zero doping – cero dopaje

August 2, 2010

Europeans Championships 2010 Barcelona – Great sport but the shadow of doping!

Filed under: Athletes — Tags: , , , — admin @ 1:02 pm

Thankfully the Championships at Barcelona passed off without serious drug incidents, to reveal what sport is really about – exciting racing! – and epic battles in some of the jumps, and middle distance races, showed how good drug free sport can be.

It also revealed the long shadows and contrasts, never more stark than in the ladies 1500m. Lisa Dobriskey has made her views known and rightly so!

Two athletes she lined up against:

Take Anna Alminova who  is coming off a 3-month drug ban for  taking a “cold medicine” – I assume ephedrine. Too many Russian women have been busted for drugs the last few years – take the urine substitution scandal at Bejing.  Thus dominating performances raise eyebrows. 

When Tim Hutchings and the international broadcasters openly raised their suspicions on the broadcast: stating that her performance in the paris diamond league, was not just “good” they  wondered whether it was “too good” – the fastest time for years. So the question remains was it real?

And the diamond league shows another dark contrast – with another athlete who beat Lisa Dobriskey that day Frenchwoman Hind Dehiba, a convicted drug cheat who finished ahead of dobriskey.

You cannot help but wonder why both of them – Alminova and Dehiba – have been allowed into diamond league events at all  when Dwain Chambers is  not.

There is clear double standards on the part of the French.

Then take Oliveira Jevtic in the marathon, whose crime is ostensibly the same as alminova, a 3 month ban for a cold cure imposed at the New York marathon, who Paula Radcliffe remarked in commentary  was barred from the big city marathons seemingly as a result – and had no options but to race in championships. An indefinite ban, If I understood what Paula said correctly that is.

My clear statement to organisers. Double standards do not help.

Clear rules, that apply to all. No exceptions, no preferential treatment. A ban that is served, is the record wiped clean. The question over how long the ban should be is a separate issue completely. And whatever is decided it must apply to all – regardless of country or local olympic association.

But well done Barcelona! Some great races and competitions – that will go down in the memories of all who saw them.

From the wonderful gesture of Jesus Espana welcoming Mo Farrar as new 5000  champion, to the tears of Blanca Vlasic , when finally getting ahead in a red hot jump competition that kept all on their seats. Too many memories to pick just one!!

July 28, 2010

The doping rules must be the same, even for Dwain Chambers

Filed under: Athletes — Tags: , , — admin @ 2:10 pm

I am no fan of drug cheats.  Zero doping . Zero tolerance.

But theres the rub. The rules must be the rules whoever you are. Whether you come from spain, UK or colombia, the doping rules must be the same.

And there is the problem. To the disgrace of himself, and all associated with him Dwain Chambers cheated. No doubt about it, and was not as contrite as he should have been.

A ban is a ban, is a ban. If the rule says  Two years is  the penalty. Two years must be imposed. Not a day less. Not a day more, and there it must end.

Can it be right that only because he lives in the UK Dwain Chambers will be prevented from olympic competition. Or that he is excluded from Golden League?

Whatever the rule is, it must be the same for everyone. If EVERYBODY is excluded from olympic competition, so must dwain. Or all must be allowed to compete.  The sport must choose. But it cannot depend on where you live – and it cannot be arbitrary either.

This arbitrary power of the BOA is a throwback, to the days of “gentlemen in blazers” controlling sport. It must now be professional. Have rules. And stick to them. Regardless of who you are or where you come from.  If you are danish or spanish or english, it must be the same tests, The same ban. The same right to compete.

It is a completely separate issue whether we have a lifetime ban. If we do – it must be for all. Not just Dwain.

When is a drug not a drug?

Filed under: Athletes — Tags: , , , , — admin @ 11:45 am

I am confused.

Read the story as it was reported in media:

“The Jamaican Shelly-Ann Fraser, the Olympic and world 100-meter champion, withdrew from a Diamond League meet after her club said she failed a doping test in May. Bruce James, president of the MVP Track and Field Club, said it was a “minor doping violation” caused by taking medication to treat a “toothache.” James told The Telegraph of Britain that the drug was the painkiller Oxycodone, banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency, but not listed as performance-enhancing or as a masking agent”

Surely WADA is about peformance enhancement or attempts to mask such drugs and practises.

So why is a drug banned which does not enhance? Or if it does enhance  why is it not listed as such?-  It is greyness that gives rise to ambiguity, gives rise to controversy.

And if this is just a toothache remedy, why are we penalizing athletes for this? It reminds me of the day Elana Meyer was deemed to have violated by virtue of drinking too much coffee!!

Black and White.

There must be rules,  rules with a proven purpose and background. And black and white adherence to them. Grey will always be a problem.

It is not just about the technical ins and outs – it is about keeping the public onside and supportive.

July 18, 2010

Should I be Worried about Lance?

Filed under: Athletes — Tags: , , , — admin @ 1:06 am

The tour de france seemed to be going so well. No revelations this time. And I am hoping that the likes of Vinikourov have learned their lessons and will not be so stupid as to risk capture again.

But a dark cloud is gathering.

It seems the federal authorities in the USA are taking Floyd Landis’s allegations seriously.

The same man who headed up the investigation into BALCO laboratories will now be examining evidence arising from the Landis revelations.

Clearly Landis is not the best of witnesses. You cannot strenuously deny allegations of doping for so many years THEN be taken seriously when you say “OK, I did it, and all these others are cheating too…”

They say that some other US postal riders are willing to cooperate (although this maybe heresay) – the federal authorities have also said they are only interested in team leaders.

Surely THAT is a defence that has not worked since nuremberg…”but my leader told me to do xyz” has never been a defense in law.

That aside, what worries me most is the carefully crafted statement from the Armstrong camp.

- That Landis’s revelations are a “carton of sour milk” – one sip and you know it is bad.

- That you cannot trust a word that Landis has said!

What seems to be missing to me is a very strenuous denial of all allegations. And a clear statement that he and the team were clean, before and after the remarks above.  Of course that could be just the fact that after so many accusations, you simply run out of steam in denials.

I hope so, I hope for the sport Armstrong is and was Clean.

I am glad that Hincapie has come out with a far more emphatic denial. 

It will be devastating for the sport  if the allegations are proven at any level.

Pat McQuaid Has come out in support of armstrong. I hope he is right.

One of the iconic moments of the tour I will remember for a long time…was Lance and Jan Ullrich on the lower slopes of Alpe Huez. Lance accelerates. Turns – stares at Ullrich, then dances away up the hill to win.

I hope that was pure talent.

June 24, 2010

Splintered Testing Policy – An Ill Wind Blowing No Good

Filed under: Drug Test Policy — Tags: , , , , — admin @ 8:25 pm

When agencies compete for the right to test athletes it cannot be anything other than divisive for the sport as a whole.

WADA turned down a request from the French Anti-doping Agency who wanted to carry out their own tests at the Tour de France.

Claiming “that it has access to confidential information from police and customs that it cannot share with other organisations”

And with that hangs a serious problem.

Our sport can only suffer from the lack of a unified face.

Whilst I don’t want to come down in any direction on the Ramussen case a couple of years ago at the TDF – I can have sympathy with Ramussen’s contention over jurisdiction.

For as long as he was complying with testing from UCI, should he really have DOUBLE the calls on his availability simply because of being a Dane, where Contador had only UCI restrictions because of where he lived?

At the time it SOUNDED like very much like a grudge to settle by the Danish federation, for the unwillingness of Rasmussen to compete on a Danish stage, and whether or not that was actually so is almost irrelevant.

Open a crack, and the media will crowbar it out to a chasm.

It cannot help the image of sport when federations seem to be bickering over jurisdiction.

So please agencies – have these discussions behind closed doors, then pronounce a decision with a unified face

Surely if there is sufficient cause to suspect a crime is being committed under french law with proper evidence for the same then there are procedures that can be used to pursue that.

I have to assume the evidence is far more circumstantial than that and that the TDF is as much arguing from a “rights” point of view than prima facie evidence of crime.

I can understand of course how the TDF is concerned about the damage done to its name. Sat where I am the Rasmussen affair was not handled with nearly enough discretion by the TDF.

June 23, 2010

The Placebo Effect

Filed under: Controversy — admin @ 6:15 pm

It is a fact. The belief that a drug is doing you good, can manifest itself as the symptom that IT IS doing you good. Mind over matter. Trials have shown that chalk pills can work wonders if the person believes they are a beneficial drug.

Which brings an interesting problem

It is clear that many athletes respect religion, indeed regard firm religious belief as a corner stone of success.

One of the celebrated cases was “eric lidell” whose story was promoted by “chariots of fire” – the belief that his athleticisim was a gift of God, and he used it as a soapbox to promote faith.

But thereby hangs an interesting question.

If the placebo effect is know to achieve positive results.

If the athletes believe that their success is due to a higher power.

If athletes carry religious artefacts – take rosary beads and consider they have a positive value, then the placebo effect will make belief come true.

Is this using artificial performance enhancement to improve performance?

Is this doping by psychological means?

This blog aims to stimulate discussion. It cannot answer such questions. What do you think?

I am Angry at Floyd Landis

Filed under: Athletes — Tags: , , , — admin @ 3:28 pm

I am Angry at Floyd Landis.
Why did he drag on the fiasco so long – before so publicly “coming clean” or rather “coming dirty” and with it trying to drag others down.

Nobody can ride the way he did. To ride away from the peloton, on the back of a bad day seemed implausible.

I wondered when he was first caught – why did he try to justify high testosterone so early? The answer is because he KNEW

He writes a book, and spends years protesting innonence before coming clean.

His protests over many years gave me just a chink of doubt about his conviction. Not enough to vindicate, just enough to hope that one day it might be proven …

So I am angry at Floyd Landis. To think he could take the world for fools.

There is something of Marco Pantani in him.

Listen to pantani’s reactions to dope allegations and he seems to believe he was singled out, as if to say, the whole world cheats so why have you picked me? For sure cycling was endemic at that time.

But I cannot forgive Landis for compounding injury and insult.

You sir, are the one we must use all efforts to catch. And ban completely – Zero Doping, Zero Tolerance.

Motive. Means. Opportunity.

Filed under: Athletes — Tags: , , , — admin @ 3:17 pm

Motive. Means. Opportunity.

Sometimes it just does not make sense.
The nandrolone affair caught many athletes off guard.

It begs many awkward questions.

Should athletes take supplements? Are they natural? Does the fact that the body makes a chemical make it OK? Do you still think so with human growth hormone?

There will always be uncertain edges.

And since athletes dont have XRay eyes how can they know what is in a substance, if they buy it over a food counter?

It seems with 20/20 hindisight batches of a supplement taken by many athletes was giving positives for nandrolone. Sadly many otherwise respectable athletes got caught and banned. As for example mark richardson a promising 400m runner.

But let us examine the case of arguably one of britains best athletes.

Linford Christie.
Linford promoted the clean living athlete “pure talent, no additives”
and took part in the infamous Ben Johnston race.

I maybe naieve – but I am on Linford’s side. Who can remember hearing the words “pseudo ephedrine” a cold cure, being an extract discovered in ginseng tea. Those words all sound so chemical that surely they are cheating. Not so by intent, in my opinion.

Can pseudoephedrine really influence performance?

But lets look at this through detectives eyes. A crime needs means and opportunity, catching red handed always helps.

But intent also needs motive.
And it just is not there in the later case.

Christie had retired. He had not competed for many months. He only remained on the testing rota, because he saw he may have to compete for the club. Not for personal glory, and certainly by that time he could not care less whether he won or not.

THEN he was done for nandrolone.

It did not and does not make sense. Sure he may have been positive.
But clearly in this case, he is hardly likely to knowingly cheat just to
compete in a lowly club match.

So logic said he may be guilty of having a drug in his system. But was he guilty of using a substance to enhance performance? I don’t think so. The motive just is not there.

June 22, 2010

The Righteous Living in Fear

Filed under: Athletes — Tags: , , , — admin @ 5:13 pm

Some athletes are clean. You can tell. Or can you?

I am sure many people have felt cheated when they pronounc any athlete is clean – to find their world collapse on the front pages of newspapers that “such and such” has been sent home following a doping failure.

I know i have put faith in some who let me down.
For all that I still believe.

I met Diane Modahl, and her personality was such I judge she could never have cheated. She would rather have come seventh in an honest race, than finish first by cheating. That was my opinion then, and it has not changed since – which makes it so much worse, that she was apparent victim of a testing disaster.

I believe in Paula Radcliffe too.

But I wonder whether her vociferously anti doping stance may become her undoing. Who can forget the images of Paula holding a placard at a track race, opposing a drug cheat who had escaped banning just on a technicality

I can think that very stance (and good on Paula for being outspoken) some have a grudge to settle with Paula and thats the trouble. A marathoner is more vulnerable than most.

There are those who would take the chance to spike a drink. With a marathoner there are opportunities. Or long distance cyclists taking drinks from the road.

A meal. A drink even a cup of tea at roadside catering trailer?

I hope for paulas sake those charged with the security
of her drinks and food do not have a bad day.
But she must live in fear of those with a grudge to settle.

She reminds me of the film gladiator: when the identity of maximus is revealed he worries about eating in case his food has been tampered

Powered by WordPress