Adverse Analytical Finding – in-competition test

My take is that I will just carry on as I do now, if I get tested and they find 'something' and I get banned well then I will carry on riding in the veld and suburbs ... not 'racing' may have affected me in years gone by but not anymore.

 

And no I am not now suddenly going to to check everything I ingest on some phone app

Booom exactly bennie....here is a 2 year ban rouxtjie....I will laugh at the oke and shrug it off... doesnt put bread on my table.

Its not my job....its my hobby...end van prent.

Can I add my 5 cents worth too..... I totally agree with dope testing at Pro level, no matter what substance and I agree with the minimum 2 year ban. A pro cyclist or any sports man for that matter, is representing a sponsor that is paying their salary and expecting positive publicity, a cheating pro cyclist is thus earning big money to do a job! Now here is where my issue starts, I do feel that Vets should be tested but I feel that certain "banned substances" should be looked at under that specific circumstance. This Vet has been bust using a diet "drug" that you get in most off the shelf diet products, so we have a 40 something guy thats making a effort to look after his body, spend money to look and feel better, and not blow it on Klippies and Kola, this VET most likely has no sponsor, pays his own way and has a good career and really does this for fun, and now The Vampires spend thousands to test and bust and ban him......WTF. I am a Vet, been racing almost 30 years and I am on a banned pain killer for a 3 level spinal fusion I had recently, I have never bothered declaring it to the cycling authorities because it has nothing to do with them ( I do however have a Dr script and letter) and honestly, this **** knocks me out cold so I dont really see how I am going to win the next Vets tour on it. My point is, there are lots of folks out there knowingly using so called "banned" drugs to improve their lives, this does not make them cheats, dope heads or anything bad in my eyes.....

But what if it might kill them?

This thread getting a bit carried away with the fact of back markers being tested etc. just remember that this test happened in the Cape Pioneer trek! which is an international race with a UCI ranking and held under their rules. A lot higher profile than most other weekend races where testing probably never happens.

There are the top mtb'ers in the world riding, and hence why random tests are also done as well as the top finishers.

Similar to Epic, you enter, you could be tested, back marker or not.

Booom exactly bennie....here is a 2 year ban rouxtjie....I will laugh at the oke and shrug it off... doesnt put bread on my table.

 

Its not my job....its my hobby...end van prent.

AND THATS WHY I WANT YOU TESTED FOR THE IDT CUP :ph34r:

Eish Roookie Boom might get you more than 2 years, you know.. Distribution 'n all...

Eish Roookie Boom might get you more than 2 years, you know.. Distribution 'n all...

Great...give me lifetime...I will have a joint whilst they pass sentencing. Care rocks.

Pass the dutchie on the left hand side

Each have a bong....

AND THATS WHY I WANT YOU TESTED FOR THE IDT CUP :ph34r:

I say we start with jorrie....

 

Booom exactly bennie....here is a 2 year ban rouxtjie....I will laugh at the oke and shrug it off... doesnt put bread on my table.

 

Its not my job....its my hobby...end van prent.

Rouxtjie, that's exactly it. If you are an average joe who rides for fun and happens to get caught in a random test, it really has little effect other than you can never ride the Epic. You can probably ride races every weekend and nobody will know or care as it is the local "fun ride "

But then again, that Vet riding a race for training and finishing mid pack, could just be riding in the worlds the following week and winning a medal thanks to his meds he used during his training. Doesn't have to use in the race itself.

Rouxtjie, that's exactly it. If you are an average joe who rides for fun and happens to get caught in a random test, it really has little effect other than you can never ride the Epic. You can probably ride races every weekend and nobody will know or care as it is the local "fun ride "

So why waste a 5 grand test on someone where the consequence is irrelevant....Use your resources where it matters...the pro's that earn their keep by racing.

PS I will probably never ride the epic....to poor

and again so what if you banned, its not like you cant ride the sani,joberg2c, anyway, its not like they scan your bar coded id, IF YOU A WEEKEND PLAYER, getting around a ban is not even hard work,

true

dips runs

Rouxtjie, that's exactly it. If you are an average joe who rides for fun and happens to get caught in a random test, it really has little effect other than you can never ride the Epic. You can probably ride races every weekend and nobody will know or care as it is the local "fun ride "

It is still a WASTE of money where they could be testing others

Ok so lets forget the health and ethical reasons, what happens if you riding an event / race and some plonker oke takes a short cut to finish in position 666 instead of 999..... and the organizers find out...WHAT SHOULD THEY DO?

1. Ignore it because he is a plonking fun rider?

2. Ban him from future events and delete his result?

3. Or?

So, do we overlook the other cheating options as well?

 

So why waste a 5 grand test on someone where the consequence is irrelevant....Use your resources where it matters...the pro's that earn their keep by racing.

 

PS I will probably never ride the epic....to poor

Because it's very difficult to draw the line between who is the funrider and who is serious. As mentioned in my other post, that funrider today is racing worlds in his/her age group a week later. So usually when they test it will be top platings plus some randoms.

I do admit, it would be nice to have some stats on what tests have been done, and the profiles of the riders tested.

Ok, I'm gonna throw the cat amongst the pigeons.

If a certain Supersport presenter, who races Masters, which has little prize money and is quite irrelevant, and who finished way down the field in Sani, was randomly tested at Sani and showed up positive.............. Would it be okay, and would that test be a waste of time and money and would everyone here still be anti random testing of back markers ???

And now I may run for the hills and go watch the Tour :-)

Ok, I'm gonna throw the cat amongst the pigeons.

 

If a certain Supersport presenter, who races Masters, which has little prize money and is quite irrelevant, and who finished way down the field in Sani, was randomly tested at Sani and showed up positive.............. Would it be okay, and would that test be a waste of time and money and would everyone here still be anti random testing of back markers ???

 

And now I may run for the hills and go watch the Tour :-)

OF COURSE NOT - He makes his living from the sport

Because it's very difficult to draw the line between who is the funrider and who is serious. As mentioned in my other post, that funrider today is racing worlds in his/her age group a week later. So usually when they test it will be top platings plus some randoms.

 

I do admit, it would be nice to have some stats on what tests have been done, and the profiles of the riders tested.

No it isn't difficult.

You have your general local licence and then a full racing licence for serious/top amateurs and pros who compete in the registered categories. If you enter a UCI sanctioned/level event like Masters XCO, CPT etc for a registered category ... then click, automatically up for a test at anytime.

Saids has a database of all the sporting codes and positive tests.

 

 

No it isn't difficult.

You have your general local licence and then a full racing licence for serious/top amateurs and pros who compete in the registered categories. If you enter a UCI sanctioned/level event like Masters XCO, CPT etc for a registered category ... then click, automatically up for a test at anytime.

 

Saids has a database of all the sporting codes and positive tests.

Ok, but does anyone know whether Hendrik Anderson has a full racing license as a Vet ? If he does, and he was racing in a UCI sanctioned event, then it is valid that he was tested, regardless of where he finished, which we also don't know ( I looked at the results and can't find a Hendrik Anderson. There was another Anderson riding for Anderson transport )

Ok, but does anyone know whether Hendrik Anderson has a full racing license as a Vet ? If he does, and he was racing in a UCI sanctioned event, then it is valid that he was tested, regardless of where he finished, which we also don't know ( I looked at the results and can't find a Hendrik Anderson. There was another Anderson riding for Anderson transport )

Was giving a general scenario to a general question.

As for HA, if he does have a full racing licence for Vets and was competing in that catergory, then the test and decision should stand.

If not and he was in the open field, then I feel it's open to debate.

There's the thing... 300 tests over road and mtb (as per their 2013 reports) split amongst say 60 pro's, national championships, all the big races, out of competition testing, passports(!) - and now it seems testing back markers

We're pissing in the wind. Nothing more than a PR stunt frankly imho

Yes, and there's a lot of factors there other than the number of tests. 300 tests across 60 competitors isn't bad, provided it's done in line with the bio passport/where abouts.

Any competitive category should be open to testing. Agree that testing some midfield sport rider is probably more for good PR than anything.

But, if in this particular case the rider is licenced and competing in a registered category and not in the open field. Then actions must stand.

There's a lot that could be done better, but there's also a lot of uniformed assumptions out there.

Bio passports have been implemented, maybe not enough, theres a review of the international framework for doping authorities come 2015 locals in each nation wont have to rely on receiving permission to test foreign athletes. In whatever country.

Bans will also span four/five years, not two.

Not exactly a silver bullet, not pissing against the wind either. Fact is, people are always going to try cheat the system some way, it's human nature and constant battle. At least it's encouraging to see younger athletes taking a harder line against it.

Lets also not forget, much of the time it's not always the athletes who have instigated the doping, but they're always the ones put to the sword.

Anyway, we can discuss this death. For sure it's a topic that's not going to go away anytime soon.

In the meantime I'm going to clean out my medicine cabinet (except the Coryx, theres one left ) get some frikin work done and stare aimlessly out the window pining to go ride ....

Vets are tested. I have been tested a number of times in the last couple of years. I am on whereabouts as well as biological passport.

pissing in the cup... not the wind.

confucius said: man who pisses in wind into cup end up with warm wet hands....

This thread getting a bit carried away with the fact of back markers being tested etc. just remember that this test happened in the Cape Pioneer trek! which is an international race with a UCI ranking and held under their rules. A lot higher profile than most other weekend races where testing probably never happens.

 

There are the top mtb'ers in the world riding, and hence why random tests are also done as well as the top finishers.

 

Similar to Epic, you enter, you could be tested, back marker or not.

Only UCI ranked / sanctioned for 2014... but hell, back markers? Wasting money by spending loads of cash on testing.

Can I volunteer to be tested? Insist they test me? So that I can come and tell the Hub I've been tested. It will up my bike cred soooo much! Except with my buddies, who will never doubt my slowness.