herneweb

The inevitable bike blog post

Doping. Sooner or later anyone with a vague interest in sport cycling will bring up the topic of doping. Heras and Millar's recent news profile got me thinking about it again. I have written a few posts about riders who have had their run-ins with the authorities and I am finding it increasingly difficult to be objective about individual cases because it has become such an everyday aspect of the sport. Unfortunately, my opinion is becoming more and more dependent on popularity rather than facts. To be crude about it, I would happily watch Hamilton and Heras race again, but couldn't care less if Rumsas or Hondo race again.

Apologies for those who have been reading this blog for a while but I'm going to repeat parts of an older article originally about Frank Vandenbrouke because it pretty much explains my take on the situation.

Whether you are vehemently anti-doping or accept it as a forever present element in sports where the physical demands on athletes necessitate its use, it is impossible not to see that the doping scandals of recent years have seriously damaged the image of many sports, and none more so than cycling. For all riders caught up in doping scandals it is always fascinating to see if and how they manage to continue there cycling careers.

Setting aside the potential obstacles of bans and custodial sentences making a sucessful return to the top must depend hugely on the reaction from teams, sponsors, fellow riders, the press and the fans. Fortunately (maybe unfortunately) there seems to have been more than a few episodes in recent years from which to learn lessons. Pantani, Ullrich, Zulle and Virenque all made comebacks from scandals of varying degrees of seriousness, albeit with limited success for some of them. For the latter two, the way they reacted to the 1999 Festina affair made a big difference to the speed of their comebacks. However, although both tasted success subsequently, I believe Zulle did so with much less of a smear to his character. His relatively immediate admission and acceptance meant he returned with the image of a someone who served his time and was left to continue his career carrying very little baggage from his past. Virenque on the other hand relied on something else to ease his return. His popularity. "Housewive's favourite", "Tricky Dicky", call him what you want. His popularity with the French fans, to the chagrin of the officials, helped him overcome a very serious image problem. Pantani and Ullrich also both benefitted from being very popular riders when caught in sticky situations. Why are they popular? Because they are all very talented cyclists; between them they have given cycling some of its greatest moments. The same goes for the recent cases. Who will forget Hamilton's exploits with broken bones, Millar's debut prologue win, Heras on the Angliru.

And here's the rub. Riders like these are needed by everyone involved in cycling. Teams and sponsors need talented high profile riders to raise there rankings and provide better media coverage. Race organisers need to attract riders like these to promote their events and provide competitive high quality racing. The fans want to see these riders because they will provide them with some of their greatest memories as spectators.

For the teams, it's a fine balance between demonstrating an intolerance of doping (and other misdemeanors) and needing to secure the services of good high profile riders; Saunier Duval being a recent example. For the fans, it's the balance between passion for the sport and any moral contentions they may have.

Comments:

The sport is larger than one single individual and even a team. We can't cling to them after they have tested positive. What's the point if we do?

Mags
By  mags
 

what do you do if they are all positive, [allegedly]!?
By  Anonymous
 

Mags, I understand your point. However in the current climate of rumour, allegation and doubts about the test system how can the fans be expected to decide which rider to condemn when it seems the professional bodies, teams and riders themselves seem unable to do this.
By  iain
 

Iain,

Well, keep in mind that the rumour-spreaders are usually the lawyers and support structure of the athlete that got busted. They are getting paid to create the doubt about the testing procedures etc. Simply because this doubt may get their rider off the hook. The fact is, the tests are VERY accurate and reliable.

Riders get tested so often and 99% are clean. Lets keep that in mind as well.

Mags
By  mags
 

The UCI etc should make the statistics for all their tests much more visible. I don't think I have ever seen the test statistics for a year published in the popular press. It might serve to restore confidence if the punters see the volume of testing and the proportion of negative results.
By  iain
 

I'll have to agree with Iain. I don't think you'd find 99% clean if you were really keeping tabs on the dope tests. They are all fairly new tests and most don't have established false-positive/false-negative rates yet. If I recall correctly from statistics class, we learned that the medical test for AIDS has a huge false-positive rate, but a low false-negative rate, meaning if you show as a negative, you're probably okay, but if you show as a positive, you probably need to get re-tested. I think the main problem with doping tests for cyclists is that their careers end the moment the test shows up positive. There's no investigation, there's no legal recourse (as we've seen from Hamilton's attempts), there's nothing but an A and a B sample, both of which are handled in exactly the same way. How would you like to base your career on something that may have a 60-80% false positive rate?
By  Caloi-Rider
 

Caloi-Rider,

That is about the most ridiculous statement I've ever heard. I am tested on a VERY regular schedule, both in and out of season. Trust me, I do understand how the tests work and the accuracy of them. They are very accurate. I can guarantee you that the "60-80%" false positive number is very, very far off the target.

If an athlete tests positive on an A and B sample, he took a PED. Simple as that.

Mags
By  mags
 

Okay, I'll concede that that's a wide number for false positives, but for you to place so much trust in tests that involve blood and urine work is pretty ridiculous too. You may be a competitor, but you're not a medical professional, and that's pretty clear from your argument.
The AIDS test really was that high for a false-positive rate, and we're talking about people's lives, not their careers here. The EPO urine test is supposed to involve running some sort of magnet across a sampling of urine to spread out the bars based on the number of proteins in the urine. It's not rEPO specific. It doesn't take a PhD to figure out that it can be made more accurate. Let me refer you to an article on the subject:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2005/epotest_problems
By  Caloi-Rider
 

True, I'm no doctor. Far from it. Consider this - imagine the thousands of tests completed every year. How many do actually test positive? If the test was so inacurate and unreliable - wouldn't we have more positives?

It's just that people on the outside never hear about "a rider tested negative today". No, all they hear is cheating riders like Hamilton screaming about false twins, poor testing procedures and how everyone was out to get him.

Mags
By  mags
 

I guess that's my issue. They test everybody randomly at home, but they only test the winners or high performers after the race. Immediately after a race, you're dealing with increased protein in the urine, increased blood pressure, perhaps even red blood cell count increase if it's been a stage race over a number of weeks. It's performed under different conditions, and lately there have been a lot of riders getting tagged for it immediately after winning--Heras for example.
I'll grant that Hamilton's argument was pretty ridiculous--the vanishing twin--but if you didn't dope and you got busted for it, I can only imagine how desperate you'd be.
We do know that there have been false negatives, as some riders like Virenque have passed tests and then later been found to have been doping. In Virenque's case, his assistant got caught trafficking doping products and then pointed the finger at him as the ringleader of the Festina scandal (cf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Virenque ).
Iain, sorry for the long comment.
By  Caloi-Rider
 

No problem Caloi-rider, I find it very interesting reading the comments. I am only sorry that I don't have much more to add to this that hasn't already been said here or elsewhere.
As a fan, I guess that if I was more informed of the testing stats both positive and negative then I would definitely feel more confident about the regime. As mentioned in previous comments here, the open publication of test stats would help this.
I don't think of cycling as a 'dirty' sport but I do think its is becoming a victim of its own efforts to clean up. The more dirt the process stirs up the more it clouds up the issue and I agree with Mags' comment about the rumour-spreaders, who are not helping to clarify anything. That said there is nothing wrong with an objective and structured challenge to the process, I shall let everyone else decide if chimeras fall into that category. With regards to PEDs most sports I believe are some way off reaching the point at which cycling finds itself at the moment.
By  iain
 

There are random tests during races as well. IOC / WADA has a pretty strict protocol for who gets tested.

I too think that there are many things that could improved upon. The penalty system for one - instead of the 2 year ban, lets make it 4. More tests, both in and out of season along with transparent results.

Other sports are also suffering. Almost all endurance sports have had their scandales. And maybe the only way to fight this, is to establish a strong value-system with young athletes.

I know that sounds a bit silly, but I firmly believe that athletes that come from an environment that promotes healthy, clean competition are less likely to use PEDs.

The Norwegian cross country culture is a great place to look. Cycling has much to learn from that.

Mags
By  mags
 

I agree about the athletic culture. Ethical or moral thinking is the solution for a lot of problems in the world. I also agree on the stiffer penalty. Virenque's 6-month ban was a disgrace.
On the flip side, though, I also think they need to be more thorough about investigating a potential doper. Last time this subject came up on my blog, a med student left a comment about how rEPO manufacturers could attach markers to rEPO so that doping regulators could detect them easier. Also, I don't think a positive test should be equated with a guilty verdict. Rutger Beke's case showed that normal healthy athletes can be mistaken for dopers. Officials should have to present evidence for a rider's suspension just as prosecutors in the legal system do. I realize that's currently an impossibility, but it would be a lot fairer to the riders.
And I'd like to see a lot more "Dopers Suck" t-shirts out among the spectators. Perhaps the riders would get the message that way.
By  Caloi-Rider
 

Bergman admits EPO use. Here's more food for thought. Bergman statement includes this:
"I never denied the charges, but I hid behind the fact that the test results were not entirely clear, and I hoped that I might be able to get off on a technicality"
By  iain
 

Well, what else is there to say?
By  mags
 

I've got something:
The more Bergmans, Virenques and Rafael Palmeiros there are, the tougher it's going to be for the Roberto Herases out there.
Also, I read on the Tyler Hamilton stuff that ProTour teams have a code of ethics urging them not to sign riders until four years after a doping offense is committed. Perhaps that will have a similar effect to mags' aforementioned stiffer penalty.
By  Caloi-Rider
 

I don't see how Heras is any different from Virenque. He's no better, at all. He just hasn't admitted it yet.

The code of ethics is nice and all, but we need something more "across the board" type of thing.

Mags
By  mags
 

Post a Comment

Archives