Its surprising to see everyone jumping to the conclusion that this is blatant cheating going on like these guys have been caught with HGH or something...
Its surprising to see everyone jumping to the conclusion that this is blatant cheating going on like these guys have been caught with HGH or something. People can trigger positive tests from things as simple as an asthma inhaler, a supplement they've taken and over the counter medication. James Stewart was banned from motocross because he didn't have paper work filed for Adderall, Cade Clason banned for the same thing but had done all the paper work which seemed to have been lost in the system somewhere and Broc Tickle banned for some random substance that doesn't even make sense to take for SX/MX.
Obviously these guys need to be diligent when it comes to what they're taking but its easy to miss something.
KB, Adderall is against the rules without a TUE, and neither Stewart nor Clason had one... i sympathize with Clason a bit because the process is long and requires a lot of follow-up thats going to be tough on a privateer... but this is pro sports... so the game needs to step up not just on the bike or in the gym... Adderall is totally 100% performance enhancing and it makes a lot of sense to take it for race car driving and moto racing, and cycling for that matter... Tickle tested positive for a type of amphetamine thats going to have similar benefits to adderall... so yeah... it does make sense to take this kind of thing... only idiots take Nandrolone and stuff like that anymore... guys looking for marginal gains, or a little help, will take things that help with reaction time and concentration... like amphetamines... seems benign, but if i was going to take medicine to go fast (its all legit medicine) i would take Adderall, and Salbutamol... basically the common drugs i can get from my doctor or a pharmacy... still cheating...
Its surprising to see everyone jumping to the conclusion that this is blatant cheating going on like these guys have been caught with HGH or something...
Its surprising to see everyone jumping to the conclusion that this is blatant cheating going on like these guys have been caught with HGH or something. People can trigger positive tests from things as simple as an asthma inhaler, a supplement they've taken and over the counter medication. James Stewart was banned from motocross because he didn't have paper work filed for Adderall, Cade Clason banned for the same thing but had done all the paper work which seemed to have been lost in the system somewhere and Broc Tickle banned for some random substance that doesn't even make sense to take for SX/MX.
Obviously these guys need to be diligent when it comes to what they're taking but its easy to miss something.
Yeah, no. It's their responsibility to know what they put in their bodies.
Having followed cycling for 25+ years, the likelihood that any doping - even in EWS - is accidental is slim.
Its surprising to see everyone jumping to the conclusion that this is blatant cheating going on like these guys have been caught with HGH or something...
Its surprising to see everyone jumping to the conclusion that this is blatant cheating going on like these guys have been caught with HGH or something. People can trigger positive tests from things as simple as an asthma inhaler, a supplement they've taken and over the counter medication. James Stewart was banned from motocross because he didn't have paper work filed for Adderall, Cade Clason banned for the same thing but had done all the paper work which seemed to have been lost in the system somewhere and Broc Tickle banned for some random substance that doesn't even make sense to take for SX/MX.
Obviously these guys need to be diligent when it comes to what they're taking but its easy to miss something.
Yeah, no. It's their responsibility to know what they put in their bodies.
Having followed cycling for 25+ years, the likelihood that any doping - even...
Yeah, no. It's their responsibility to know what they put in their bodies.
Having followed cycling for 25+ years, the likelihood that any doping - even in EWS - is accidental is slim.
Having spent a number of years racing at that level and being drug tested all I was saying is that is easy to miss something tiny that can have a huge effect - a positive test.
Never said its not their responsibility, even said they need to be diligent.
Not unless you want to get sued! Anyone with their ear to ground knows who the rumours are circling around. It will say a lot about...
Not unless you want to get sued! Anyone with their ear to ground knows who the rumours are circling around. It will say a lot about the ews if they call them out. Either it runs an open and clean series that continues to grow or cover it up and become dh’s and xc’s poor and broken relation. EWS it’s over to you!
May I give you some reasons why not to do this, not the least of which is that you created an account today just to make...
May I give you some reasons why not to do this, not the least of which is that you created an account today just to make this post. Perhaps trying to keep some anonymity?
The testing took place at the French EWS and riders tested were the podium and a few randoms. Myself and Sven posted photos of the riders waiting for testing in race recaps to respective editorial outlets so it's pretty easy to see who all the potential players are here. So of course it would be big names regardless of who it is (the rumors are multiple riders)... It's nit rocket science to know the podium riders get tested so it's always going go to be folks at the sharp end.
However, and it's a BIG however. In theory no one other than the French agency, possibly the EWS (though they say not), and the riders involved would know the details so all else is speculation at this point. Somehow word got out and these rumors have spread like wildfire all over the place a few months back. Do they know the names or are they just making assumptions and pointing fingers at who they want it to be rather than who it actually is? The truth is almost no one knows, especially not all the different people everyone is hearing the rumors from. At this point I've been told three different things all by people who claim they heard it from someone else, who of course heard it from someone else all the way back to someone with close ties to the event in France.
This isn't high school, and it's a bit disappointing a few individuals have been fueling the rumor mill as if it were such. If people cheat then by all means F*k 'em, but until there is official word you would be jeopardizing riders reputations, contracts, livelihood just so you could have some taking point on the internet.
This is not a subject to run cavalier with "facts"
Don't do it.
Thanks for the tip, off to check out Sven Martin and Trumpore pics from a french enduro round, of riders waiting for testing.
#clues
Stik, the CG vid was from a while back, 2017 I think.
Everybody be cool.
There has been no official information released at this time.
Respect the athletes who make our sport so awesome to watch and inspire us to push ourselves. Don’t speculate or spread false information about who might be involved.
Not unless you want to get sued! Anyone with their ear to ground knows who the rumours are circling around. It will say a lot about...
Not unless you want to get sued! Anyone with their ear to ground knows who the rumours are circling around. It will say a lot about the ews if they call them out. Either it runs an open and clean series that continues to grow or cover it up and become dh’s and xc’s poor and broken relation. EWS it’s over to you!
I think it is good to clarify a couple of things, if I'm not an expert on doping and what kind of products are used, I know a bit how the testing methods work.
First thing, doping is a race and the better anti-doping is getting, the smarter the dopers are (or seems to be). So know it seems like athletes are trying to gain a small edge by using either drugs at a very low level or drugs that are very difficult to detect (mostly drugs who completely mimic regular human products from what I've read).
An other method would be to use an other drug that would react during the testing and give false results (the so called "masking" drugs).
Second thing when you talk about medical testing you need to understand a couple concept:
- Specificity = capacity NOT to give false positive (or accurately detect true negative as such), so basically it means your test is very good at detecting a specific molecule among others.
- Sensitivity = capacity NOT to overlook false negative (or accurately detect true positive), so basically it means your test is capable of detecting very small concentration.
Now it usually is impossible to get both an excellent sensitivity ans specificity. If you add to that athlete using (very) low level of drugs to gain a marginal (but useful) gain in performance and the fact that sample conservation and transport is critical ( because some drugs and metabolites are extremely sensitive to temperature or light) you can understand how complicated the testing process is...
So for me a positive test on the A sample can be as simple as a slightly deteriorated sample or a test not being specific/sensitive enough and giving a false positive. It can also be an incoherent result which could indicate use of a masking product (or simply an interaction between "legal product" mimicking a masking product), an error in the testing process and a lot of other things.
Anyway this is why there is a procedure with two samples and hopefully second testing will be done with an other testing method/machine. In the meantime I think everybody is doing a good job at not spreading false rumours.
Rems brings up some good points. As someone who is in the testing world (not specifically doping), the testing is not perfect and there is always a chance for errors which is why regular testing with A and B samples is really important.
This is really a communication issue for EWS. If only the French rounds were testing and the anti-doping agencies only have one instance of testing during the series, I think its really hard to draw truly definitive conclusions. Mistakes happen and this a career limiting accusation. If a rider had consistent results at 2 or more rounds on A and B samples, I think you can make some definitive decisions.
Given that there seems to be some positive results and issues, I think the EWS needs to be more transparent and acknowledge that it may have a doping problem, BUT it lacks enough definitive evidence (if that is really the case) to name and/or punish riders. I would then modify the rules that some caught doping would be banned from a full season worth of rounds (I think its 8) and if they are caught a second time, it's a lifetime ban.
A couple more things not directly related to the testing process: from a medical point of view each individual should be considered as unique. It just means that every person is reacting differently and for some biological parameters or drug metabolism you can find (very) large discrepancies (even without pathology). If I remember correctly this is how Froome tried to escape any sanction by pleading that the failed test resulted from an altered state (dehydration, kidney failure, etc).
So this is the reason behind the "biological passport" that CG is explaining. The idea is to monitor biological parameters of the athlete through regular testing, so instead of searching the product you search for the (abnormal) effects. It can be very powerful since punctual variation are non-existent.
But this is only a UCI process for now.
Rems brings up some good points. As someone who is in the testing world (not specifically doping), the testing is not perfect and there is always...
Rems brings up some good points. As someone who is in the testing world (not specifically doping), the testing is not perfect and there is always a chance for errors which is why regular testing with A and B samples is really important.
This is really a communication issue for EWS. If only the French rounds were testing and the anti-doping agencies only have one instance of testing during the series, I think its really hard to draw truly definitive conclusions. Mistakes happen and this a career limiting accusation. If a rider had consistent results at 2 or more rounds on A and B samples, I think you can make some definitive decisions.
Given that there seems to be some positive results and issues, I think the EWS needs to be more transparent and acknowledge that it may have a doping problem, BUT it lacks enough definitive evidence (if that is really the case) to name and/or punish riders. I would then modify the rules that some caught doping would be banned from a full season worth of rounds (I think its 8) and if they are caught a second time, it's a lifetime ban.
But this is precisely why there are A and B samples. If a rider’s A sample tests positive, they have the right to get their B sample tested. If that tests positive then, that’s about as definitive as you can get. Would anyone be foolish enough to fail both AB tests in one round, only to continue doping and fail again in the next??
As for punishment, a one season ban is way too lenient..
May I give you some reasons why not to do this, not the least of which is that you created an account today just to make...
May I give you some reasons why not to do this, not the least of which is that you created an account today just to make this post. Perhaps trying to keep some anonymity?
The testing took place at the French EWS and riders tested were the podium and a few randoms. Myself and Sven posted photos of the riders waiting for testing in race recaps to respective editorial outlets so it's pretty easy to see who all the potential players are here. So of course it would be big names regardless of who it is (the rumors are multiple riders)... It's nit rocket science to know the podium riders get tested so it's always going go to be folks at the sharp end.
However, and it's a BIG however. In theory no one other than the French agency, possibly the EWS (though they say not), and the riders involved would know the details so all else is speculation at this point. Somehow word got out and these rumors have spread like wildfire all over the place a few months back. Do they know the names or are they just making assumptions and pointing fingers at who they want it to be rather than who it actually is? The truth is almost no one knows, especially not all the different people everyone is hearing the rumors from. At this point I've been told three different things all by people who claim they heard it from someone else, who of course heard it from someone else all the way back to someone with close ties to the event in France.
This isn't high school, and it's a bit disappointing a few individuals have been fueling the rumor mill as if it were such. If people cheat then by all means F*k 'em, but until there is official word you would be jeopardizing riders reputations, contracts, livelihood just so you could have some taking point on the internet.
This is not a subject to run cavalier with "facts"
So before an unnamed post above was edited, I thought it mentioned a French rider on a US team who's parents were the promotors(?) of the French EWS round. The manager of said team is supposedly a key source of the rumors.
But this is precisely why there are A and B samples. If a rider’s A sample tests positive, they have the right to get their B...
But this is precisely why there are A and B samples. If a rider’s A sample tests positive, they have the right to get their B sample tested. If that tests positive then, that’s about as definitive as you can get. Would anyone be foolish enough to fail both AB tests in one round, only to continue doping and fail again in the next??
As for punishment, a one season ban is way too lenient..
Except for 2 details:
We should check the rules but from what I understood the B sample testing is mandatory, the rider only gets the right to be present or represented during the testing process.
And I'm sure about the fact that samples A and B are from the same collection. So sample B can only prevent a manipulation or testing error of sample A. Unless you are using a completely different method (if available).
So yes this is a good failsafe but as I pointed earlier it is not completely sure (especially if there is a case of cross-reaction or a biological specificity from the rider).
And by the way, considering the time before sample A was tested (and rumours began), if testing was systematic (and considering how close some events can be) it would be easy to have an other sample from the athlete at another race...
Anyway even if both samples fail, the athlete can still make an appeal and try to prove why he failed the test without being a doper. So to me the athlete have quite enough means to protect their career.
May I give you some reasons why not to do this, not the least of which is that you created an account today just to make...
May I give you some reasons why not to do this, not the least of which is that you created an account today just to make this post. Perhaps trying to keep some anonymity?
The testing took place at the French EWS and riders tested were the podium and a few randoms. Myself and Sven posted photos of the riders waiting for testing in race recaps to respective editorial outlets so it's pretty easy to see who all the potential players are here. So of course it would be big names regardless of who it is (the rumors are multiple riders)... It's nit rocket science to know the podium riders get tested so it's always going go to be folks at the sharp end.
However, and it's a BIG however. In theory no one other than the French agency, possibly the EWS (though they say not), and the riders involved would know the details so all else is speculation at this point. Somehow word got out and these rumors have spread like wildfire all over the place a few months back. Do they know the names or are they just making assumptions and pointing fingers at who they want it to be rather than who it actually is? The truth is almost no one knows, especially not all the different people everyone is hearing the rumors from. At this point I've been told three different things all by people who claim they heard it from someone else, who of course heard it from someone else all the way back to someone with close ties to the event in France.
This isn't high school, and it's a bit disappointing a few individuals have been fueling the rumor mill as if it were such. If people cheat then by all means F*k 'em, but until there is official word you would be jeopardizing riders reputations, contracts, livelihood just so you could have some taking point on the internet.
This is not a subject to run cavalier with "facts"
Haha... It's not exactly rocket science to know who gets tested as the podium is a given at an event where dopping controls are in place.
I don’t have a ews podium rememberance for every round, I sure as shit do for World Cup dh, so yeah, a little bit of science, to remember....and knowing what the randoms are is also unknown, regardless THanks for the tip.
May I give you some reasons why not to do this, not the least of which is that you created an account today just to make...
May I give you some reasons why not to do this, not the least of which is that you created an account today just to make this post. Perhaps trying to keep some anonymity?
The testing took place at the French EWS and riders tested were the podium and a few randoms. Myself and Sven posted photos of the riders waiting for testing in race recaps to respective editorial outlets so it's pretty easy to see who all the potential players are here. So of course it would be big names regardless of who it is (the rumors are multiple riders)... It's nit rocket science to know the podium riders get tested so it's always going go to be folks at the sharp end.
However, and it's a BIG however. In theory no one other than the French agency, possibly the EWS (though they say not), and the riders involved would know the details so all else is speculation at this point. Somehow word got out and these rumors have spread like wildfire all over the place a few months back. Do they know the names or are they just making assumptions and pointing fingers at who they want it to be rather than who it actually is? The truth is almost no one knows, especially not all the different people everyone is hearing the rumors from. At this point I've been told three different things all by people who claim they heard it from someone else, who of course heard it from someone else all the way back to someone with close ties to the event in France.
This isn't high school, and it's a bit disappointing a few individuals have been fueling the rumor mill as if it were such. If people cheat then by all means F*k 'em, but until there is official word you would be jeopardizing riders reputations, contracts, livelihood just so you could have some taking point on the internet.
This is not a subject to run cavalier with "facts"
Haha... It's not exactly rocket science to know who gets tested as the podium is a given at an event where dopping controls are in place.
There might be more in it than you think. From what I understand, the top 3 riders are tested, along with three others. Previously, the three other riders were selected at random but in recent times, at least in other cycling disciplines, these riders have been specifically targeted based on information from "different sources" (read anti-doping bodies). Whether this process extends to EWS remains to be seen but considering there's been talk (and instances) of doping for an extended period of time, I would wager that that photo is significant in this whole discussion.
The number of randoms can vary at different events. Pretty sure that selection process for those is done by the testing authority, not the Governing body. (which in this case would be the French federation or UCI not EWS). Agree that the "randomness" may have changed but it is still up to WADA or CADF to finalise that list.
Almost want to tell the names I know but would it be useful to do this....? Not sure...
I agree naming the riders on this forum would not be responsible. Maybe this was discussed in the thread that got deleted, but I am curious how you came to see "the list" and if it clearly said that the racers had failed.
Not sure if it's been stated already. If any joker from Wada, etc is sharing preliminary info with their dipshit friends - especially those who post (or tease) unverified rumors on the internet, that should raise bigger questions about the legitimacy of the organization.
Boycotts never work, but if this gets leaked - the ship should sink.
Except for 2 details:
We should check the rules but from what I understood the B sample testing is mandatory, the rider only gets the right...
Except for 2 details:
We should check the rules but from what I understood the B sample testing is mandatory, the rider only gets the right to be present or represented during the testing process.
And I'm sure about the fact that samples A and B are from the same collection. So sample B can only prevent a manipulation or testing error of sample A. Unless you are using a completely different method (if available).
So yes this is a good failsafe but as I pointed earlier it is not completely sure (especially if there is a case of cross-reaction or a biological specificity from the rider).
And by the way, considering the time before sample A was tested (and rumours began), if testing was systematic (and considering how close some events can be) it would be easy to have an other sample from the athlete at another race...
Anyway even if both samples fail, the athlete can still make an appeal and try to prove why he failed the test without being a doper. So to me the athlete have quite enough means to protect their career.
Yep, AFAIK the A and B samples are from the same collection but again, only the A sample is tested while the B is held in reserve in case of a positive result. Agreed that you would be testing for some kind of testing error by testing sample B. Still, it seems like it's a sufficiently failsafe method.
Not sure how systematic testing has been so there may not be multiple samples to prove doping across several races. At any rate, getting caught cheating at one race for something as serious as doping (as opposed to pot or ecstasy) should trigger a lifetime ban and not some 6-month-suspension-in-the-off-season slap on the wrist.
Except for 2 details:
We should check the rules but from what I understood the B sample testing is mandatory, the rider only gets the right...
Except for 2 details:
We should check the rules but from what I understood the B sample testing is mandatory, the rider only gets the right to be present or represented during the testing process.
And I'm sure about the fact that samples A and B are from the same collection. So sample B can only prevent a manipulation or testing error of sample A. Unless you are using a completely different method (if available).
So yes this is a good failsafe but as I pointed earlier it is not completely sure (especially if there is a case of cross-reaction or a biological specificity from the rider).
And by the way, considering the time before sample A was tested (and rumours began), if testing was systematic (and considering how close some events can be) it would be easy to have an other sample from the athlete at another race...
Anyway even if both samples fail, the athlete can still make an appeal and try to prove why he failed the test without being a doper. So to me the athlete have quite enough means to protect their career.
Yep, AFAIK the A and B samples are from the same collection but again, only the A sample is tested while the B is held in...
Yep, AFAIK the A and B samples are from the same collection but again, only the A sample is tested while the B is held in reserve in case of a positive result. Agreed that you would be testing for some kind of testing error by testing sample B. Still, it seems like it's a sufficiently failsafe method.
Not sure how systematic testing has been so there may not be multiple samples to prove doping across several races. At any rate, getting caught cheating at one race for something as serious as doping (as opposed to pot or ecstasy) should trigger a lifetime ban and not some 6-month-suspension-in-the-off-season slap on the wrist.
Or held for years to retest later when testing is better.
An interesting read about a serious master's road racer (known derisively as a fatty master) who was outed through the Usada tip line. See something say something applies... Sheds some light on questions raised here as well...
An interesting read about a serious master's road racer (known derisively as a fatty master) who was outed through the Usada tip line. See something say...
An interesting read about a serious master's road racer (known derisively as a fatty master) who was outed through the Usada tip line. See something say something applies... Sheds some light on questions raised here as well...
Having followed cycling for 25+ years, the likelihood that any doping - even in EWS - is accidental is slim.
Never said its not their responsibility, even said they need to be diligent.
(FFWDed for simplicity)
CG is one of the GOATS.
#clues
Everybody be cool.
There has been no official information released at this time.
Respect the athletes who make our sport so awesome to watch and inspire us to push ourselves. Don’t speculate or spread false information about who might be involved.
First thing, doping is a race and the better anti-doping is getting, the smarter the dopers are (or seems to be). So know it seems like athletes are trying to gain a small edge by using either drugs at a very low level or drugs that are very difficult to detect (mostly drugs who completely mimic regular human products from what I've read).
An other method would be to use an other drug that would react during the testing and give false results (the so called "masking" drugs).
Second thing when you talk about medical testing you need to understand a couple concept:
- Specificity = capacity NOT to give false positive (or accurately detect true negative as such), so basically it means your test is very good at detecting a specific molecule among others.
- Sensitivity = capacity NOT to overlook false negative (or accurately detect true positive), so basically it means your test is capable of detecting very small concentration.
Now it usually is impossible to get both an excellent sensitivity ans specificity. If you add to that athlete using (very) low level of drugs to gain a marginal (but useful) gain in performance and the fact that sample conservation and transport is critical ( because some drugs and metabolites are extremely sensitive to temperature or light) you can understand how complicated the testing process is...
So for me a positive test on the A sample can be as simple as a slightly deteriorated sample or a test not being specific/sensitive enough and giving a false positive. It can also be an incoherent result which could indicate use of a masking product (or simply an interaction between "legal product" mimicking a masking product), an error in the testing process and a lot of other things.
Anyway this is why there is a procedure with two samples and hopefully second testing will be done with an other testing method/machine. In the meantime I think everybody is doing a good job at not spreading false rumours.
Hope this can be a bit helpful
This is really a communication issue for EWS. If only the French rounds were testing and the anti-doping agencies only have one instance of testing during the series, I think its really hard to draw truly definitive conclusions. Mistakes happen and this a career limiting accusation. If a rider had consistent results at 2 or more rounds on A and B samples, I think you can make some definitive decisions.
Given that there seems to be some positive results and issues, I think the EWS needs to be more transparent and acknowledge that it may have a doping problem, BUT it lacks enough definitive evidence (if that is really the case) to name and/or punish riders. I would then modify the rules that some caught doping would be banned from a full season worth of rounds (I think its 8) and if they are caught a second time, it's a lifetime ban.
So this is the reason behind the "biological passport" that CG is explaining. The idea is to monitor biological parameters of the athlete through regular testing, so instead of searching the product you search for the (abnormal) effects. It can be very powerful since punctual variation are non-existent.
But this is only a UCI process for now.
As for punishment, a one season ban is way too lenient..
So....who is the rider and who is the US team/manager? Nothing jumping out at me on this list: https://www.pinkbike.com/news/the-complete-guide-to-2018-enduro-world-s…
We should check the rules but from what I understood the B sample testing is mandatory, the rider only gets the right to be present or represented during the testing process.
And I'm sure about the fact that samples A and B are from the same collection. So sample B can only prevent a manipulation or testing error of sample A. Unless you are using a completely different method (if available).
So yes this is a good failsafe but as I pointed earlier it is not completely sure (especially if there is a case of cross-reaction or a biological specificity from the rider).
And by the way, considering the time before sample A was tested (and rumours began), if testing was systematic (and considering how close some events can be) it would be easy to have an other sample from the athlete at another race...
Anyway even if both samples fail, the athlete can still make an appeal and try to prove why he failed the test without being a doper. So to me the athlete have quite enough means to protect their career.
Boycotts never work, but if this gets leaked - the ship should sink.
Not sure how systematic testing has been so there may not be multiple samples to prove doping across several races. At any rate, getting caught cheating at one race for something as serious as doping (as opposed to pot or ecstasy) should trigger a lifetime ban and not some 6-month-suspension-in-the-off-season slap on the wrist.
https://cyclingtips.com/2016/04/the-curious-case-of-oscar74-how-usada-n…
Martin Maes
Greg Callaghan
Ruchie Rude
Jared Graves (sitting on the floor on the right)
Post a reply to: EWS Doping Thread Disappearance