Yet Another Cycling Forum

General Category => Freewheeling => Racing => Topic started by: gonzo on July 21, 2009, 10:07:56 pm

Title: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: gonzo on July 21, 2009, 10:07:56 pm
People will be coming up to us, as 'the cyclist' for weeks to come and saying; "that Wiggins, what's he on then?"

Can we provide a concise list of reasons why Wiggo is clean?
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Wowbagger on July 21, 2009, 10:10:02 pm
I anticipate being able to count people coming up to me to ask this question on the fingers of 0 hands.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: andygates on July 21, 2009, 10:11:50 pm
"A natural high, man, he's on a natural high."

or

"Alli! Why don't you try it?"   :demon:
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: simonp on July 21, 2009, 10:14:00 pm
The drugs in cycling thing is unlikely to come up unless I mention cycling.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Really Ancien on July 21, 2009, 10:32:18 pm
Because it is one of the things that motivates him, and it's making news across the world, here's a Pennsyslvania paper, Wiggins: Drug-free riders can win race notebook | Sports | timesleader.com - The Times Leader  (http://www.timesleader.com/sports/Wiggins__Drug-free_riders_can_win_race_notebook_07-12-2009.html)
Bradley's always been keen on a drink, and he's given that up. He looks like he might be a bit of a pothead, but he'll have given that up, if that was ever his thing. His team voluntarily undergoes 20 times more tests than are stipulated.

Damon.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: ChrisO on July 21, 2009, 10:33:34 pm
The Garmin team seems to be generally regarded as one of the ultra-clean squads, even by journalists etc who are plugged in to the various rumours about other riders and teams.

I believe they voluntarily set up their own biological testing programme from the beginning - similar to what now operates as the biological passport.

Apart from that it isn't like Wiggins has suddenly turned from no-hoper domestique to champion overnight. He is a triple Olympic gold medallist after all.

Edit: Should add that I don't regard the testing as proof in itself. The number of known dopers who never tested positive is rather alarming. However the fact that the team set up the testing programme and their general attitude against doping is the more important factor.

I suspect some teams do what they have to do and no more, and are still probably quite happy to turn a blind eye, operating on the principle that getting caught doping is the worst offence.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: teethgrinder on July 21, 2009, 10:55:22 pm
If anyone asks me, I shall produce a blister strip of placebo and reply, "Summa deez man, joo wanna buy for twenny quid a go?"

I feel n+1 coming on.
Soon I shall be armed with new titanium cycling weaponry. 8)
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Rich753 on July 21, 2009, 11:14:30 pm
Unfortunately we don't know Wiggins is clean.

Many of us believe strongly that he is, but we don't have access to real data.

It's a faith thing  ;D
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: DuncanM on July 21, 2009, 11:41:06 pm
The other thing that we know is that the UK track squad is well run and tested a lot.  And that there's no money in track cycling, so the liklihood of it being worth paying for the "sports doctors" and "medicine" necessary to dope properly is slim.

That said, ultimately, it is faith.  I have more faith in UK track and Garmin than I do in the rest of the tour teams...
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: LEE on July 21, 2009, 11:53:11 pm
Unfortunately we don't know Wiggins is clean.

Many of us believe strongly that he is, but we don't have access to real data.

It's a faith thing  ;D

All I can be sure of is that I want him to be clean.

Until someone proves otherwise and I mean PROVES, rather than some French journalist's bitter allegations, then he's clean in my eyes.

I would say that his extraordinary improvment in performance is so great that he's need to be stupid to take drugs and perform so well.  It's just too obvious.

Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: andygates on July 22, 2009, 09:09:27 am
Which, alas, hasn't stopped plenty of others in other years. ::-)
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: MSeries on July 22, 2009, 09:22:13 am
Unfortunately we don't know Wiggins is clean.

Many of us believe strongly that he is, but we don't have access to real data.

It's a faith thing  ;D

All I can be sure of is that I want him to be clean.

Until someone proves otherwise and I mean PROVES, rather than some French journalist's bitter allegations, then he's clean in my eyes.

I would say that his extraordinary improvment in performance is so great that he's need to be stupid to take drugs and perform so well.  It's just too obvious.


The only proof we are going to get is a positive test. Alas for some here, the opposite is not acceptable, negative tests does not mean clean it seems. 
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Seineseeker on July 22, 2009, 10:14:07 am
Who knows? It seems to me that cycling has been through the mill on the doping front. They've got the biological passports now, and there doesn't seem to be much else they can do. So just forget about it, move on, enjoy the drama, and wonder (ahem!) and how Contador can take 40 seconds out of the field in 5km!
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: MSeries on July 22, 2009, 10:16:38 am
Who knows? It seems to me that cycling has been through the mill on the doping front. They've got the biological passports now, and there doesn't seem to be much else they can do. So just forget about it, move on, enjoy the drama, and wonder (ahem!) and how Contador can take 40 seconds out of the field in 5km!
Yup.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: pcolbeck on July 22, 2009, 10:17:02 am
The only proof we are going to get is a positive test. Alas for some here, the opposite is not acceptable, negative tests does not mean clean it seems.  
Very true. It also seems to depend for a lot of people (and the cycling press) on if they like the rider in question or not. Bradley Wiggins is clean because he's not failed a dope test but Lance must be doping even though he has never failed a test.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: MSeries on July 22, 2009, 10:19:27 am
It's what I was saying a few days ago
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Moloko on July 22, 2009, 10:21:47 am

Hope that wasn't 'roid rage' when he was punching the team van.   ;D
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: MSeries on July 22, 2009, 10:22:52 am
Chalfonts ?
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Moloko on July 22, 2009, 10:25:47 am

He has been getting out of the saddle a lot lately though, hasn't he?
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: vorsprung on July 22, 2009, 10:29:21 am
If you read his biography you will see that his father, who was a track rider in the 60s was fucked up by the amphetamines that he took to perform during the 6 day events.  He is anti drug because he is aware of the harm that they do.  Most riders just see the positive side of doping.

Also as everyone else has said his team Garmin are not a hot bed of doping and are widely regarded as a clean team

Thirdly, my personal take on Pro cycling at the moment is that the dopers are not winning the battle of avoiding detection, so less riders are doping.  Therefore clean riders can keep up on mountain top finishes

We don't know for absolute certain that he isn't doping but it is highly unlikely
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: MSeries on July 22, 2009, 10:31:13 am

He has been getting out of the saddle a lot lately though, hasn't he?

Maybe it's the other way round, maybe Preparation H makes one a good climber. I thought it was a coincidence but my climbing has also improved this year...
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Seineseeker on July 22, 2009, 10:36:39 am
To be honest what annoys me is people saying we know so and so is clean because..... (and usually it's because we like them for some reason).  We don't know if they are clean, we just know that some of them aren't when they fail a test.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: MSeries on July 22, 2009, 10:38:37 am
To be honest what annoys me is people saying we know so and so is clean because..... (and usually it's because we like them for some reason).  We don't know if they are clean, we just know that some of them aren't when they fail a test.
Indeed. Innocent until proven guilty ?. Not here it seems.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Seineseeker on July 22, 2009, 10:40:48 am
To be honest what annoys me is people saying we know so and so is clean because..... (and usually it's because we like them for some reason).  We don't know if they are clean, we just know that some of them aren't when they fail a test.
Indeed. Innocent until proven guilty ?. Not here it seems.

I'm afraid that's how it is. Doesn't really stop my enjoyment of the race though, at least these days I think some if not many riders are clean now.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: ChrisO on July 22, 2009, 01:39:14 pm
To be honest what annoys me is people saying we know so and so is clean because..... (and usually it's because we like them for some reason).  We don't know if they are clean, we just know that some of them aren't when they fail a test.
Indeed. Innocent until proven guilty ?. Not here it seems.

Why do you keep going on about "not here" . It isn't just here, it's through the whole of cycling in case you hadn't noticed.

There are plenty of cycling journalists and followers who are happy to help point fingers, and it has frequently been the case that the people and teams who have rumours about them are the ones who later get found out. It's perfectly legitimate to suggest that if you associate with people - directors, trainers, doctors etc - who are tainted by doping then it increases both the suspicion and the likelihood that you are also involved in it.

Among the people who never failed a dope test are:
Bjarne Riis
David Millar
Marco Pantani

Add to that the comments from Bernard Kohl about the way teams are using the biological passport to help avoid being caught.

Like you I'm also not particularly bothered about it - I just enjoy the racing and it is phenomenal, whether they are taking drugs or not. But to make out that people are being unneccessarily suspicious about riders who haven't failed tests is just ignoring established facts.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: MSeries on July 22, 2009, 01:47:19 pm
To be honest what annoys me is people saying we know so and so is clean because..... (and usually it's because we like them for some reason).  We don't know if they are clean, we just know that some of them aren't when they fail a test.
Indeed. Innocent until proven guilty ?. Not here it seems.

Why do you keep going on about "not here" . It isn't just here, it's through the whole of cycling in case you hadn't noticed.


Why shouldn't I express my view ? Of course I have noticed that views here are same as those that the written media have.

I am not making out ttat "people are being unnecessarily suspicious about riders who haven't failed tests". I am saying that rules are rules and until they are broken they are not broken. I have never said I think rider X is clean. Ever.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: onb on July 22, 2009, 01:49:25 pm
To be honest what annoys me is people saying we know so and so is clean because..... (and usually it's because we like them for some reason).  We don't know if they are clean, we just know that some of them aren't when they fail a test.
Indeed. Innocent until proven guilty ?. Not here it seems.

Why do you keep going on about "not here" . It isn't just here, it's through the whole of cycling in case you hadn't noticed.

There are plenty of cycling journalists and followers who are happy to help point fingers, and it has frequently been the case that the people and teams who have rumours about them are the ones who later get found out. It's perfectly legitimate to suggest that if you associate with people - directors, trainers, doctors etc - who are tainted by doping then it increases both the suspicion and the likelihood that you are also involved in it.

Among the people who never failed a dope test are:
Bjarne Riis
David Millar
Marco Pantani

Add to that the comments from Bernard Kohl about the way teams are using the biological passport to help avoid being caught.

Like you I'm also not particularly bothered about it - I just enjoy the racing and it is phenomenal, whether they are taking drugs or not. But to make out that people are being unneccessarily suspicious about riders who haven't failed tests is just ignoring established facts.

Pantani failed a test for crit levels during the Giro one year.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: bobb on July 22, 2009, 01:52:30 pm
If you read his biography you will see that his father, who was a track rider in the 60s was fucked up by the amphetamines that he took to perform during the 6 day events.

I know this is way off topic, but what ever happened with his father's mysterious death?
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: DuncanM on July 22, 2009, 01:54:53 pm
Crit levels were a "safety check" remember? ;)
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: mattc on July 22, 2009, 02:16:04 pm
It's perfectly legitimate to suggest that if you associate with people - directors, trainers, doctors etc - who are tainted by doping then it increases both the suspicion and the likelihood that you are also involved in it.


Those 2 are very different things. You really should differentiate between them better.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: ChrisO on July 22, 2009, 02:29:38 pm
It's perfectly legitimate to suggest that if you associate with people - directors, trainers, doctors etc - who are tainted by doping then it increases both the suspicion and the likelihood that you are also involved in it.


Those 2 are very different things. You really should differentiate between them better.

Well spotted - that's why I used two different words.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: ChrisO on July 22, 2009, 02:38:50 pm
To be honest what annoys me is people saying we know so and so is clean because..... (and usually it's because we like them for some reason).  We don't know if they are clean, we just know that some of them aren't when they fail a test.
Indeed. Innocent until proven guilty ?. Not here it seems.

Why do you keep going on about "not here" . It isn't just here, it's through the whole of cycling in case you hadn't noticed.


Why shouldn't I express my view ? Of course I have noticed that views here are same as those that the written media have.

I am not making out ttat "people are being unnecessarily suspicious about riders who haven't failed tests". I am saying that rules are rules and until they are broken they are not broken. I have never said I think rider X is clean. Ever.

"until they are broken they are not broken"

So you can take banned substances but until you are caught you haven't broken the rules ?

If you aren't prepared to say that riders are clean then I don't see it as logical to also claim that everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

If someone cheats then they are a cheat whether they get found out or not.

It's the difference between being Not Guilty in a legal sense and Innocent in a moral sense.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: MSeries on July 22, 2009, 02:56:48 pm
You are putting words into my mouth now ChrisO. Morality ? This is professional sport. It up to the officials to decide what is right and wrong. You may of course disagree with that, I happen to wish to let them get on with their job, while I get on with mine. That's all.

Are you prepared to say rider X is clean ? I mean for sure ? not just you think or you hope ? How will you be sure ?

My underlying view is that no one is above suspicion and testing is the right way to find them out. The current tests are not good enough, they never have been and never will be but it has to be testable.  people will take all sorts of potions, they need to know what will and what will not show up on a test.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: mattc on July 22, 2009, 03:15:15 pm
It's perfectly legitimate to suggest that if you associate with people - directors, trainers, doctors etc - who are tainted by doping then it increases both the suspicion and the likelihood that you are also involved in it.


Those 2 are very different things. You really should differentiate between them better.

Well spotted - that's why I used two different words.
I know, but you did put them very close together - which increased the likelihood of you treating them the same ;)
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: LEE on July 22, 2009, 03:34:50 pm
Unless I use my criteria of "Innocent until provent guilty" then watching any competetive sport is pointless for me.

If a rider (or any sports person) has never been found guilty of cheating then, in my book, they never cheated.  I can happily watch them compete.

If someone is found guilty of cheating then, in my book, they probably always cheated.  I can happily forget about them forever in that case.

Nobody on this forum knows who, amongst all the 'clean' riders, is cheating or not.  It's all speculation and/or favouritism.  I couldn't watch sport if I was constantly speculating (or, more accurately, guessing) about who was cheating.  Once you start along that path then the sport is totally devalued and you may as well watch horse-racing.  At least with horse-racing you know for sure it's all corrupt.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: ChrisO on July 22, 2009, 03:48:12 pm
As if to neatly support my point about associations and rumours... Danilo di Luca has been suspended today for positive test during this year's Giro.

He was previously suspended for three months in 2007 not for failing a dope test but for working with a doctor who had been found guilty of supplying banned substances.

Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: matthew on July 22, 2009, 03:49:36 pm
We know Wiggins is clean because...








Spoiler









He has been dropped by Contador on the penultimate climb 




Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: gonzo on July 23, 2009, 02:26:54 pm
As I said earlier, Wiggins hasn't been implicated in a single doping scandal. Riders are always implicated before they get caught.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Seineseeker on July 23, 2009, 02:47:39 pm
Was Millar implicated before he got busted?

Though I do think that's a good point.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: DuncanM on July 23, 2009, 02:53:10 pm
Cofidis of that era were a bit dodgy.  That was why the police raided his flat...
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: gonzo on July 25, 2009, 05:12:41 pm
Interestingly:
Wiggins, in stark contrast to Simpson, is riding clean and is prepared to demonstrate it in wholly unprecedented ways. He's now asked the UCI, cycling's governing body, to publish his blood values taken for their biological passport programme – an anti-doping system that monitors riders' physiological data.

The data will be available on Monday, as will all his results from his team's internal testing programme.


            Bradley Wiggins: 'Tom will be watching over me on Ventoux' -
            Others, More Sports - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/others/bradley-wiggins-tom-will-be-watching-over-me-on-ventoux-1760541.html)

Going out of his way to get his bio data published? Clearly a mark of a doper ;)
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Moloko on July 25, 2009, 09:11:29 pm

He's the best puncher on the Tour.
He gave that twat a nice dig in the ribs.

Nice one Wiggo.  :thumbsup:
They're not fans, just moronic twats.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: gonzo on July 25, 2009, 11:12:10 pm

He's the best puncher on the Tour.
He gave that twat a nice dig in the ribs.

Nice one Wiggo.  :thumbsup:
They're not fans, just moronic twats.

What happened?
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Moloko on July 26, 2009, 06:48:26 pm

He's the best puncher on the Tour.
He gave that twat a nice dig in the ribs.

Nice one Wiggo.  :thumbsup:
They're not fans, just moronic twats.

What happened?

About 2k from the top when he was hanging on for dear life, an idiot ran out in front of him.
Luckily it never broke his rhythm. But Wiggo swung at the pleb and caught him.
This was on the live filming and it was in the background of the filming - as the camera was on
the others. I just glimpsed it quite by chance.
It was omitted from the highlights.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: ChrisO on July 27, 2009, 10:46:08 am
This may be, in fact probably is, total bollocks but...

A poster on the Eurosport forum was claiming that he was involved in the testing and that several top riders are likely to either have results announced against them or at least have the finger of suspicion pointed based on their biological profiles.

He alleges that it is two out of Armstrong, Wiggins and Vande Velde, and also one of the other top 7 riders - so Contador, the Schlecks, Nibali and Kloden.

Claimed he works for either AFLD or UCI and that they are letting info leak out to contradict various public positions, and that it will be confirmed once the dust has settled in 6-8 weeks due partly to political and financial pressure.

Personally I think it is total crap, particularly in regard to Garmin, and judging by his other posts he knows f-all about cycling.

But it is odd nevertheless that there've been no positives this year - from what Bernard Kohl was saying it is still widespread. I suspect the final results have not been set in stone yet.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: clarion on July 27, 2009, 10:50:04 am
There are a lot of self-aggrandising bullshitters on the interwebs.  It's entirely possible that some tests have been 'not passed', and by prominent riders, too, but, until the announcements are made, I think it's best not to speculate who.

FWIW, I felt that the way the race was pretty closely fought almost right to the end indicated a probably fairer contest than we've seen in some previous years.

And, whatever I may think of his previous rides, I am prepared to believe that LA was clean this year, unless I hear of tests that show otherwise.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Hot Flatus on July 27, 2009, 10:57:21 am
But it is odd nevertheless that there've been no positives this year - from what Bernard Kohl was saying it is still widespread. I suspect the final results have not been set in stone yet.

It took a couple of months for di Luca's Giro positive to be revealed.  I think we'll be seeing some in september.  At a guess I'd say some deal has been reached not to have exposes during or soon after the Tour, because too many and there won't be another Tour.

If you listen to what the testers have been saying over the previous 6 months, they planned to target those riders with suspect passports. IIRC they even gave a number of suspect riders.  

Astana seemed to get tested quite a lot didn't they.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Moloko on July 27, 2009, 11:07:11 am

More post-race podium shuffling?
It's not fair on GruB.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: gonzo on July 27, 2009, 02:40:29 pm
This may be, in fact probably is, total bollocks but...

A poster on the Eurosport forum was claiming that he was involved in the testing and that several top riders are likely to either have results announced against them or at least have the finger of suspicion pointed based on their biological profiles.

He alleges that it is two out of Armstrong, Wiggins and Vande Velde, and also one of the other top 7 riders - so Contador, the Schlecks, Nibali and Kloden.

Claimed he works for either AFLD or UCI and that they are letting info leak out to contradict various public positions, and that it will be confirmed once the dust has settled in 6-8 weeks due partly to political and financial pressure.

Personally I think it is total crap, particularly in regard to Garmin, and judging by his other posts he knows f-all about cycling.

But it is odd nevertheless that there've been no positives this year - from what Bernard Kohl was saying it is still widespread. I suspect the final results have not been set in stone yet.


I don't suppose you've got the original post?
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Basil on July 27, 2009, 04:27:05 pm

Claimed he works for either AFLD or UCI....<snip>

Quote
.... and judging by his other posts he knows f-all about cycling.


That bit seems to make sense.  :demon:
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Hot Flatus on July 27, 2009, 11:41:16 pm
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/afld-president-suspects-new-drugs-in-peloton (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/afld-president-suspects-new-drugs-in-peloton)
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: mr endon on July 27, 2009, 11:56:59 pm
Contador's a bit squeaky voiced. Coincidence?
You decide: YouTube - Mighty Mouse - Genetically Modified Mice (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6oxXwBsD1U)
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Tewdric on July 27, 2009, 11:58:24 pm
I have a sneaking feeling that Lance will eventually be the winner of this tour.  I just hope that Bradley is clean.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Hot Flatus on July 28, 2009, 12:03:51 am
I'm just amazed how, if the AFLD boss is correct, riders can get hold of these new drugs that are still in testing phases at the pharma companies and still years away from release.  

Money really talks.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: ChrisO on July 28, 2009, 05:02:46 am


I don't suppose you've got the original post?

No, sorry, it was in the chat that goes with the live text commentary for each stage and it doesn't seem to be accessible after the day.

The AFLD comments are interesting too. I have more faith in them than in the UCI - too much of a conflict of interest.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: vorsprung on July 28, 2009, 11:09:26 am
I'm just amazed how, if the AFLD boss is correct, riders can get hold of these new drugs that are still in testing phases at the pharma companies and still years away from release.  

Money really talks.

A 5 minute google search finds this link apparently selling AICAR

TRC | Product Details (http://www.trc-canada.com/details.php?CatNumber=A611700)

Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Kathy on July 28, 2009, 11:33:28 am
More post-race podium shuffling?

This sums up the whole problem I have with the TdF. Yes, as a day out it's really really exciting to watch and cheer yourself hoarse, but at home, I see no point watching it on the TV (apart from the humorous crashes). There's no defined "end" to the race: someone finishes the race, but final positions aren't decided for months until all the tests, scandals and appeals are over. It means that I can't look at the podium and say "Wow! Contador came first, Shleck second and Armstrong third." It means I think "Oh, was Sunday the last day of the cycling? Oh well, we won't know for sure who *really* won for a few months yet" and it's all a bit of an anti-climax.

 :-\
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Hot Flatus on July 28, 2009, 01:24:28 pm
I'm just amazed how, if the AFLD boss is correct, riders can get hold of these new drugs that are still in testing phases at the pharma companies and still years away from release.  

Money really talks.

A 5 minute google search finds this link apparently selling AICAR

TRC | Product Details (http://www.trc-canada.com/details.php?CatNumber=A611700)



Not thinking so much in terms of that, but Hematide
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: Bledlow on July 28, 2009, 01:41:33 pm

He's the best puncher on the Tour.
He gave that twat a nice dig in the ribs.

Nice one Wiggo.  :thumbsup:
They're not fans, just moronic twats.

What happened?

About 2k from the top when he was hanging on for dear life, an idiot ran out in front of him.
Luckily it never broke his rhythm. But Wiggo swung at the pleb and caught him.
This was on the live filming and it was in the background of the filming - as the camera was on
the others. I just glimpsed it quite by chance.
It was omitted from the highlights.
I think the French police have the right attitude to this. IIRC it's something like - "A cyclist punched you? How did you get within his reach? Piss off before we think of something to arrest you for."
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: citoyen on July 28, 2009, 09:55:58 pm
This may be, in fact probably is, total bollocks but...

Yep. Total and utter sloblock.

d.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: gonzo on July 31, 2009, 12:52:39 pm
Wiggins blood profiles from the last year now released. He's working on getting data since 2003 published according to Twitter.

Does this make him the first athlete to voluntarily do so?

Who's going to follow his example?

edit - Nope, Armstrong's been doing it too.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: woollypigs on July 31, 2009, 02:15:21 pm
I have just accepted that that in my favorite sports there is some sort of drug use.

Be it energy drink/bars, food that gives you more carbs pr kg than other stuff, etc etc etc. All the stuff that they eat has been made to make them less dehydrated, gives them a boost, sugar rush, run for longer or what ever it does to make them win. It is all chemicals and drugs if you look at it that way :)

And they also taking pain killers to cover for the aches and pains, that for us others would have us off the bike, playing field much much earlier. Ain't that drug use?

And then there is the plain old stubbornness that makes them run, ride or jump tru' the pain barrier or over the "I can't be arsed" wall. Which when I see that wall, I stop and have a rest, not pot of energy stuf and pain killers and go come on you old git you just gotta.

If someone wants to cheat they will cheat and will find a loop hole in the system being that with or without the passport.

My favorite drugs atm is gummy bears *) and chocolate milk, gets me up and over Col d'Aspin :) Though the pro's gets up and over in 3rd of that time, but hey I'm happy I had a god ride.

*) just look at the E number in that, if that is not classified as drugs then I don't know what drugs is.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: vorsprung on July 31, 2009, 02:49:36 pm
It is all chemicals and drugs if you look at it that way :)

Nah, you are wrong

EPO alters the thickness of your blood in quite a radical way.  This is quite dangerous and has caused several deaths.  It gives a significant advantage in power.
Many of the other hormone products they use are altering the body to recover too quickly and have potential side effects that are pretty bad

You can't compare stuff like that to taking a neurophen, a couple of expressos, or a mars bar.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: woollypigs on July 31, 2009, 02:52:22 pm
oops my bad, but hey what do I know, I just like to ride my bike
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: citoyen on July 31, 2009, 03:39:56 pm
Be it energy drink/bars, food that gives you more carbs pr kg than other stuff, etc etc etc.

Not to mention the equipment - lighter, more aerodynamic bikes, skinsuits, aero helmets, etc.

And as for the better training methods they use these days...  ;)

d.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: ChrisO on July 31, 2009, 05:45:48 pm
Be it energy drink/bars, food that gives you more carbs pr kg than other stuff, etc etc etc.

Not to mention the equipment - lighter, more aerodynamic bikes, skinsuits, aero helmets, etc.


But it's quite simple. That stuff is allowed and the other stuff isn't.

Various things may well enhance their performance - the prohibition is not on getting better or doing things better, it is on specific and named drugs.

Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: citoyen on July 31, 2009, 07:49:36 pm
But it's quite simple. That stuff is allowed and the other stuff isn't.

Well, you can look at it in those black and white terms but they keep changing the rules about what equipment is and isn't allowed, and the arms race in bike building is always one step ahead of the regulators in much the same way that the drugs labs are always one step ahead of the testers.

Just look at swimming - some of the new hi-tech swimsuits aren't technically illegal but does that mean it's entirely fair for swimmers to use them? It's a grey area, and one that has often affected cycling too.

Of course, there are other reasons for banning "performance enhancing" drugs, such as the health implications that Vorsprung mentions, but surely the main aim of the regulations of any competitive sport, besides keeping the competitors alive and safe, is to ensure a reasonably level playing field?

d.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: gonzo on July 31, 2009, 07:53:26 pm
Well, you can look at it in those black and white terms but they keep changing the rules about what equipment is and isn't allowed, and the arms race in bike building is always one step ahead of the regulators in much the same way that the drugs labs are always one step ahead of the testers.

I'm not sure that's entirely true. The UCI like banning stuff that's been used for a long time or suddenly re-interpreting a rule.

By your definition, is it unfair that some riders have more time to train than others?

There has to be a line somewhere or they wouldn't even be on bikes!
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: citoyen on July 31, 2009, 10:58:38 pm
By your definition, is it unfair that some riders have more time to train than others?

There has to be a line somewhere or they wouldn't even be on bikes!

Yeah, of course, it's all about drawing lines and making sometimes fairly arbitrary decisions. If I wanted to push the argument to ridiculous extremes, I could say that Team GB had an unfair advantage in the Olympics because they had Brailsford coaching them. But that would be silly.

Thing is, sportspeople are always looking for ways to get a competitive advantage over their rivals, whether it be within the rules or - if they think they can get away with it - by breaking the rules. There are lots of aids to improving performance that aren't banned, so why are "performance enhancing" drugs banned? It's not necessarily because they enhance performance - as Chris said, the prohibition is not on getting better or doing things better - but those are the reasons for taking drugs, so the question of which aids to performance are considered fair and which aren't is very relevant to the point Woolly was making.

So how do you decide where to draw the line? Besides the health issues, you have to weigh up the ethical arguments and make moral decisions based on whatever notions of fairness and sporting ethics you are guided by.

d.
Title: Re: We know Wiggins is clean because...
Post by: ChrisO on August 02, 2009, 05:54:56 pm
Smutchin your point is reasonable if we are talking about what's fair - and that's probably how FINA got into such a mess over the swimsuits and the UCI over the Hour record.

But when it comes to drugs there is a list of substances which are banned.

I didn't mean it was quite simple morally - I meant it was quite simple factually.

It's not a loophole, it's not a grey area. Nobody who takes this stuff can be in any doubt that they are quite simply cheating the rules.

Someone who uses a new swimsuit or food or helmet or can afford to train at altitude etc might choose to wrestle with their inner Corinthian spirit but that's a different argument altogether and there's no point introducing it to the drugs discussion in my view.