Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Back from the dead
Joined
·
20,800 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
However you feel about Floyd Landis, the CAS decision is chilling in a lot of ways. Here is just one:

the ISL requires laboratories to comply with 'concepts' found in the WADA Technical Documents on chain of custody, not literal compliance...
In other words, you just have to kinda follow the rules, you don't have to actually follow them. After all, those rules clearly weren't meant to be taken literally. I wonder what other rules weren't meant to have literal compliance? It makes you wonder, who is watching the watchers?

This is the best article I've seen on the decision: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2008/landis_cas_jun08
 

·
Yo no fui.
Joined
·
8,486 Posts
Doesn't that just mean the panel won't put form or procedure over function or substance?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
Are you blind as well as....?

It is backhanded comments and idiotic insinuations like yours that keep the drug culture alive and thriving in cycling! When are you going to wake up and see the damage that drugs and related cheating and fraud has done to the sport of cycling? Can you even imagine the financial damage done, by sponsors walking away from cycling, and the continuing and deepening stain of drugs in cycling which taints us all?

There should be a policy of ZERO TOLERANCE with respect to the use of banned drugs - i.e. criminal charges, a lifetime ban for cycling for use of banned drugs, along with a multi-million dollar fine - which is only a pittance as far as the damage caused by the continuing cloud over cycling.

The culture of accepting and excusing the use of banned substances in professional cycling has to end before this sport will ever have the chance to get back on its feet and be worthy of the attention, support and participation of fans, sponsors and cyclists.

I have been a cyclist, and a fan of pro cycling for over 30 years, and I have finally walked away from it. All of us have been cheated by the use of banned substances. But why don't we throw up some smoke, make some excuses and cloud the issue, so it can continue? Isn't it obvious that frivolous comments such as yours do nothing but prolong the agony of the drug culture, keep pro cycling on its knees and darken the cloud over all clean cyclists?

And by the way, let's continue to readily accept excuses for laced candies, spiked drinks, mysterious health foods and supplements and the multitude of "asthmatic" cyclists (several times the ratio of the general population), who have medical certificates - like Petacchi - who used 4 or 5 times the dosage in a day? (By the way - I developed asthma in my 50's, and there is no way someone with asthma doesn't know exactly how many times he has used his inhaler in a given day).

As any professional should know, he and only he should be fully responsible for everything and anything he ingests! If a pro cyclist wants to stay a pro cyclist, he should accept the responsibility of knowing what he's going to take or not take, if he isn't 100% certain.

If there is no ZERO TOLERANCE policy strictly enforced in pro cycling, pro cycling will stay in the DARK AGES!
 

·
Adorable Furry Hombre
Joined
·
32,324 Posts
mohair_chair said:
I'm not sure what your rant has to do with my post. But I hope you feel better now.
Stop Hating America so much, America Hater.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Whoa Fix! Calm down :) Mohair and Pablo are asking valid questions, they are not "idiotic." You argue for "zero tolerance" but keep in mind that frequently "zero tolerance" can mean "zero judgment" ...much like labeling someone who merely shines a light of inquiry on your strongly held views as simple minded.
 

·
Yo no fui.
Joined
·
8,486 Posts
Room 1201 said:
Stop Hating America so much, America Hater.
I thought we were hating the French? :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,561 Posts
Pablo said:
Doesn't that just mean the panel won't put form or procedure over function or substance?
That's basically my take on it. So this or that procedure wasn't followed to the T, but there is no reason to believe that the chain of custody was ever violated. That is, we can be pretty damn sure it was his samples that were tested.
 

·
Back from the dead
Joined
·
20,800 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Dwayne Barry said:
That's basically my take on it. So this or that procedure wasn't followed to the T, but there is no reason to believe that the chain of custody was ever violated. That is, we can be pretty damn sure it was his samples that were tested.
What bothers me is that the statement is too open ended. If they aren't looking for literal compliance here, where else aren't they looking for literal compliance? And why bother writing down procedures if they aren't meant to be taken literally? There is too much wiggle room for assumption and interpretation to create shortcuts in what is supposed to be a legal process.
 

·
Yo no fui.
Joined
·
8,486 Posts
mohair_chair said:
What bothers me is that the statement is too open ended. If they aren't looking for literal compliance here, where else aren't they looking for literal compliance? And why bother writing down procedures if they aren't meant to be taken literally? There is too much wiggle room for assumption and interpretation to create shortcuts in what is supposed to be a legal process.
The statement is a bit broad, yes. However, I would imagine that CAS doesn't want to start nullifying drug bans everytime an "i" isn't dotted. It's probably further complicated by the disperse nature and likely varying procedure of all the labs. That needs to be remedied. At some point, I imagine, CAS would throw something out if bad procedures undermined the results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
If there is an expectation of ZERO TOLERANCE for athletes, shouldn't there be an an equally high expectation of ZERO TOLERANCE for the testers when it comes to following the rules?

Pettachi didn't knowingly cheat, he just used a little too much. Sorry, suspended. The lab didn't nefariously not follow all the procedures, they just skipped a few, cause they know what's best. Hey, that's OK, as long as the results look good. Seems like a helluva double standard to me.

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,561 Posts
DriftlessDB said:
If there is an expectation of ZERO TOLERANCE for athletes, shouldn't there be an an equally high expectation of ZERO TOLERANCE for the testers when it comes to following the rules?

Pettachi didn't knowingly cheat, he just used a little too much. Sorry, suspended. The lab didn't nefariously not follow all the procedures, they just skipped a few, cause they know what's best. Hey, that's OK, as long as the results look good. Seems like a helluva double standard to me.

Dave
I think this is being a bit ridiculous. All an athlete has to do is not take drugs, or too much of a TUE drug. He can also employ any number of means of avoiding being tested in the first place or avoiding having his dope show up in his sample.

WADA or USADA, etc. have but one means of uncovering doping, and that is dope testing. They have umpteen people who must maintain a chain of custody, divide and test it for however many drugs using however many different techniques, and then be prepared to repeat it all if the A sample is positive. It is unreasonable to expect every single T to be crossed and i to be dotted by everyone involved at every stage of this procedure.

What is important is simply can we be sure they were Landis' samples and is there any legitimate reason to suspect that if the testers failed to follow the rules to the letter, it caused his samples to test positive?
 

·
Back from the dead
Joined
·
20,800 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Why is it unreasonable to expect every single T to be crossed and i to be dotted by everyone involved at every stage of this procedure? Do the labs have something more important to do? Testing is what they do. It's all they do. Presumably they do it all day, every day. So how come it isn't ingrained into the people who work there that EVERYTHING is logged and detailed? You make it sound like it is an inconvenience, or a hindrance to getting to the facts, when in reality, it's the entire basis of their credibility.

I completely reject any statement that says, yes we did it wrong, but prove that it doesn't affect the test. No. I'm not interested in validating and excusing your mistakes. Prove to me that the shortcuts you took are acceptable in a legal process where lives and careers are on the line. Would you be as gracious if it was your life or career on the line?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
All the testers have to do is follow the checklist from a to z and there is no question. Where is the difficulty in that? Yes,testing is the only means of catching cheats, wouldn't you think you would want to do it strictly by the book, to ensure your results can not be questioned?

If you want to get rid of doping, as the authority, you have to be above scrutiny. The only way to do that is to follow the rules.

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,561 Posts
mohair_chair said:
Prove to me that the shortcuts you took are acceptable in a legal process where lives and careers are on the line. Would you be as gracious if it was your life or career on the line?
Well the fact that the only arbiter to vote to overturn the positives is known to be so biased as to reject the whole process, would seem to argue that within the rules that the dope testers and athletes have agreed to follow the tests are valid.

Call me a cynic, I just don't buy that Landis really raised any issues of substance or went about trying to demonstrate in a legitimate way that the mistakes made led to his false positives. Rather he attempted a PR style attack on the way the system is organized.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,561 Posts
DriftlessDB said:
Yes,testing is the only means of catching cheats, wouldn't you think you would want to do it strictly by the book, to ensure your results can not be questioned?
I wouldn't be terribly surprised if a whole lot of people involved in this process are nothing more than lab techs not making a tremendous amount of money, putting in their hours at work and looking forward to getting out of there to spend time with their friends and family. There may be some crusaders at the top, but I suspect a whole lot of grunts at the bottom just doing their jobs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,671 Posts
well, Frelat (who ran the tests) was certainly incompetent by the standards I'd apply to someone working in my lab (a research lab, not a commerical lab). She had minimal training, was not certified for many of the tests she ran (was not listed as an IRMS analyst). It's not hard to find someone guilty when the burden of proof is so low - the CAS panel took LNDD's word for just about everything, including the admission that Frelat was at best questionable to be running the tests--which weren't even blind (she said her job was to confirm the A results..)
 

·
Back from the dead
Joined
·
20,800 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
You haven't answered my question. This isn't about Landis. It's about the process. Forget Landis. Forget his hearing. Here we have CAS saying T's don't have to be crossed and I's don't have to be dotted, and you agree with that. And still I ask, why not? Why is literal compliance with the rules unreasonable?

This is like in math class, when it isn't enough to get the right answer. The teacher also wants to see your work. If you don't show your work, how can you prove that you really know what you are doing? You could guess the right answer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,561 Posts
stevesbike said:
well, Frelat (who ran the tests) was certainly incompetent by the standards I'd apply to someone working in my lab (a research lab, not a commerical lab).
Stevesbike,

So you're a bench scientist, I'm not and only have some passing familiarity with running assays and such. My impression of doing stuff like muscle fiber typing, etc. is if you screw-up the somewhat complicated, long, multistep processes, you get rubbish not something that "makes sense".

So do you understand the tests they ran? Is it plausible to any degree that a mistake could turn the T/E test from not positive to positive, and all 7 of the isotope tests as well?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,342 Posts
Pablo said:
I thought we were hating the French? :D
we were. But if the <a href="http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2008/07/larry-stunned.html">speculation</a> that Landis is going to challenge the ADA system in US court is correct, we'll be moving on to Hating America™ in short order.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top