For those who want to nerd out on procedure: https://www.slowtwitch.com/Features/Anti-Doping/The_Process_of_Anti-Doping_Protocols_9010.html
.
ItââŹâ˘s amazing how gullible the general public continues to be about all of this. I remember training in Phuket and hearing of a pro tri camp that had a doctor visiting to ââŹĹtop everyone upââŹÂ.
At the end of the day testing is a joke and you have to be an imbecile to get popped like Colin and Tomas.
IââŹâ˘d conservatively that 80% of the Euro Pros at IM Frankfurt are microdosing EPO right now in preparation.
I love the tour. I liked it from the first time I saw lemond fignon. Abdujaporov binning it on the champs eleysee. US postal. Uhlrich, indurain etc and it is as amazing today as it was then, but the idea I am meant to believe that the performances of the past, and the recoveries riders experienced then were all tainted but are all clean today defies belief.
IM is no different including AGâers. I suspect itâs endemic given the increase in TRT etc
For those who want to nerd out on procedure: https://www.slowtwitch.com/âŚ_Protocols_9010.html
Read it earlier. Great write-up. Thanks 
My kingdom for WADA, ITA, IRONMAN, et al to put their rules and procedures in honest to God webpages and not slap them up on PDFs so they might actually get linked to.
But here we are.
I love the tour. I liked it from the first time I saw lemons fignon. Abdujaporov binning it on the champs eleysee. US postal. Uhlrich, indurain etc and it is as amazing today as it was then but the idea I am meant to believe that the performances of the past and the recoveries riders experienced were all tainted then but are all clean today defies belief.
IM is no different and AGâers I suspect itâs endemic given the increase in TRT etc
This is where IââŹâ˘m at.
Well said. If Lionel Sanders pushes 330 watts and runs a 2:38 to win Kona this year after doing poorly at other races, would he also receive all these accusations?
Or if Sam Long were to take some family time away from racing, and didnât make a detailed vlog explaining his reasons?
There are not many well-resourced elites out there with a long term focus on winning IMWC or bust. Frodenoâs retired, Idenâs had time away, Neumannâs been injured.
The others are chasing T100 or Pro Series and taking a calculated / measured approach to their careers. Not surprised few follow Laidlow when he punches off the front on the bike.
Itâs clearly not about his performances. Weird that in one of the toughest competitions on the planet, some people object to a bit of competitive spirit.
Itâs okay to put your competition in hospital with heatstroke or a torn calf, but not okay to drum up some energy and get in peoplesâ heads?
He took ibuprofen⌠Geez
Beals admitted to taking non-banned painkillers before races yeah? So some pain killers are âcleanâ and some are not. Similar to going to an altitude camp or sleeping in an altitude tent to raise hemoglobin 3% is ânaturalâ, but microdosing EPO to raise hemoglobin 3% is not. Lol.
I would raise that to 99%, but of course the Americans are all natty, and USADA would never cover them upâŚ
Replying to you as the last mention in the thread:
Another instance of our lovely content management system taking the fruit of the poisonous tree. But, well, here we are.
Reminder: you do not accuse or mention athletes by name of doping, micro dosing, etc. without concrete, first-hand proof of it. Next person to do it earns a ban.
Want to discuss the likelihood that pros, generally, might be microdosing? Sure.
Want to debate the merits of Tomasâ case, as he has the adverse analytical finding to his name? Go for it.
But donât bring up other names unless they have either an AAF or an actual ban to their name.
And if an athlete has publicly disclosed an ITA investigation against him, is it OK to speculate - using the athleteâs name - on whether that investigation has to do with allegations of micro dosing that a third party may have leveled?
No.
I would raise that to 99%, but of course the Americans are all natty, and USADA would never cover them upâŚ
The story I read (I think posted earlier) was USADA not convicting an African in order to get him to work for them undercover and infiltrate their doping ring.
But to your first point, yeah. As an American thatââŹâ˘s pretty convinced that doping is extremely rampant in sport, itââŹâ˘s bittersweet when Americans actually win or do well in endurance events these days.
This is a pretty good summary, which includes The Guardian story that you reference, as well as Reuters which notes the practice dating back at least a decade. https://frontofficesports.com/usada-wada-informants-doping/
As an American thatââŹâ˘s pretty convinced that doping is extremely rampant in sport, itââŹâ˘s bittersweet when Americans actually win or do well in endurance events these days.
Only the endurance events? Sydney McLaughlin seems amazing, but I couldnât help but think of the parallels with Marion Jones while watching the typical NBC puff piece they were showing right before one of her heats.
Yeah bad choice of words. I agree.
ItââŹâ˘s amazing how gullible the general public continues to be about all of this. I remember training in Phuket and hearing of a pro tri camp that had a doctor visiting to ââŹĹtop everyone upââŹÂ.
At the end of the day testing is a joke and you have to be an imbecile to get popped like Colin and Tomas.
IââŹâ˘d conservatively that 80% of the Euro Pros at IM Frankfurt are microdosing EPO right now in preparation.
This is the big issue with anti-doping in the modern sport world. Methods have been proven to evade positive tests. One response to this is the setting of detection limits at unrealistically low levels. Some of these drugs (nandrolone I believe, the Houlihan one) stay in your system for over a year and are easily detectable. It defies belief that a pro athlete would willingly take some of the things theyâve been caught with. Houlihanâs burrito excuse was laughable, but so is the idea sheâd willfully take an easily detectable drug thatâs detectable for so long and has a much lesser effect than other common drugs.
By setting their detection limits so low they have injected (pun intended) uncertainty to their findings. Setting the limits a bit higher could allow microdosing, but would make any positive test very difficult to blame on contamination. Weâre left in a situation where dubious practices are rampant, but the guys doing them are smart. The only ones getting caught are either stupid or unlucky. Raising the detection limits wonât fix this but it could counterintuitively instill more confidence in the system.
I love the tour. I liked it from the first time I saw lemons fignon. Abdujaporov binning it on the champs eleysee. US postal. Uhlrich, indurain etc and it is as amazing today as it was then but the idea I am meant to believe that the performances of the past and the recoveries riders experienced were all tainted then but are all clean today defies belief.
IM is no different and AGâers I suspect itâs endemic given the increase in TRT etc
This is where IââŹâ˘m at.
Same. The fact that Pogi (for example) can (easily) sit on the wheel while several of his teammates set tempo on a climb (that blows the Peleton to shreds)⌠only to then unleash a brutal attack on the steepest of sections (and achieve a watts per kilo number north of those that were doped to the gills)⌠time after time and seem to show no ill affects, no cumulative fatigue, no breakdown of his body â is simply too much for me to accept. I accept that nutrition is better, I accept that training is better (Zone 2 baby!!) and I accept that recovery is better, but reality is certain people deliver performances that make one seriously question if said performances are enhanced by modern chemistry.
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
ItââŹâ˘s amazing how gullible the general public continues to be about all of this. I remember training in Phuket and hearing of a pro tri camp that had a doctor visiting to ââŹĹtop everyone upââŹÂ.
At the end of the day testing is a joke and you have to be an imbecile to get popped like Colin and Tomas.
IââŹâ˘d conservatively that 80% of the Euro Pros at IM Frankfurt are microdosing EPO right now in preparation.
This is the big issue with anti-doping in the modern sport world. Methods have been proven to evade positive tests. One response to this is the setting of detection limits at unrealistically low levels. Some of these drugs (nandrolone I believe, the Houlihan one) stay in your system for over a year and are easily detectable. It defies belief that a pro athlete would willingly take some of the things theyâve been caught with. Houlihanâs burrito excuse was laughable, but so is the idea sheâd willfully take an easily detectable drug thatâs detectable for so long and has a much lesser effect than other common drugs.
By setting their detection limits so low they have injected (pun intended) uncertainty to their findings. Setting the limits a bit higher could allow microdosing, but would make any positive test very difficult to blame on contamination. Weâre left in a situation where dubious practices are rampant, but the guys doing them are smart. The only ones getting caught are either stupid or unlucky. Raising the detection limits wonât fix this but it could counterintuitively instill more confidence in the system.
Raising the detection limits will just make the micro dosers use a little bit more. As it is they are obviously trying to use the highest amount for benefit while still remaining under detectable levels, raise the levels = raise the dose.
I think the uncertainty in testing is more the athletes caught trying to make us question the validity of their positives, not the true validity of results.