Doping row continues

[noel]

Do I think Froome is a cheat? Yes. But it's all about definitions.

If the definition is "did he break the rules?" then perhaps not (although this is debatable).
However if the definition is "using substances with the intention to give him an advantage over clean riders", then I think yes. I think the latter definition is more valid.

BTW, I think Wiggins is a cheat for the same reason.

But then I shouldn't cast too many stones. People will look back on my miraculous times and discount them all once beetroot is banned.

[Graham Breeze]

Do I think Froome is a cheat? Yes. But it's all about definitions.

If the definition is "did he break the rules?" then perhaps not (although this is debatable).
However if the definition is "using substances with the intention to give him an advantage over clean riders", then I think yes. I think the latter definition is more valid.

BTW, I think Wiggins is a cheat for the same reason.

Indeed. It used to be that you were responsible for what was in your body however it got there - to overcome the "someone spiked my drink, I am innocent" excuse - and that is just a matter of laboratory measurement but once the authorities start accepting exonerating circumstances then it is wriggle room time and politics/ business take over.

David Miller has said (and there is a man who knows a thing or two about cheating) that Sky are "gaming the system" and this is undeniable. The problem with going close to the edge is that inevitably there is a risk that sometimes you will topple over the line and it is outrageous that, Sky, to pick a team at random, can then start special pleading.

In my view: if you fail the test, you fail the test. and "the dog ate my homework" doesn't cut it.

(Note for CL: the exception that tests the rule is the great but mentally troubled Marco Pantani whom I saw ride and who was killed by the powers that be).

[Witton Park]

Indeed. It used to be that you were responsible for what was in your body however it got there

and it still is

[Derby Tup]

Pantani RIP

[anthonykay]

But then I shouldn't cast too many stones. People will look back on my miraculous times and discount them all once beetroot is banned.

At least beetroot is easy to detect in a urine sample.

[CL]

Apologies CL you were right with Lance and I was wrong!!

Why anyone would have this much salbutamol does confuse me.
Possible side effects: common - feeling tense and getting headaches, muscle tremors and dizziness. Uncommon - muscle pain. Rare - Reduction in potassium in your blood, increase in lactate levels and acid levels, sleep disturbance, increased blood flow to the extremities, mouth and throat irritations, muscle cramps. Very rare - insomnia, skin itching, trembling.
Almost all of these would have a negative effect on a cyclist. Any asthmatic knows if you take a few puffs to many of the inhaler you can feel your heart race for a few seconds, hardly likely to make you go quicker.
Extra puffs on the inhaler, I totally understand, I raced (or more correctly I ran slowly in races) carrying my inhaler in my pocket, even used it occasionally!!

The day before Froome lost time to Nibali. The day after he burnt him off. So
all that drug in his system did him no harm.

[CL]

Doctors like Lipworth know nothing about the methods used by the doping doctors. And that is not a criticism of them, but it does mean they get drawn into things they don't understand. A doping doctor knows how to dose and stack different compounds for best effect. They are miles ahead of doctors like Lipworth because they specialise in making people faster and stronger, without any concern for breaking protocol or rules.

So when they make comments on performance enhancing effects of drugs like Salbutamol they end up playing to the deceptions carried out by the doping doctors. Lipworth may know about Salbutamols effects in sick people but its easy to drop the context and apply it - wrongly - to athletes.

[CL]

On a lighter note I found an article. My fag packet calculations have been endorsed by another writer. Does he read the forum? I definitely got there before him as the times of our posts prove. Don't agree with his conclusion though. Here goes:

https://deadspin.com/the-only-soluti...-on-1821436636

[Graham Breeze]

Doctors like Lipworth know nothing about the methods used by the doping doctors. And that is not a criticism of them, but it does mean they get drawn into things they don't understand. A doping doctor knows how to dose and stack different compounds for best effect. They are miles ahead of doctors like Lipworth because they specialise in making people faster and stronger, without any concern for breaking protocol or rules.

So when they make comments on performance enhancing effects of drugs like Salbutamol they end up playing to the deceptions carried out by the doping doctors. Lipworth may know about Salbutamols effects in sick people but its easy to drop the context and apply it - wrongly - to athletes.

I agree. I was surprised to read his comments, including those critical of his peers. In my experience Consultants are reluctant to criticise colleagues especially in areas outside their particular fields of expertise. Perhaps he was flattered to be asked or desires a career as a "go to" media Doctor? His remarks can now be quoted out of context which, I suggest, he will live to regret - possibly in the court appearance he seems to crave.

[Graham Breeze]

On a lighter note I found an article. My fag packet calculations have been endorsed by another writer. Does he read the forum? I definitely got there before him as the times of our posts prove. Don't agree with his conclusion though. Here goes:

https://deadspin.com/the-only-soluti...-on-1821436636

Not too bothered about the arithmetic but it's a droll and amusing resume of the mess cycling has got itself into after decades of failing to deal with the fact that for a few million pounds and immortality cyclists (and 100m sprinters) will always cheat if they can get away with it.