DBrower, idiot at large

Bro Deal

TBV proves that he is dumbest man on the Internet. He describes the doping possibilities and his belief in what is really happening:

1. Maybe nobody dopes, and these are all false positives.
2. Maybe doping is widespread, and most dopers are getting away with it.
3. Maybe the tests are perfect, and they’re finding exactly who’s doping.
4. Maybe there’s a lot of dopers, but they’re really good at cheating, and the tests suck, and the people getting caught are still all innocent.

And 4 is the mythology of cynics like me, that think anti-doping is doing more harm than good.

Gotta love how he describes himself as a cynic. Perhaps his dictionary defines cynic as someone whose oil does not reach his dipstick.

Yeah, I am such a cynic. All the riders caught must be innocent because the uber-dopers never get caught...except the ones that do...but they cannot be super-dopers because they got caught...they must be innocent...and since only the innocent are being persecuted, anti-doping efforts are causing more harm than good...ouch...my head hurts.

http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2008/0...oup-please.html

__________________
"I'm completely fu**ed up. Even the speed of the bus was almost too fast for me." -- Gert Steegmans

Crankyfeet

Chances of a false positive are high when the incidence of real positives is low. But when the real incidence of positives is high (ie most are doping), chances of a false positive are low.

Notwithstanding that cyclists are masking/cooking their biology so that they don't test positive.

I don't understand his logic that most are doping, but those that are caught are unlucky false positives. I guess he is saying that everyone is able to fudge pass the test, so those that are caught are just the unlucky false positives? It is an interesting concept, but it relies on a lot of assumptions regarding the accuracy of the tests.

thunder

Landis must be having a good ol fashion chuckle at his expense.

1. Alpha pro sport. If most dope, there comes a tipping point, where it becomes virtually all. Pros dont lose if they have an option. Thus, they justify their culture, and their own internal rules.

2. Doping only exists because 1) it works, and 2) it can be masked and rules subverted.



Folks like Tom Fine and Dave Brower, Michael Akinde (Strategy) look for the most specious of supporting evidence. The simple evidence is the power numbers on climbs, and the scientific studies. A good doping program gives you 15% on that finishing climb. It may be less on a chrono.

Everyone appreciates these athletes are off the curve, there is less then 1% seperating them in pure physiological terms, they all train hard, they all watch their nutrition and diet, they all have sports science advisers.

Those numbers are stark. Then you look at the entire GC winners and podiums in the last decade. Those with actual positives or actual links to doping doctors or doping rings, is near 100%.

So, if you are clean, giving up the 15% power to a doper on a final climb, just how can you get anywear near the podium. I think the last clean guy to ride into the top 10 of a GT was probably Mcgee in either 2004 or 05 at the Giro.

I still don't think you can win a doyenne clean. I dont think you can win the worlds tt clean neither. You may be able to get on the podium. Wiggins and Mcgee could almost snag a podium in the worlds tt.

classic1

Uncle Chris Boardman wasn't that long ago.

__________________
Collingwood - 2008 AFL Premiers

classic1 is on the bandwagon early this year

thunder

Can you do it now? The worlds tt was pretty weak back then, in depth and in talent. The best GC riders were the best tters. Ullrich, Lemond, Indurain. But the worlds tt is only a decade old, before it was GP des Nations, unofficial. Jens Voigt used to have a monopoly on that.

But like Michael Rich, and Uwe Peschel, Jens is a great tter, but not the best in the peloton. Even Rogers, great tter, but he was behind Ullrich. And behind many when he had to tt within a GT.

Now no one can compete with Cancellara. Remember Cancellara won the jnr worlds twice, and in the second tt, was faster kmph than Ullrich who won the pros, albeit 50% longer tt.

classic1

I'd argue the fields in Boardmans time (1994 to early 2000's) had better fields. Names like Olano, Indurain, Rominger, Zulle, Gontchar, Mauri crop up. Look at the podiums. Voight only won GP des Nations once.

__________________
Collingwood - 2008 AFL Premiers

classic1 is on the bandwagon early this year

limerickman

Boardman was up against some outstanding TT'ers in his era.

The hour record for example was swapped between Indurain and Rominger in the mid-1990's, when they both reached the record at Bourdeaux.

Boardman and Obree also had hour record in that era as well.
Add Ullrich, Peschel, Zulle, Olano in to the mix and you've got a pretty select group competing with/against Boardman.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

italiano

Interesting you mix Strat to idot as DB…Strat (I think he rr alter bad side) loves Riis and not objective…hates Lemond………… but not apologist as cheap prostitute DB....

__________________
For inches and centimetres, let fools contend."
-- Damian Grammaticus

TheDarkLord

I don't agree with you there. There is usually no simple correlation between incidence of positives and the probability of false positives. I'm not saying that they are completely independent. But you can have a situation of high incidence of positives along with high chance of false positives, and low incidence of positives along with low chance of false positives. It depends on the criteria used to define a positive in a doping test. If you use stringent criteria, I would think that it is possible to make the probability of false positives very low (whether or not you have a clean peloton).

thunder

Olano contested, did the others contest the worlds consistently?

Wayne666

I didn't understand that either. I would think the probability of the false positives is almost entirely due to the particulars of the test (i.e. how well does the test detect what it is suppose to, and what factors influence the possibility of false positives).

However from what we know it seems pretty unlikely there is an unacceptable level of false positives because the false positive rate is related to the amount of false negatives and we know there are whole bunch of false negatives. IOW, the "sensitivity" of most dope tests is quite low (intentially so to avoid false positives). This is why so many dopers can avoid testing positive, the tests are set up to have a low sensitivity and high specificity. If OTOH, guys who doped were testing positive all the time (which they aren't since only a very small percentage of tests are positive and yet we know up until quite recently lots and lots of riders were doping) you could be fairly sure you would also have a relatively high rate of false positives (i.e tests with high sensitivity but low specificity).

helmutRoole2

Hey Lim, why was Obree so good at the hour record and pursuit, but in every other aspect of the sport he was something less than an average pro rider?

__________________
"Bait in 08" --nns1400

thunder

UK cycling tt culture + Armstrong specialisation phenom.

You know Pozzato was just as good as Cancellara and Rogers in the chronos in the espoirs?

So, point is, if he doped, and did ride road races, he probably had some potential.

Wiggins hasa never looked like winning a road stage, unlike Mcgee.

limerickman

I agree with Thunder : British concentration on the hour record (ie Boardman/Obree).

Also Obree was offered a professional contract at Le Groupement - but he has said that he found life in a professional team difficult and left.
(a couple of posters here, who know Obree, say that Obree was not prepared to dope aand that's why he decided to abandon professional road racing).

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.