I agree pretty much with all you said, except i would argue with you on this point #6 you posted;

6) Doping does not continue as a long term benefit...as a matter of fact it does the opposite in many cases, that includes ALL types of doping, steroids, EPO, T...once you remove the "assist" your body returns to normal or worse, because you may have permanently F-ed up your production of (T, RBC's, etc) as your body adapted to having naturally occurring homeostasis disrupted. As a matter of fact, mitochondrial density starts to fade in days and Vo2 improvements associated with doping (or training) has been shown to return to "normal" in 12 weeks. ///////

Just because levels return to normal does not mean there is no benefit left over. What about the strength, speed, muscle twitch, etc., that was gained during the very long periods of doping? As any athlete, especially a pro one can attest to, once you reach a certain level of speed, it is a 100 times easier to achieve it once you have laid off, or been injured, than it was to get there in the first place. You are just talking about numbers, i'm talking about performance. When i retired and was out for a very long time, i was able to come back at 50 and do a pretty decent 1/2 ironman on 6 to 9 hours a week of training. And it was solely because of how fast i was. There was a ton of muscle memory that was just laying dormant, but with just minimal training, it would awaken and i could get 95% of the way back on training that most would be out of shape with. That is the true long lasting advantage of doping. And if we are to believe that a lot of these ex pros are now clean, then how the hell are they going so fast still if they are so damaged by all the years of doping?

And it is not 0% tolerance on Testerone, looks like A-Rod actually got a TUE for it. That is going to be some shit hitting the fan there, no way he should have gotten that. But probably not that hard for a guy who did roids most his life to do a couple things to get some ridiculous low reading. It will be interesting to see what the numbers actually were when they granted him that TUE, certainly was not reported in the news when it was done. So someone is hiding something.

What is it you want to win? In the 35-39 age group the winner isn't beating Andy Potts or Jordan Rapp. Besides why should you get to decide that I get to pay for something I consider wasteful? It is amazing how easy it is to spend someone else's money.

What is it you want to win? In the 35-39 age group the winner isn't beating Andy Potts or Jordan Rapp. Besides why should you get to decide that I get to pay for something I consider wasteful? It is amazing how easy it is to spend someone else's money.

Actually, even muscle twitch recruitment/changes recede to original type/levels, all physiological gains recede, there is a decent amount of research on it and it is pretty unequivocal. That is not to say what you did, which may be residual "muscle memory" or psychological advantages. Either way dopers suck, but the fact is there aren't significant long-term advantages. In Colom's case, he doped, and because of it got to maintain a lifestyle of top notch coaching and training which IS a significant advantage, as we all know mileage on your legs doping or not provides significant advantages.

My main statement, was to clarify some common myths, which many people mistakenly believe. The outrage should be on the lack of testing, WTC makes a boat load of cash, they sure as heck aren't putting it into pro prize purses...so do something other than line your own pockets, especially now that Providence has taken their investment back out, they are leveraged on house money.

As for A-Rod, MLB is not a member of USADA/WADA, American professional leagues are closed private businesses and they don't answer to anyone, except congress (and only under threat of removing their anti-trust exemption). If you go to USADA or WADA site they actually have the zero tolerance TUE for Testosterone posted, since they get a decent amount of calls daily on it.

>What is it you want to win? In the 35-39 age group the winner isn't beating Andy Potts or Jordan Rapp.

Actually I'm a cyclist, occasionally a triathlete, so I'm projecting my argument because it's pretty similar. :) But the answer is, "I want to win races." I train hard. I fully understand it's recreational, I'm not ProTour, and I'd get dropped like a toilet seat by even the lowest-level pro. But I want to win races, nonetheless, against the categories that have been set up for amateur racing.

The desire to win races fairly is the entire underpinning of competitive sport.

And because it's cycling, I do actually win cash. Several hundred dollars so far this year. Yes, it's token money. But it covers the entry fees + gas!

>Besides why should you get to decide that I get to pay for something I consider wasteful?

The pat answer: Why should you get to decide that it's acceptable to allow cheaters into my sport, something I consider abhorrent?

The respectful answer: I don't get to decide. I get to use my speech to influence like-minded people towards a consensus that I agree with. That's all.

>It is amazing how easy it is to spend someone else's money.

My money too. I donated my own money to USAC's "RaceClean" program, above and beyond the compulsory amount. (It's tax deductible!)

IMHO a dick move

---

Lewis

Would you be able to elaborate which move you are referring to? That might clarify your views.

Isn't a hobby sport like a triath-a-lon the perfect place for banned or retired professionals to continue an active lifestyle?

---

Lewis

If there are studies to show that a long term comprehensive doping program leaves absolutely no benefit when the doping stops, I would be HIGHLY suspicious of the methodology. What we see in the real world seems to prove otherwise. Pretty much without question.

I think someone should take a beachball with Dopers Suck or Doper written on it and toss it to a doper on stage in Kona. Good money shot after he/she catches it.

Fark em this sport has no omertà

Dev I don't think Sam will let him beat him at Kona.:0) oh and herbert / Slowman the title of the sorry should have been
" Sam Gyde makes OUR point!".

---

__________________________________________________
Official Polar Ambassador
http://www.google.com/...P7RiWyEVwpunlsc2JtQQ

The one where he got on stage dressed like a homeless kid who wrote on himself with a marker

---

Lewis

At present a professional athlete who dopes and gets caught can always come back to racing, if not pro then age group. With a life time ban the average age grouper who has a chance to qualify can still pay his money, and take part in a fair race. As it stands you pay your money and then have to chance your arm against cheaters who have unnatural benefits over your efforts. How can that be right?

Folks who say Colom is within the rules fair enough. But I say Sam is also within the rules to stand on stage in his T-shirt and make his protest so if you are going to fall on the side of Colom and say he is within the rules, don't critisise Sam because he is also within the rules.

F**& you former pro dopers, taking slots away from paying working age groupers.

---

He who understands the WHY, will understand the HOW.

I don't get to decide that it is okay to allow cheaters in the sport. Only the actual cheaters decide that. And that occurs with or without drug testing. No one was popped for PEDs at Kona last year. Do you take that to mean it was a 100% clean race or that someone got away with cheating? You can build a dam to prevent water from flooding your town. Water has physical properties that are predictable. You cannot do the same thing to prevent cheating. The war on drugs has been a waste of a trillion dollars. More or less the same number of people use drugs now as they did in 1980.

That is a ridiculous statement. People were dying from EPO use right up until the late 00's. Since the change in attitude towards drug use, EPO use and the slow but steady death of the Omerta the deaths due to hearts stopping due to thick blood seem to have stopped. Weird that isn't it? I would say that the money spent on fighting drugs is a tiny percentage of the overall money that gets ploughd into sport so brands can market their goods and has been money very well spent. I would hate to think I get my Son involved in an activity that will eventually lead him to using PED's risking his health, just because its expected at a certain level in sport. I think the money has changed attitudes, saved lives and future generations from using PED's. Maybe you should have a think about what you have written in a wider context because I think you are just plain wrong.

---

He who understands the WHY, will understand the HOW.

If the guy served his time for doping then what else should he do? I read the article as a bit of sour grapes by Glyde. Nina served her suspension for doping and still still races and no one is calling for her to stop.

He should have had a life ban like Lance. Piss off from endurance sports, forget about what it feels like to stand on top of the podium and go and play golf with his friends.

These douches are not welcome in our sport. And we all should let them know it as much as we can.

I understand your feelings here but if the rules allow him to compete then he is allowed to compete.

Being 'allowed' to do something and whether you 'should' do something are very very different concepts.

He shouldn't be competing.

But he obviously has a different moral radar. Fark him and his ilk.

Without question? Christ, with the amount of armchair science-ing going on in this thread, we could find a cure for cancer.

First, most studies don't say "absolutely no benefit", just that the benefit is either negligible or offset by the downsides (damaged natural hormone production or uptake). After two years, the better training in the past starts to fade, and the reduced capacity starts to take it's toll.

Second, if anything, that's what we see in the real world. Lots of dopers come back from their bans weaker, tire more quickly, and fade faster than before. Jonathan Vaughters is one of the few people who have power files pre- and post-bans of riders, and his experience should carry a bit more weight than a Slowtwitcher's "I think".

If you think for a second that you (or any age-grouper short of Gyde and his sub-9 peers) stood a chance against a hypothetical dope-free Colom, you can stop deluding yourself. To become a doping euro-pro, you first have to become a euro-pro. You have to show enough potential in the junior and U23 ranks, prove to others that you're worth the investment - EPO ain't cheap, you know. You can't turn a mule into a derby winner, and each and every one of these busted dopers would be a top-level athlete without it.

---

ZONE3 - We Last Longer

You are arm-chair sciencing as well as the rest. Cherry-picking studies that inevitably say "more research needed" and citing them as indesputible proof is not only arm chair science it is bad science dressed up as conclusive evidence.

And starting on the "these guys are great even if they hypothetically didn't dope, so shut up as they would have beaten you", is nothing less than a pathetic argument devoid of not only science but reason and common sense.

I have always asked why a number of triathletes, like Nina, who were caught using drugs, then raced after their penalty, do not have the same anger directed at them as do a few like Lance.

I guess at the end of the day is it worth all the negative energy being spent on a cheater, bully or whatever you want to call them? They really just want attention. So the best way to deal with these kind
of folks is to make them invisible! Never talk about them, etc. That would really drive them nuts.

And if you really wanted to make a statement, all the rest of the podium winners should have not gone up on the stage. Having him stand their by himself would have made a much stronger statement.

.

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

Oh boy...you are probably a nice guy (or gal), are very intelligent, and could defend your position reasonably well, even if most of us (including me) would disagree with your reasoning. But since this is slowtwitch, be prepared to have your entire family history, your educational background, your religious beliefs, and your morals attacked. Too bad...I would have liked for you to have the chance to explain your views. Good luck with that.

The "War on Drugs" is about psychoactive drugs, not EPO. EPO does not have the violence and fatality rates to be compared, and completely lacks the widespread addiction that is the inherent problem. It is a performance enhancer affecting a small sub population, with a miniscule fatality rate. The statement about the waste of money on the "War on Drugs" is astute for many reasons...