The only real eye opener there is Usain Bolt did NOT return a suspicious test 

twoyacks said:

The only real eye opener there is Usain Bolt did NOT return a suspicious test 

no testing in Jamaica. Can't return a positive if you aren't tested!

Horner is breaking my heart....can't get a TUE...so sad...I'm welling up...the injustice of it all
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/horner-blasts-uci-for-denying-asthma-tue/

twoyacks said:

Horner is breaking my heart....can't get a TUE...so sad...I'm welling up...the injustice of it all
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/horner-blasts-uci-for-denying-asthma-tue/

I thought you didn't need a TUE for albuterol inhalers anymore. Only that you were supposed to "declare" them. Vlad? Any insight/personal experience with this?

I finally dug up Vaughters "Eskimo DNA" theory on Danielson.  Looks even dumber today.

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/jonathan-vaughters-on-the-enigmatic-tom-danielson-64053

"You can see this in any photo of Tommy D. He can never get down to the vein popping five per cent fat you see in some riders. He just cannot do it, not matter how much he starves or trains. In addition, this metabolism tends to strongly favour sugar as fuel. When Tom eats carbohydrate, his body wants to just use it up as fuel, then shut down, and store all the fat ingested as body mass. I suppose this is to protect against arctic winds, but it’s very difficult to work with in a cyclist. Not only does his body want to be chubby, naturally, it also gets the hunger knock very easily, as naturally, his body doesn’t like to use its fat stores as fuel. So, he’s a rider that has to eat a lot to keep from getting hunger flat, but gets fat, quite easily, from eating a lot. Tough."

Maybe this explains his need for T.

Marc Bertucco said:

twoyacks said:

Horner is breaking my heart....can't get a TUE...so sad...I'm welling up...the injustice of it all
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/horner-blasts-uci-for-denying-asthma-tue/

I thought you didn't need a TUE for albuterol inhalers anymore. Only that you were supposed to "declare" them. Vlad? Any insight/personal experience with this?

here's the search you need: http://www.globaldro.org/us-en/search/search.aspx

USADA:"Salbutamol is not prohibited up to a maximum of 1600 micrograms over 24 hours. This threshold is not valid in the presence of diuretics. If you are using a diuretic you must have a Therapeutic Use Exemption to use both the diuretic and salbutamol."

Clearly, he wants the stronger stuff.  Which is prohibited unless you have a TUE.  Notice how he doesn't specify what he's requested the TUE for.  

Equally clearly, the six experts who reviewed his request thought it amounted to doping.  

Tommy D got caught out by a new test...looks like his old doping tricks went obsolete and nobody had the heart to tell him.  Oh and Horner has been tight lipped about Danielson...Interesting to see how this pans out.  Danielson is looking at a mandatory lifetime ban...unless he has any dirt he can sling...Danielson rode with Horner at Saturn, where the doping system was apparently rampant.
http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/08/news/the-test-that-caught-tom-danielson_381086

And the Wall St Journal is on it....great publicity for future corporations that may want to sponsor a bike team
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-rough-road-for-cyclings-clean-team-1439161583

twoyacks said:

And the Wall St Journal is on it....great publicity for future corporations that may want to sponsor a bike team
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-rough-road-for-cyclings-clean-team-1439161583

It's absurd to think you can create a team run by a doper, fill it with ex-dopers, and not have any doping positives in the future. I guess that's Vaughters in a nutshell. Absurd. The ego, the fucking giant ego on that guy to think he can create a team, trust a team that somehow denies human nature. People don't change. Once a dick, always a dick. You might be slightly less or slightly more dicky than before, but you are still a dick.

Marc Bertucco said:

twoyacks said:

And the Wall St Journal is on it....great publicity for future corporations that may want to sponsor a bike team
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-rough-road-for-cyclings-clean-team-1439161583

It's absurd to think you can create a team run by a doper, fill it with ex-dopers, and not have any doping positives in the future. I guess that's Vaughters in a nutshell. Absurd. The ego, the fucking giant ego on that guy to think he can create a team, trust a team that somehow denies human nature. People don't change. Once a dick, always a dick. You might be slightly less or slightly more dicky than before, but you are still a dick.

Disagree.  He could have avoided this positive by not signing Danielson for another year.  Not like his other ex-dopers did much after their admissions.  The only one who logged big results afterwards was Millar.    

What's absurd is to think that Vaughters couldn't spot this doper in his midst.  I'm guessing he could, which makes me think he accepted Danielson's doping.  

Why is the big question.  Danielson's big result last year was winning Utah.  Hardly worth hanging on to the guy for winning Utah.  

mugwump said:
Why is the big question.  Danielson's big result last year was winning Utah.  Hardly worth hanging on to the guy for winning Utah.  

Maybe because as a US registered team, getting wins at home makes it good for taking sponsors to see your guy kick ass.

Dan Reiners said:

mugwump said:
Why is the big question.  Danielson's big result last year was winning Utah.  Hardly worth hanging on to the guy for winning Utah.  

Maybe because as a US registered team, getting wins at home makes it good for taking sponsors to see your guy kick ass.

Dombrowski was a better pick from the get-go.  Cannondale didn't want dopers on the team, and Vaughters decided that the possible victory was more important than the risk of pissing off sponsors.  

What strikes me is that Vaughters is so obsessed with physiology to the detriment of clear psychological flaws.  We are all so impressed when Vaughters speaks of the physical ability of each of his riders...VO2 max, wattagae etc.  Anyone could see Danielson is a putz.  He never had results without being on a program.  Tillford taught us that...Ned Overend saw that.  What's worse is that Tommy D has always been a fancy lad....and out for himself one.  Expiring contract = he NEEDED a big result to stay in the profession at a livable wage.... an ex-wife, 2 young children and a trophy girlfriend = NEEDED $$$$   If anyone on that team was going to dope, it was going to be that inconsistent mess with a ton of overhead.
Quite honestly, Vaughters should save some of the $$$ his team spends on internal controls and pay a psychologist to weed out or at least FLAG riders who are either doping or going to dope again.  It wouldn't take long to assemble a profile of suspect character traits.
Yacks

Let's not forget that even though most folks don't seem to give a shit about Tour of Utah, it is an HC categorized stage race, just one tick below World Tour in terms of #UCI points earned...and points matter.

Help I've fallen and I can't get up...

Doping expose largely focused on Victor Conte gabbing about the Track and Field world.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/sports/column/the-doping-epidemic/

http://www.propublica.org/article/speed-bumps-why-its-so-hard-to-catch-cheaters-in-track-and-field?

I just wish Epstein would own up to Mytranta's doping.

Nothing professional about it.

Wanna make sure it is clear that this article is from Oct 28th 2015

https://gfny.com/gfny15-winner-was-doping/

I tagged awesome because I'm bewildered by the absurdity of it all.

Doping by Colombians!?
http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/10/death-threats-doping-and-disillusion-the-troubling-state-of-cycling-in-colombia/

He'll be offered a spot on Mengoni in 2 years.

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/features/lees-lowdown-tramadol-the-biggest-non-secret-in-pro-cycling/#.VkJw_WQrKEI

Can we get OSMO to add this to active hydration? Sounds awesome.

JohnMalcolmson said:

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/features/lees-lowdown-tramadol-the-biggest-non-secret-in-pro-cycling/#.VkJw_WQrKEI

Can we get OSMO to add this to active hydration? Sounds awesome.

Well the good news is that it somehow causes both diarrhea and constipation, so those are canceled out.

http://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520248229

Testosterone has inspired dreams—of restored youth, recharged sexual appetites, faster running, quicker thinking, bigger muscles—since it was first synthesized in 1935. This provocative book investigates the complex, bizarre, and sometimes outrageous history of synthetic testosterone and other male hormone therapies. Exploring many little-known social arenas—both inside and outside the medical world—in which these substances are becoming increasingly available and accepted, Testosterone Dreams examines the implications and dangers of their use in professional sports, in the workplace, in our sex lives, and beyond. 

Maybe it failed because it was too far ahead of its time.

why isn't there a in depth analysis of the Froome data here yet? Anybody have a hot take on the seemingly contradictory facts coming from Froome, like it was just weight loss generated from his wife picking up a Weight Watchers cookbook and no longer letting him eat directly from the Criso tub with a soup spoon, and totally unrelated to the Sky program.

Come on, I need analysis, I need speculation, I need chatter!

http://sportsscientists.com/2015/12/seven-quick-thoughts-on-the-froome-data/

"80.2 ml/kg/min is high, but it’s not eye-popping. There are plenty of riders who get there, or even beyond, and never come close to achieving the dominance of Froome in recent years. That says to me, again, that something is missing from this ‘big reveal’. We already know that, though, because VO2max is a poor predictor of performance in an elite sub-set of endurance athletes, runners or cyclists. Knowing this, it would have been nice to explore those. And yeah, I know, it’s only Esquire, but that brings us full circle. The point was to offer data in support, and what’s happened is that some data has been offered, and good for Froome."

This summer he wrote: 

"So, we are to believe that 5.78 W/kg goes 1:30 faster than >5.8 W/kg, and 4:25 faster than 5.5 W/kg.  One comparative value, you could debate and dismiss the accuracy of that comparison.  But here are two comparisons, plus the fact that we know from riders like Thibaut Pinot, who has published his data, that 6 W/kg for 40 min is the level at the front of the Tour, and this value of 5.78W/kg does not make sense in the known physical universe."

http://sportsscientists.com/2015/07/great-power-great-responsibility-less-power-greater-speeds

There is nothing to speculate - it's clearly insufficient for a serious discussion on the topic. The only serious response is that it's a PR move so they can say "we've released data" even though it's incomplete and misleading.

I'm sorry to say it, but the joy for me is gone from watching the Tour as a sporting event. It's an interesting spectacle but I don't think for a minute the top 10 aren't juicing to the gills.