Seyffert receives two year ban from competition

That's like sending little Johnny to the dunce corner for suspicion of not wearing any underpants because his boner is showing when Ms Fine walks in to deliver the Maths class...

I can comfortably say that this image will remain with me all day.

OK, I understand.

 

But.... there is still the issue that the Phentermine is not a performance-enhancing drug. Hypothetically speaking: I receive R60k back from the Receiver of Revenue and my friend and I enter the Epic. We are nobodies by anyone's standards. We hope to finish. I take Phentermine because I want to enter the race at 74kgs instead of 80. I pee, get caught and am banned for two years. Fair?

 

Consider the question rhetoric since there are too many ifs and buts. Hopefully someone in charge is thinking this through very well - philosophically and scientifically.

If that is your story, you will be known as the hubber that doped at the Epic.

If that is your story, you will be known as the hubber that doped at the Epic.

That horse has already bolted I'm afraid

On a level playing field, genetics is the deciding factor between equally well trained and prepared athletes.

This is not Formula 1, this is a bunch of people riding bikes.

If I was doped to the gills, riding the lightest, most expensive bike available, and in the most state of the art kit available, my neighbor will beat me riding a Game special in cut-off jeans and a cotton shirt in flat pedals.

He just has the required genetic makeup.

I am genetically suited to picking up heavy stuff and cracking heads in a fight.

I accept that.

A professional should not have to take supplements to make him or herself faster. You are or you are not faster.

A professional cyclist will not take a banned substance in error - I just don't buy it.

 

A professional cyclist will not take a banned substance in error - I just don't buy it.

I get it and agree with you. Not because of the paragraph about cracking my head but the word professional in there. That changed it for me.

Ok so most of you know I take a hard line on doping.

Me - I'm with the two tiered crowd.

There is doping and serious doping.

Doping for me are stimulants, appetite suppressants, pain killers etc are tier 1 doping. These should be max 2 two suspension from for ALL sports, prize money paid back, salary from test date forwards paid back, no media exposure, no celebrity races, no magazine articles - ie COMPLETE romoval from ALL sport. Tier one you can potentially believe "accidental ingestion" through tainted supplemants, ignorance etc hence the minimal sentence.

Tier two is blood manipulation, EPO, anything injectable. Lifetime ban on first positive. Tier one stuff you can half believe "accidental ingestion" but stabbing yourself is not accidental. EPO etc is most definitiely intentional doping. Out of sport forever - no free race entry, commentating, articles in cycling magazines, media coverage of any kind. Done. Uit.

On a level playing field, genetics is the deciding factor between equally well trained and prepared athletes.

 

This is not Formula 1, this is a bunch of people riding bikes.

 

If I was doped to the gills, riding the lightest, most expensive bike available, and in the most state of the art kit available, my neighbor will beat me riding a Game special in cut-off jeans and a cotton shirt in flat pedals.

 

He just has the required genetic makeup.

 

I am genetically suited to picking up heavy stuff and cracking heads in a fight.

 

I accept that.

 

A professional should not have to take supplements to make him or herself faster. You are or you are not faster.

 

A professional cyclist will not take a banned substance in error - I just don't buy it.

Yet there was a local pro who claimed just that and only got a six-month sanction.

Like Eldron @ #81!!!!!

 

 

I get it and agree with you. Not because of the paragraph about cracking my head but the word professional in there. That changed it for me.

I assume where this is going is that it should not apply to non-professionals.

So we have 2 equally good amateurs. 1 dopes and wins more hence secures a pro contract and the other not. Is that then fair ?

I'm sorry, if you dope you are guilty whatever the reasons were. Yes as a middle of the bunch the chance of ever being tested are slim, but as we have seen, not entirely impossible. So take your chances, but take your punishment.

OK, I understand.

 

But.... there is still the issue that the Phentermine is not a performance-enhancing drug. Hypothetically speaking: I receive R60k back from the Receiver of Revenue and my friend and I enter the Epic. We are nobodies by anyone's standards. We hope to finish. I take Phentermine because I want to enter the race at 74kgs instead of 80. I pee, get caught and am banned for two years. Fair?

 

Consider the question rhetoric since there are too many ifs and buts. Hopefully someone in charge is thinking this through very well - philosophically and scientifically.

Firstly if you are a nobody entering the Epic and never won anything, you wouldn't be tested. So no one would ever know what you have taken.

Testing is expensive, I raced for years with the ladies and haven't been tested once. Why, because I've never won a race. Yet even I knew to a large degree what was acceptable to take and what wasn't.

If he was caught with Nurofen, fine it can be "swept under the rug" as "accidental". However a stage 5 drug already shows signs that he knew what he was doing. So even if this drug may not give him the performance enhancement some seem to think it was on the banned list and you can't just buy it over the counter. What does that tell you??

Firstly if you are a nobody entering the Epic and never won anything, you wouldn't be tested. So no one would ever know what you have taken.

 

Testing is expensive, I raced for years with the ladies and haven't been tested once. Why, because I've never won a race. Yet even I knew to a large degree what was acceptable to take and what wasn't.

 

If he was caught with Nurofen, fine it can be "swept under the rug" as "accidental". However a stage 5 drug already shows signs that he knew what he was doing. So even if this drug may not give him the performance enhancement some seem to think it was on the banned list and you can't just buy it over the counter. What does that tell you??

Unfortunately as we now know this is not true, three hundred and something has been tested ......

Yet there was a local pro who claimed just that and only got a six-month sanction.

Hence the zero tolerance attitude

Wham bam thank you man, do not pass begin do not collect 200 dollah

Ok so most of you know I take a hard line on doping.

 

Me - I'm with the two tiered crowd.

 

There is doping and serious doping.

 

Doping for me are stimulants, appetite suppressants, pain killers etc are tier 1 doping. These should be max 2 two suspension from for ALL sports, prize money paid back, salary from test date forwards paid back, no media exposure, no celebrity races, no magazine articles - ie COMPLETE romoval from ALL sport. Tier one you can potentially believe "accidental ingestion" through tainted supplemants, ignorance etc hence the minimal sentence.

 

Tier two is blood manipulation, EPO, anything injectable. Lifetime ban on first positive. Tier one stuff you can half believe "accidental ingestion" but stabbing yourself is not accidental. EPO etc is most definitiely intentional doping. Out of sport forever - no free race entry, commentating, articles in cycling magazines, media coverage of any kind. Done. Uit.

Unfortunately as we now know this is not true, three hundred and something has been tested ......

We all didn't know this as some of us are totally out of the racing game

So things have changed...hmmm, interesting.

Is that number 300 in the pro's group still though? Well I guess these days everyone has to have a racing licence so they are now all under the same rules. Now the discussion makes more sense and is more likely for a number whoever to not know the rules.

But still, a schedule 5 drug states more knowledge than the nobody taking an over the counter weight loss or USN product.

I then have to agree with Eldron's 2 tier doping approach.

I assume where this is going is that it should not apply to non-professionals.

 

So we have 2 equally good amateurs. 1 dopes and wins more hence secures a pro contract and the other not. Is that then fair ?

 

I'm sorry, if you dope you are guilty whatever the reasons were. Yes as a middle of the bunch the chance of ever being tested are slim, but as we have seen, not entirely impossible. So take your chances, but take your punishment.

No. I didn't intend it to go like that. It dawned on me (thanks to scull breaker's nice post) that a true pro will know his stuff. If I'm a tax auditor, I can't be forgiven for making an error on my tax return. Me as an amateur, it is possible and perhaps even excusable. OK perhaps tax is a bad example but still. I didn't take the argument further...I simply haven't given that side of it any thought.

Firstly if you are a nobody entering the Epic and never won anything, you wouldn't be tested. So no one would ever know what you have taken.

 

Testing is expensive, I raced for years with the ladies and haven't been tested once. Why, because I've never won a race. Yet even I knew to a large degree what was acceptable to take and what wasn't.

 

If he was caught with Nurofen, fine it can be "swept under the rug" as "accidental". However a stage 5 drug already shows signs that he knew what he was doing. So even if this drug may not give him the performance enhancement some seem to think it was on the banned list and you can't just buy it over the counter. What does that tell you??

I understand that number 380 something at this year's Epic was tested and banned. There's even a discussion about it somewhere here. But I get your point. Thanks.

 

 

Unfortunately as we now know this is not true, three hundred and something has been tested ......

What kind of idiot 'dopes' to come that far back in the fie.... .... Oh, wait...

We all didn't know this as some of us are totally out of the racing game

 

snip snip snip

The about time you get back into it hey - we could have some nice company on our morning rides again

I assume then this issue is a Tier one in your above classification? You actually believe Seyfferts accidentally or ignorantly took a schedule 5 drug not knowing it may be bannesd ie not know that he was cheating? Surely not.

Nope. I don't know the facts so I couldn't be bothered having an opinion. I just believe the punishment should fit the crime. Consider the 2 year ban and cash panelties as "stupid tax" - doesn't really matter to me how the drug got into his system.

There are forms on DFS site where a contestant can declare use of illegal substance with the necessary back ground details reason doctors instruction etc.etc... if they don't take the option to declare prior to an event or test and take a banned substance and then compete Im sorry there has to be a reason he or she has not declared the use of the substance, you can draw your own conclusion but in my eyes it is cheating.

But, if its a scedule 5 drug for obesity, where is the doc that prescibed it to a 8% body fat person?

We always hear of the riders but who gave him the script?

The Dr's and coaches are just as responsible as the riders.

We always hear of the riders but who gave him the script?

The Dr's and coaches are just as responsible as the riders.

I thought we had established this would be 'procured' from non 'script' means .... and normally shady characters anyway!

No. I didn't intend it to go like that. It dawned on me (thanks to scull breaker's nice post) that a true pro will know his stuff. If I'm a tax auditor, I can't be forgiven for making an error on my tax return. Me as an amateur, it is possible and perhaps even excusable. OK perhaps tax is a bad example but still. I didn't take the argument further...I simply haven't given that side of it any thought.

The people at the apex of our sport are no longer "convicts of the road" - they are highly specialised athletes.

My point at the end is as JB said - professional cyclists do not do anything that impacts their craft/profession without due consideration.

My point at the end is as JB said - professional cyclists do not do anything that impacts their craft/profession without due consideration.

I gotta disagree with this. People are people. Some pros study and take drugs on purpose, some get sucked into it by coches/team/leader, some chance upon it, some unwittingly.

"Pro athlete" doesn't describe a person - it only describes their job.

I gotta disagree with this. People are people. Some pros study and take drugs on purpose, some get sucked into it by coches/team/leader, some chance upon it, some unwittingly.

 

"Pro athlete" doesn't describe a person - it only describes their job.

That may well be true.