This has been an epochal week for cycling – a sport which, despite best efforts, cannot distance itself from the poisonous association with performance-enhancing drugs.
This week marked the conclusion of the investigations into the two most successful cyclists of the recent era: Lance Armstrong (winner of seven Tours de France yellow jerseys and Alberto Contador (a three-time winner).
The circumstances of the cases were very different. The Armstrong case related to fraudulent use of funding via the grants that the U.S federal government provided to Armstrong’s team US Postal.
The alleged fraud was the use of the funds to engage in illegal doping.
As we all know, Armstrong was never found with contraband in his system, despite literally thousands of tests throughout his long career. The case against Armstrong was based on evidence given by certain former teammates and staffers of US Postal who claim to have seen Armstrong use the illegal substances or methods.
I will return to the merits of this case later, but draw for now the distinction with Contador, who during the final stages of his last win at the Tour de France in 2010 was found with small traces of Clenbuturol in his system.
This week the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) upheld the appeal lodged by WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) and the UCI (the world cycling body) relating to this offence.
Thus while the circumstances and even the outcome of the two cases is somewhat different, the impact on cycling will be the same. The headlines will cement the belief in most people that the superhuman efforts we see every European summer are exactly that.
Cycling has had a long association with performance-enhancing drugs. During last year’s Tour de France, SBS aired a fascinating documentary about the life and death of Tom Simpson, Britain’s first road cyclist to wear the yellow jersey, and a famous rogue.
Simpson won the 1965 Road Race World Championship and several Classics before dying in the 13th Stage of the 1967 Tour de France from exhaustion. In the post mortem, he was found to have both amphetamine and alcohol in his system.
In that same documentary it was claimed to be common for the domestiques (in the pre-professional era) to stop on the side of the road to try to find sustenance from the roadside shop keepers, who often provided them with alcohol. This seems ridiculous now, but at the time a lot less was known about hydration, and the riders simply knew that it dulled the pain of riding up steep gradients for hours on end.
I need not name the raft of high-profile riders who have been done for drugs in the last fifteen years, save three: Tyler Hamilton, Floyd Landis and Alexander Vinokourov. These three are of special interest because two rode for Armstrong in his prime; all three have links to Dr Michele Ferrari (the disgraced doctor who looked after the US Postal team for a period) and all three have been found guilty of doping offences.
Furthermore, Hamilton and Landis now claim that Armstrong also cheated.
The primary purpose of the recently aborted U.S Federal Investigation was to get to the bottom of these fresh allegations made by former Armstrong team-mates and friends. No reason was proffered by the U.S Federal Attorney for dropping the investigation; it could have been lack of evidence but most have speculated that it was a financial decision.
Whatever the case, Armstrong’s legacy and cycling’s reputation do not benefit from the resulting ambiguity.
While Armstrong cannot be guilty by association, the associations certainly raise doubts. As of this week we probably have to accept the fact that we will simply never know. Nor will we know whether the minute traces of Clenbuturol found in Contador’s system did come from contaminated meat as he claims.
What is clear is that cycling’s image crisis continues.
Some say it is an inevitable by-product of such a physically gruelling endurance sport where the athletes are pushed to their physical limits, but that does not wash when we compare it to marathon running and Iron Man, sports which have not suffered from as many high profile doping cases.
Jimbo
Guest
amazonfan, most recreational drugs are on the WADA banned substances list regardless, so the question as to why he wasn't caught remains. (source: http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/World_Anti-Doping_Program/WADP-Prohibited-list/2012/WADA_Prohibited_List_2012_EN.pdf page7/8)
amazonfan
Roar Guru
There is nothing absurd about suggesting Cousins never took PEDS. What is absurd is assuming that since he took illicit drugs, he must therefore have taken PEDs as well. As for your point, it is extremely debatable, as indicated by the two links I provided.
sittingbison
Guest
no I am certainly not "..putting cycling on a pedestal as being the sport everyone should be looking to...", I have maintained that enthusiasts have moved on from the "death knell" when cheats were caught to appreciating that improvements have been made, the competition is obviously fairer and more honest, and that articles like this that allude to cycling being ceaselessly mired in drug controversy are outdated. As you said baseball only introduced testing in 2002, and since 2005 has 35 plus cheats with that list of great names is at least as bad as cycling s record. Further it is great that guys like Ulrich are being penalized. It has taken until now to get him because like so many others in all sports he was not caught, he is the result of Peurto, missed some random tests bla bla exactly like Basso. Interestingly none of the big Spanish names from a variety of sports associated with Peurto have been found guilty because the authorities prematurely closed the investigation. And no I do not believe and have not witnessed one other person opining that because Evans won then cycling is clean - that jingoistic kind of assertion (and it is made in other threads on different sports) is complete crap and verging on trolling, and anyone actually believing certain nations or sports or teams don't cheat is a moron. Ill say it again just to be super clear - cycling is a sport that revealed drugs were rife, they have improved the testing, they have improved their own attitude to protecting "champions", and finally the competition is becoming more even and honest. Articles like this are outdated. That is not saying cyclists don't cheat. BTW the last Olympics was in 2008, and anyone avoiding events is certainly suspicious and the modern public soon turn their backs on them.
B.A Sports
No you are implying in your posts that other sports don’t test like cycling does, and seem to be putting cycling on a pedestal as being the sport everyone should be looking to. I am not ignorant enough to think that every sport does a good job of testing or couldn’t do better, but most sports have had a steady success rate of catching the odd cheat since they introduced their testing programs. Cycling is still trying to catch guys from 5 years ago (as we saw today)! As recently as 2010 we saw many cyclists race in the Tour De France (under the drug control of the governing body) and then chose not to ride at the Olympics shortly after where they would be tested by a different body. A little suspicious... My personal opinion, everyone has their opinion on drug testing in different sports and those opinions are naturally different. Many people, in this country, appeared to have the same opinion of how poorly cycling was in trying to catch their cheats. Some people still hold those opinions, others have changed theirs, not because they have witnessed an improvement in the testing, but because an Australian won “The Tour”, and Aussies don’t cheat.... Even though our track cycling team has had its share of indiscretions over the last 20 years..
sittingbison
Guest
exactly the point BA. No testing regime in baseball and the home run records of luminaries get smashed causing a furore. With testing you say 35 players, some the biggest in the game, are done since 2005.. So why is this article and some others still saying cycling is stuck in the mire? Get with the program writers, don't just trot out and trumpet old hat or repeat blather like Lances PR.
jameswm
Guest
amazon fan you can't say Cousins never took PEDs. That's an absurd assertion. The point is that cycling tests a lot more, and is therefore doing more to clean up its act.
B.A Sports
When McGuire and Bonds used steroids (although Bonds still denies it), Major League Baseball did not have compulsory testing. Their Steroid Program did not come in until 2002. Since 2005 they have suspended more than 35 players for PED's including some of the most high profile names in the sport including A- Rod, Manny Rameriz and this years National League MVP, Ryan Braun.
B.A Sports
Peter Korda, Martina Hingis, Jenny Capriati, Andre Agassi, Richard Gasquet and a bunch of no-names you wouldn't have heard of, have all returned positive tests.
Misterphotocyclist
Guest
Well said sittingbison. Let's leave the past and concentrate on the now. I'm in favour of a take no prisoners regime. If you are caught, you're out. Swift and clear. The pros know the consequences and so do team managers.
sittingbison
Guest
The relevance is that in a ten year career concurrent with doping in cycling at its most prominent, the AFL did not manage to conduct a drug testing program of sufficient prowess to catch an addict, while the article claims cycling is iin the mire after catching it's greatest star with 4 pictograms/ltr of the well known PED clenbuterol, stripping him of two major and several minor wins, fining him $3miion and banning him from competition. None of us have any idea if Nadal or Cousins cheated because unlike the raft of cyclists caught they were never tested satisfactorily. Nadal however was caught up in Peurto before the govt canned it prematurely because of him AC and Raul, Cousins was and still is a drug addict, Bonds and McGwire sell PEDS. So much for those sports anti drug programs. This is neither irrelevant nor diversionary. This and similar articles are years behind current opinion, cycling is not in the mire or unable to extricate itself, the opposite is true they are doing everything possible, with the result that the competition is more even and the effort more honest than anytime in memory.
amazonfan
Guest
That's true. However, you can't just take someone's name out of a hat. Just as nobody is suggesting that Evans takes drugs, there isn't any evidence to suggest that Nadal does either. It's just speculation based on zero evidence. Nobody has even come out and said that they saw him injecting, for example.
amazonfan
Guest
Bob, there is no evidence that Cousins ever took PEDs. As for out of competition testing in the AFL, it is nonsensical to suggest that the AFL doesn't test cheats. ASADA conducts out-of-competition testing and does so extensively. http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/82039/default.aspx http://www.sportsnewsfirst.com.au/articles/2011/05/13/afl-drug-tests-are-all-clear/ A few highlights: "The AFL and ASADA annually review all testing options to determine the most up-to-date approach in combating the use of performance-enhancing substances." "The AFL was the first sport to pay for its own hGH, EPO and CERA testing program , after working with ASADA to examine all possible testing options and Mr Anderson said the AFL was very proud that last year ASADA described the testing program as ‘gold standard’, and would continue to examine all initiatives to maintain this rating."
Jimbo
Guest
You ignore the fact that the panel also noted that his reticulocyte count during the tour was higher than his baseline measurement, and significantly higher than his values from previous tours - which seems odd in the extreme from a physiological perspective. As the report notes, however, the appellants in the case (WADA) were unable to to argue the merits of the blood doping case, as the only subject matter in the appeal was how the clenbuterol entered Contador's body, and blood passport values were not considered relevant - hence WADA did not want to prove per se that a blood transfusion occurred, only that it was more likely than contaminated meat (Here is the report: http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/5648/5048/0/FINAL20AWARD202012.02.06.pdf; check from page 73 onward) Additionally, Contador could have had a blood transfusion on the 20th (causing the presence of plasticisers), and a plasma transfusion on the 21st to dilute the blood to maintain a normal blood profile (plasma doesn't need to be stored in a DHEP bag) which would have caused the clenbuterol spike, but not the plasticiser spike. (see page 81 of the report) My problem is that, given the steak scenario was considered equally implausible, the question remains how did the clenbuterol enter his system? The contaminated supplement scenario falls down in that as the report itself notes, there would have been a high likelihood that at least one of his team mates would have tested positive if the supplements were contaminated, and additionally, Contador approached the supplement manufacturers and confirmed that none store prohibited substances in their warehouses, all undertake independent testing of their products with no adverse findings reported, and none have ever been blamed for an athlete's positive test.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
"Hmmm, I thought I said "...did they ever catch Ben Cousins at anything?" can't see anything about accusing of using PEDs." I thought this thread was about performance-enhancing drugs. If you want to bring up irrelevant issues, then maybe we should talk about pro cycling scheduling. That's as relevant as Cousins. I could also say (I don't actually believe this) that the Tour de France is too long, which is also as relevant as Cousins. Oh, and in your examples you also spoke of footy players being juiced up, so don't act so shocked that I would presume you were talking about PEDS, especially since I had presumed that you wouldn't bring up irrelevent topics and that you would stick to the topic at hand. "What is known is that he is an addict who has very publicly been in rehab, so a very legitimate question is why wasnt he caught by the AFL program." But how is this relevant?! "Especially as the authorities like telling us how "recreational" drugs stay in the system for extended periods. Highly relevant." No, it's not. You're doing this as a diversionary tactic, except you're overlooking one important thing: Cousins, unlike Contador & numerous other cyclists, did NOT cheat. "BTW the AFL is not a Holy Cow absolved of criticism" I never said it was, however you are criticizing it for something that has nothing to do with the article. You may as well criticize the ICC for their attitude towards chucking. They aren't a holy cow absolved of criticism. Oh, and the Tour de France is far too long!
sittingbison
Guest
That's the point really, tennis doesn't have a history of drug use because scandalously they haven't ever had a program. Perhaps you should do some research into Operacion Peurto and who was implicated before the authorities became petrified at the names and closed it down prematurely and blanket absolving said names
sittingbison
Guest
Hmmm, I thought I said "...did they ever catch Ben Cousins at anything?" can't see anything about accusing of using PEDs. What is known is that he is an addict who has very publicly been in rehab, so a very legitimate question is why wasnt he caught by the AFL program. Especially as the authorities like telling us how "recreational" drugs stay in the system for extended periods. Highly relevant. BTW the AFL is not a Holy Cow absolved of criticism
Bob
Guest
You have no idea if he took PEDs. Nor does anyone else except for him and his trainer. That's the point cyclists try to make - no other sport tests anywhere nearly as rigorously, so no other sport will find the drug cheats. Take a look at the ATP or AFL stats for out of competition testing in the last year - how on earth do they expect to catch cheats if they don't test them?
Bob
Guest
You might have a point, if they had not also tested him the day before and found no clenbuterol in his system. The DHEP was found the day before, not that day. So the transfusion story doesn't work, either. I have no doubt he doped in a general sense, but I doubt he deliberately doped with clenbuterol.
amazonfan
Guest
Ben Cousins never took performance enhancing drugs. If you are going to criticize the AFL, you should at least criticize something that is of relevance.
sittingbison
Guest
errmmmm....no, that is not what I said - "...riders are being caught, sentences are being meted out...". Too many commentators keep perpetuating the ideology that cycling is riddled with drug cheats and every rider caught is shock gasp horror the death knell of the sport, when in fact most enthusiasts now believe that enhanced testing and the fact that cheats are being found and banned even when champions is actually good for the sport - the result has been much more competitive competition with honest performance. But yes, some other sports could definitely try harder to catch cheats, and for the past 10 years when cycling was taking a hammering many were in fact not trying at all ergo nobody got caught. If the average footy fan thinks the super bulked up players from 1980 to 2000 were not juiced to the eyeballs, then think again. As to the efficacy of the current AFL testing regimen, did they ever catch Ben Cousins at anything? This would be the same Ben Cousins that is a self confessed drug addict, and been in rehab at least twice, and has had numerous drug related issues. Baseball and gridiron? Soccer?