@Jules yeah a few of the old articles I read pointed to finishing bottles and I honestly don't know how WADA can sit there and say it isn't problematic. Even if its small, feeling less pain at the pointy end of a long race absolutely gives that person an advantage

Came across this as new info on the bad old days:

1) what’s the podcast
2) it’s very clear the organizations tasked with preventing doping are… shall we say “not up to the task?”

Jules said:

1) what’s the podcast
2) it’s very clear the organizations tasked with preventing doping are… shall we say “not up to the task?”

"the bounce"  is the name.  It seems to be local for Baltimore. It seems to be something new for Jill.

I've been trying to figure out if there's a possible reason, assuming Swift is telling the truth, for people like Voight to be hired by USADA.  Maybe they admitted to their complicity in misdeeds, gave insight into how powerful athletes and administrators can cheat the system,  and a promise that they won't do it again.  Or, paraphrasing Swift, they were given 'secret amnesty.'

@eloy

Acknowledged.  That's why I wrote, "for better or worse, it went with this slide. "

Interesting story from the world of Triathlon:



https://www.triathlete.com/culture/news/american-pro-triathlete-collin-chartier-admits-epo-use-after-positive-drug-test/ 

Kudos to him for being so forthright in his response and acknowledging where and why he went wrong. I can imagine in the list of dopers, he'll be viewed more positively than others for this one.

This doping positive appears to have shaken the triathlon world, which some take as a good sign: Many top pros have denounce it, and appear honestly concerned and angry it happened. 

This is the most interesting comment from a fellow triathlete from that article:

"Fellow pros posting in response to Chartier’s Instagram message gave mixed comments, with 2014 Ironman world champion Sebastian Kienle saying: “Let me guess, you bought it on the internet and also learned how to use it – all from the internet. Nobody helped you, nobody knew.”"

mugwump said:

This is the most interesting comment from a fellow triathlete from that article:

"Fellow pros posting in response to Chartier’s Instagram message gave mixed comments, with 2014 Ironman world champion Sebastian Kienle saying: “Let me guess, you bought it on the internet and also learned how to use it – all from the internet. Nobody helped you, nobody knew.”"

I find the story concerning; for two reasons. One, it's EPO; same trick, different clown. Two, once again it suffices to throw one guy to the wolves - as Kienle pointed out.

That has been the general comment I have seen for some of the few triathletes in my radar, including Mark Allen. The suggestion appears to be: Most triathletes are clean(ish) but there is a cohort that is doping, and Chartier was maybe a chance to smoke them all out, it wont happen, and they suck for all the reason dopers suck. 

eloy said:

That has been the general comment I have seen for some of the few triathletes in my radar, including Mark Allen. The suggestion appears to be: Most triathletes are clean(ish) but there is a cohort that is doping, and Chartier was maybe a chance to smoke them all out, it wont happen, and they suck for all the reason dopers suck. 

Yeah the "just a few bad apples" line. Funny thing about that. If you've got 100 athletes who know that one is cheating but won't talk you kind of have 101 dirty athletes, don't you?

The dilemma of modern doping reminds me of the Soda companies clever move on vending machines. They make the store owner "own" the machine, and pay for all it's maintenance.

The modern doper carries all the risk personally regardless of who helped, pressured, or enabled them.

There was an interview with Jay Vine and he was discussing how on a team like UAE, they have so many advantages over smaller teams--and he came from what I suspect is a mid-budget squad, Alpecin.

Both you and Jules love all this talk about everyone is doping 
yet neither of you give an indication of what it is the are ALL doing
please share , btw , I tried Guinness , I didnt work🤣

Mark Taylor said:

Both you and Jules love all this talk about everyone is doping 
yet neither of you give an indication of what it is the are ALL doing
please share , btw , I tried Guinness , I didnt work🤣

I don't love it.  I'm rather frustrated and saddened by it.  I don't know if everyone is doping.  I'd guess probably not.  

It stems, for better or worse, from seeing the peloton at two speeds in the 1990s and feeling no one spent enough time questioning why that was occurring.  I think that was awful for everyone, and probably worse for the racers.  My guess is that people who get to the top of a sport have pretty addictive traits in a number of ways--and the doping I fear was terrible for their long-term health, not just the addiction issues but also the damage it did to their bodies.  That's well beyond the necessity of following rules that make sport sport.  

It's a spidey sense issue.  When things don't add up, it tingles.  I don't think I should suppress it, I don't think that's healthy.

Yeah , I’m 56 years old and have been following cycling since I was 11 
I know the history  , but aside from your sense twitching , which of coarse I get , and I watch jumbo go 123 in Paris nice and sigh, but what are the rumors , theists always rumors , that everyone is doping , @jules has said multiple time that training camps are a way to hide from doping control 

Mark Taylor said:

Yeah , I’m 56 years old and have been following cycling since I was 11 
I know the history  , but aside from your sense twitching , which of coarse I get , and I watch jumbo go 123 in Paris nice and sigh, but what are the rumors , theists always rumors , that everyone is doping , @jules has said multiple time that training camps are a way to hide from doping control 

I have no idea what exactly they're doing, but if history is any guide they're doing what they always did - the sophistication (if you can call it that) is in the methods of hiding it. EPO, Steroids, weight loss drugs. There are more masking agents, but the gaps we're seeing are too big for marginal gains or a better finish bottles.

There was essentially zero testing for two years due to COVID, and Chris Horner (by all accounts) made a career of avoiding testing by living in a mobile home.

Anti-doping enforcement & monitoring is largely done by the national organizations for each country. Jamaica (different sport) for example has essentially zero. So training in places with weak (or easilly corrupted) anti-doping infrastructure, training in expensive to get to places, and of course (again we've seen this all before) paying or influencing to have samples switched, buried or tampered with are always options.

Look if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and the peloton has the same two speeds as we've seen at the height of doping, it's probably a f*#kng duck.

@Mark Taylor did you try the classic stout or extra stout? Heard the extra is where the performance can be found 

Matt Budofsky said:

@Mark Taylor did you try the classic stout or extra stout? Heard the extra is where the performance can be found 

I used the Guinness Zero

GCN Tech’s ears musta been burning. Their main talking point today was why is cycling faster today. They put some numbers to it and it makes for an interesting conversation. 

I'll give it a watch, but if the answers are anything but "dude, it's doping" imma gonna roll my eyes

The TLDR is that they acknowledge that it could be doping, but basically just plug CDAs of a bike from ten years ago vs. today into mywindsock and point out that based on the fact bikes today have a lower CDA there are some pretty significant time savings. I don't think they make any wild claims or inferences of savings for say a waxed chain vs. a lubed chain, etc. Again, it doesn't provide a dispositive yes or no to anything, but putting minutes and seconds to the marginal gains rather than saying it saves X watts helps better frame the conversation in my opinion

How do I know (or why do I think?) we're back in the 90's? Articles like this - zero mention being an admitted doper/cheat. Kind of jaw dropping, to be honest.

https://www.velonews.com/news/tom-danielson-undergoes-amputation-of-finger-in-cancer-fight/

I saw that and was bothered by the strong suspicion that Andrew Hood just re-wrote Danielson's tweets.  There was no figuring out what kind of cancer it was, how common it was, and if there were known causes.

This quote is begging for follow-up questions:

Now the kids in Columbia have a chance in their local park race

Really good interview with Lemond, talks about doping quite a bit. He suggests that he thinks the sport is relatively clean now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xq5PQvBFvI

I'm glad he's talking at length again, but I find the interview pretty frustrating. If the difference between his era and today is slightly lighter riders, how are they staying so lean?

Love the idea of indemnity for people who "come clean" and name names, but how do you know if someone has confessed completely, or even accurately?

Well he does talk about the actual differences in training, and nutrition to optimize for that.