbish banning lycra booties.

Given your logic, then there is no industry on the planet in which one could work, because they all have crooks and frauds involved somewhere.

We take action to minimise their influence and impact and eradicate as much as possible.

You took the moral high ground, but, with money brings greed, and subsequent fraud.
Be it in the Sport, at competitive or Administrative levels (e.g. FIFA )

Your logic is poor, as you are saying you need money to have high quality sport.
(and I could give many examples where money doesn't make high quality sport)

You invest a sizeable proportion of the money to clean the sport up

A Self-defeating process. IMO.

The original Greek Ethos, of Sport, was naked folk, competing, to envoke sportsmanship.
(would leave the clothing tycoons out in the cold... Just Do It! nikeD... though rough on a bike, eh)

[jules21]

In some countries, riders can perform very well up to their National level, but frequently under perform when they go to UCI/world level events because the testing regimes at world level are better than at state/national level.

do you believe this could explain why contador raced predominantly in spain this year, to date? the other reason could obviously be a friendlier reception from fans.

[gdt]

I don't think doping can be blamed on just the money. Consider the number of >40yo dopers at some gyms.

I also think that the public and media has to take its share of the blame. The "medal count culture" places amazing temptation on athletes to play unfairly. I do worry about the "medal or out" tough love culture of some sports programmes.

The idea of legalising drugs in competition is just unrealistic. Every serious athlete has a stage of their life where they have no real perspective, where if you said "Olympic medal and die 20 years earlier" they'd think that was a bargain. To pick on cycling and AFL for a moment, just look at the sheer level of irresponsibility in teams' use of the legal drug caffeine. These are not people you want to give unlimited access to drugs with more serious side effects.

Performance enhancing drugs, legal or otherwise, undermine some key reasons to do sport -- to enhance health, to challenge yourself, to measure yourself against what is possible, to grow as a person by tasting both victory and defeat. When drugs are involved it isn't sport any more -- a best it is self deception, at worst it is gladiatorial entertainment.

[ft_critical]

Apparently Ricco might race for an Italian Pro-conti team. One of the conditions makes me laugh, but really points to Ricco's public character -'he must remove the diamond embedded in his tooth' He thinks he's a rap star.

[Alex Simmons/RST]

You took the moral high ground, but, with money brings greed, and subsequent fraud.
Be it in the Sport, at competitive or Administrative levels (e.g. FIFA )

Your logic is poor, as you are saying you need money to have high quality sport.
(and I could give many examples where money doesn't make high quality sport)

You invest a sizeable proportion of the money to clean the sport up

A Self-defeating process. IMO.

The original Greek Ethos, of Sport, was naked folk, competing, to envoke sportsmanship.
(would leave the clothing tycoons out in the cold... Just Do It! nikeD... though rough on a bike, eh)

You seem comfortable with the notion of having dopers as a normal facet of our sport. I'm not.
Perhaps you're just playing devil's advocate - I get that.

You say it's inevitable if there is money involved. I say it doesn't have to be that way.
Golf has enormous money involved (more than cycling) but doesn't appear to have a doping problem (and yes there are doping methods that would aid a golfer).

I did not say money was required for high quality sport.
You say money does not automatically mean quality sport - I agree but that's an irrelevant point (a red herring) in any case. Have you not witnessed some fantastic and high quality amateur racing (given your history in the sport I'm dead certain you have)?

Do you not think everything should be done to eliminate doping as much as possible?

You are bring in another red herring with the Greek ethos line.
Doping is already defined - the line in the sand is determined by WADA and it doesn't require us to compete naked. We do not need concern ourselves with what is/isn't cheating - it's already been defined for us.

[brentono]

Inadequate doping control is holding back development of the sport in such countries.

"There is no coherent argument to support the view that enhancing performance is unfair;
if it were, we would ban coaching and training.
Competition can be unfair if there is unequal access to particular enhancements,
but equal access can be achieved more predictably by deregulation than by prohibition."

I hear the term "level playing field" but till developing countries have access to scientific
training techniques, teams of Sports Psychologists and Sports Medical practioners.
Also the latest scientific equipment advances etc. there is no Level Playing Field.
And the more advanced Nations have an unfair advantage, Correct? Must it be so?

Have you not witnessed some fantastic and high quality amateur racing

The Olympics, was a high quality amateur competition, and now has High paid professionals,
involved, and now most of the top competitors, are sponsored, so different from my days.
So there is no Level Playing Field there for Developing Countries.

Do you not think everything should be done to eliminate doping as much as possible?

Doping is quite an emotive term, and would think, today it's more like... PESM
Performance Enhancing Substances and Methods, if we take a look at EPO etc.

"Acknowledging the importance of rules in sports, which might include the prohibition of doping,
is, in itself, not problematic. However, a problem arises when the application of these rules
is beset with diminishing returns: escalating costs and questionable effectiveness."

The higher the Stakes (including Monies) The higher the risks, taken.
I think that's where my position is, and think the "high moral ground" approach cannot succeed.
Let's bring back sportsmanship, and competition for it's enjoyment, and entertainment.

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Doping is defined for us by WADA - that bit is simple. We do not need to debate that.

Everything else, provided it's legal/ethical, is on the table. No-one is saying we are on a level playing field. That's another red herring.

Are you saying we should just give in and allow doping (as defined by WADA)?

If that became the case, then I would be actively dissuading anyone (especially juniors) from becoming involved in the sport. I would also be lobbying our politicians very hard to stop any and all public funding to any sport run in such a manner. I do not want my tax dollars paying for doping. I want them used to stop it.

[brentono]

Are you saying we should just give in and allow doping (as defined by WADA)?

It has been mooted in many areas of Drug Policy and Deterance, and it easy to see
the "Doping in Sport" heading that way.
Hope you have a lot of tax-dollars,
to spare to go ahead/along with your "high moral ground" policies.
I am taking a balanced view of it.

As with the "War on Drugs"
http://www.smh.com.au/national/the-cost-of-the-war-on-drugs-20091002-ggiw.html
there is diminishing returns: escalating costs and questionable effectiveness.

On the WADA
Swiss private law foundation
Members/Constituents: 625 sports organizations, agencies, committees, federations,
associations, councils, and unions worldwide that have adopted the Code.
Annual Budget: $27,268,260 (2008)
Sr. Executive: John Fahey, Chairman
# of Offices: Five (Headquarters in Montreal, Canada)
# of Staff: 53
Relevant Affiliations: •International Olympic Committee (IOC)

•International Paralympic Committee (IPC)

•International Sports Federations (IFs)

•National Olympic Committees (NOCs)

•National Paralympic Committees (NPCs)

•National Anti-Doping Organizations (NADOs)

•Regional Anti-Doping Organizations (RADOs)

•Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)

•34 laboratories that analyze doping control tests under the World Anti-Doping Code

Annual Budget: $27,268,260 (2008) and rising rapidly.

"According to the IOC [International Olympic Committee] director general...
the fact that only eight athletes out of 11,000 Olympic competitors tested positive
is proof that 'the war on doping is being won.'
But the argument that the small number of athletes testing positive
is indicative of the low prevalence of doping is nonsense.
The number of positive tests is an extremely poor indicator of the prevalence of doping...
There is general recognition among those involved in elite level sport that those testing positive
represent only the tip of the iceberg.
It is impossible to estimate precisely how big that iceberg is, but it is clearly very large...
Firstly, drug-using athletes often beat tests because they have access to specialized medical advice
from sports physicians...
Secondly, there is evidence of collusion between dope-using athletes and senior officials.
Positive tests have been 'lost' at several Olympics."

Possibly the monies spent by the WADA could be better spent, by directing it towards
education, from the bottom of the Sports Pyramid up. Just a thought.

Education following the World Anti-Doping Code: as follows...

"Anti-doping programs seek to preserve what is intrinsically valuable about sport. This intrinsic value is often referred to as 'the spirit of sport'; it is the essence of Olympism; it is how we play true. The spirit of sport is the celebration of the human spirit, body and mind, and is characterized by the following values:
•Ethics, fair play and honesty.
•Health.
•Excellence in performance.
•Character and education.
•Fun and joy.
•Teamwork.
•Dedication and commitment.
•Respect for rules and laws.
•Respect for self and other participants.
•Courage.
•Community and solidarity. "

(sorry about the long post)

[Alex Simmons/RST]

I don't consider my views unbalanced. I also don't consider this to be "high moral ground".

The primary doping substances/methods have serious health consequences.

I agree about the education element - that is fundamental for change.

[Chuck]

The strongest justification, perhaps, on the ban on drugs and furthermore, on the application of criminal law on doping infractions, relates to the issues of health. Many commentators have argued that interference with the individual's liberty is unacceptable and, therefore, the ban on drugs cannot be justified. However, this argument cannot rebut the fact that doping is both extremely dangerous and destructive. In particular, the 'individual liberty' argument fails to take into account the coercive nature of doping that is at its most insidious at the State level."


Nov. 2003 - Gregory Ioannidis, LLM, PhD

"In general, I'm not a paternalist, but some of these drugs are dangerous. Ken Caminiti, the former Most Valuable Player of the National League, died recently -- in his forties. He admitted to using steroids. Lyle Alzado, a former football player, died young. He, too, had used steroids. These appear to be deadly substances. Doesn't society have an interest in protecting people from their own folly?"

Flo Jo

But the most important argument against for me is....

"An ongoing debate simmers about whether performance-enhancing drugs should be allowed in sports........ perhaps the only area where there is no doubt or controversy is when it comes to young people: these drugs, especially anabolic steroids, are unanimously considered harmful to the young."

2008 - Caroline K. Hatton, PhD

"I would love to see steroids banned from sports. They are unhealthy and physically dangerous. They are a Faustian bargain - offering immediate success for the price of an athlete's body, if not his or her soul. Worse yet, young kids who have no judgment and only see the glory of a Bonds home run are rushing to use them. In the process they are jeopardizing their health to make the team, get the college scholarship, and maybe make it to the pros."

Dec. 11, 2007 - Paul Finkelman, PhD

There are other arguments to be made against PED's but surely the health of our young stars coming through is one of the strongest. Talented athletes in many sports are being identified at what seems like younger and younger ages. How as a parent, coach, manager or senior peer could you accept that that young person would have to compromise their health in order to chase their dream. It's an issue that we as adults, supposedly able to make mature, rational decisions, shouldn't even have to wrestle with. A no brainer imho.

How could we justify to ourselves sending the message to young people that the only way that they can achieve their dream of competing at the highest level is to risk their health by doping ??

[Mulger bill]

Hear hear Chuck, well put.

Shaun

[Alex Simmons/RST]

There are other arguments to be made against PED's but surely the health of our young stars coming through is one of the strongest. Talented athletes in many sports are being identified at what seems like younger and younger ages. How as a parent, coach, manager or senior peer could you accept that that young person would have to compromise their health in order to chase their dream. It's an issue that we as adults, supposedly able to make mature, rational decisions, shouldn't even have to wrestle with. A no brainer imho.

How could we justify to ourselves sending the message to young people that the only way that they can achieve their dream of competing at the highest level is to risk their health by doping ??

The irony of course is that two of the cycling doping infractions in those tables I posted earlier were for athletes competing at masters age group competition (although I wouldn't necessarily label the individuals involved as systemic dopers, just foolish).

EPO misuse is also dangerous, as is a significant number of the substances and methods on the WADA list. Others may not be but act as masking agents.

[brentono]

I don't consider my views unbalanced. I also don't consider this to be "high moral ground".

The primary doping substances/methods have serious health consequences.

I agree about the education element - that is fundamental for change.

The primary doping substances/methods in our Sport in the media ATM
(high profile cases)
would not be available to young sportspeople, and usually administered
by medical professionals.
From your Tables, it is quite clear, the most misused PED available to
young sportspeople are Anabolic Steroids. As with other illegal drugs,
easily available from a sub-culture making massive profits on them.
Around the gym, at the football club, around a teen-school yard, they
could fairly easily be obtained (like many other drugs). IMO.
Most teens (boys) would be using them, possibly for a sports benefit,
but more likely use them because they want to look good for teenage girls.
Or their peers, or vise-versa for their peers.
In fact, a study released recently, and one of the few studies to actually
attempt to find out what motivates teen boys to take steroids,
found that the most reliable indicator of steroid use was a teen's own self,
self esteem and body image.
As for a risk to their health, it is more longterm, and rarely immediate.
With teen use, this may not be picked up at a later stage by WADA testing.
So this is where the education element - is the fundamental for the change.
Teens may be well entrenched in the culture, relying on PED's at an early age,
even prior to becoming Talented athletes.
There is a school of thought, that at this early stage in their lives, teens,
may be better seved, by medical supervision, of these types of practices,
and in some cases it would be a normal medical practice, for low BMI or
below-normal body development.
Just a thought.

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Just a thought.

No one is disputing legitimate medical use of such substances to treat recognised medical conditions. That's why they were developed in the first place.
Not being good enough to win a bike race is not a legitimate medical condition.

It is not a valid argument to support their (potentially dangerous) misuse to attain an athletic advantage.

[MichaelB]

Eveyone's picking on poor ol Ricco - I'm innocent ...... really I am ...

Boo hoo

Whaqt is the progress on his investigation I wonder ....

[brentono]

Just a thought.

Not being good enough to win a bike race is not a legitimate medical condition.

It is not a valid argument to support their (potentially dangerous) misuse to attain an athletic advantage.

I don't consider my views unbalanced.

Alex,
You are definitely starting to sound a little unbalanced (not yourself?)
I was merely pointing out where the root cause lies, and the area that should be targeted
through education, and whether later it may escalate to attain an athletic advantage,
that is a possibility.
You may try to twist my words, but I will explain your misunderstandings.
Medical condition, was not part of my "argument"... discussion actually.
(just an example, of where it starts... one example)
The massive misdirected use of WADA funding was my point.
And even with the introduction of the Passport system, in the last 6 years, and it's
draconian methodology, even that, isn't getting to the root cause of the problem.
Massive escalating costs, more bureaucracy, more complicated rules, a few profile busts
and all with an overall questionable effectiveness. The writing is already on the Wall.
If you can't see that, I can't help you in this discussion, any further.
All's cool.

[twizzle]

So, brentono.... did you dope in your day?