2020 Pro thread

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderator: Moderator Team

User avatar
LouisN
Posts: 2803
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:44 am
Location: Canada

by LouisN

Yes, it will be in the hands of his leadout teammates to place him well when needed. Today (yesterday) it seems as if the leadout man was missing a little bit of top speed so Greipel was left late for the last 50 m.

Louis :)

flying
Posts: 2098
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:16 am

by flying

This should be good :beerchug:
Mathieu van der Poel’s Paris-Roubaix debut confirmed
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/raci ... med-447152

by Weenie


Pierre86
Posts: 62
Joined: Mon May 13, 2019 3:53 pm

by Pierre86

okimy wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 2:14 pm
Sam Welsford has also impressed me so far.
He's a super impressive rider, glad he's got another shot at the TdU
S6 Evo
S5 Aero

User avatar
Miller
Posts: 1691
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 8:54 pm
Location: Reading, UK

by Miller

Watched TdU highlights. After a few years of 'spot the disc brake bike', now it's 'spot the rim brake bike'.

CrankAddictsRich
Posts: 1789
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:39 pm
Contact:

by CrankAddictsRich

I'm surprised that there hasn't been any talk about this...

Denise Betsema back racing after serving retroactive 6 month ban

She tested positive for an anabolic agent which normally would be a 4 year ban, but she's cleared to race again after serving a retroactive 6 month ban because te investigation revealed it was not her fault and she ingested some tainted supplements. Many of the cx women have publicly voiced their displeasure with Katie Compton saying, "This is f**king bullsh*t!"

User avatar
Kjetil
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 1:17 pm
Location: Hamar, Norway
Contact:

by Kjetil

6 months in the off season seems somewhat (understatement) lenient but isn’t 2 years the max for this offence?
Bianchi-Campagnolo
The Specialissima

User avatar
Dan Gerous
Posts: 1336
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 6:28 pm

by Dan Gerous

Kjetil wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:13 pm
6 months in the off season seems somewhat (understatement) lenient but isn’t 2 years the max for this offence?
I think the reaction is worst because she's a rider that came out of nowhere, suddenly beat everyone, then got popped. Then the explanation that it's a pharmacist to blame is also eyebrow raising as most athletes with ethics and that have spoken up about it would not use special supplements that are 'prepared' by a pharmacist. Basically, many just don't buy her excuse.

User avatar
Kjetil
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 1:17 pm
Location: Hamar, Norway
Contact:

by Kjetil

Yes, but that’s just talk.

Therese Johaug got 14 months for lip cream negligence in CAS.
I’d be surprised if WADA doesn’t wade in (ha!) in this case as well, even if the athlete involved is somewhat less profiled.
Bianchi-Campagnolo
The Specialissima

CrankAddictsRich
Posts: 1789
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:39 pm
Contact:

by CrankAddictsRich

Kjetil wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:13 pm
6 months in the off season seems somewhat (understatement) lenient but isn’t 2 years the max for this offence?
The standard for anti-doping rules violation is 4 years.
Dan Gerous wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 5:05 pm
Kjetil wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:13 pm
6 months in the off season seems somewhat (understatement) lenient but isn’t 2 years the max for this offence?
I think the reaction is worst because she's a rider that came out of nowhere, suddenly beat everyone, then got popped. Then the explanation that it's a pharmacist to blame is also eyebrow raising as most athletes with ethics and that have spoken up about it would not use special supplements that are 'prepared' by a pharmacist. Basically, many just don't buy her excuse.
Exactly... she had middle of the pack results, then came out last year and was suddently competing at the top. She tested positive at one event in late January and then another positive test mid-February at event that she won. I assume the result from the first test wasn't discovered under after February. I think it is strange that she's using a pharmacist in a different country to get her supplements.

UpFromOne
Posts: 799
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 5:23 am
Location: Olympic Nat'l Park, WA

by UpFromOne

If you guys keep complaining about doping, only the moderator here will weigh in, not the UCI :lol:

Actually I was going to post about this a few days ago when the story broke, but I felt the moderator's chill on the subject from last time I tried.
Not sure why, 'cause doping is to cycling as spit is to a baseball.

AJS914
Posts: 3764
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

Her postive was an "Adverse Analytical Finding" not a rules violation. Remember that Froome got off scott free after his AAF.

I do agree that it seems sketchy that any pro athlete in this day would take a "supplement" of unknow origin.

https://www.cxmagazine.com/denise-betse ... eroid-test
According to Sporza, “The deviating values appear to have to do with a food supplement in which contamination had occurred. Betsema had obtained an authorized product from a pharmacy in Belgium, but it turned out to contain contaminated substances (DAE pollution of 0.37%).”
It's sad if she's a doper and found the secret sauce to make her start winning races and it's doubly sad if she's actually innocent and truly got a contaminated supplement.

CrankAddictsRich
Posts: 1789
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:39 pm
Contact:

by CrankAddictsRich

AJS914 wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 12:42 am
Her postive was an "Adverse Analytical Finding" not a rules violation. Remember that Froome got off scott free after his AAF.
None of the news reports I've read have stated... they've all listed it as an Anti-Doping Rules Violation.... she tested positive for anabolic steroids. There is no amount that is legal. It is my understanding that an adverse analytical finding represents a substance that s allowed, but only within certain limits... i.e. Froome had salbutomol which he was allowed via the TUE, but it was present in an amount that exceeded the allowable amount.

AJS914
Posts: 3764
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

Well, it seems that they bought her story. She got lucky.

This was the story that said AAF. I guess they were wrong.

https://www.cxmagazine.com/denise-betse ... e-steroids

Velonews also reported AAF:

https://www.velonews.com/2019/04/cycloc ... est_492198

It's hard to even find a consistent story on the internet.

Karvalo
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:40 pm

by Karvalo

CrankAddictsRich wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:01 am
AJS914 wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 12:42 am
Her postive was an "Adverse Analytical Finding" not a rules violation. Remember that Froome got off scott free after his AAF.
None of the news reports I've read have stated... they've all listed it as an Anti-Doping Rules Violation.... she tested positive for anabolic steroids. There is no amount that is legal. It is my understanding that an adverse analytical finding represents a substance that s allowed, but only within certain limits...
An adverse analytical finding is a positive drugs test, for any drug. An AAF for a straight up banned substance (which I'd imagine her anabolic steroid was) is an automatic rules violation. Strict liability, if it's inside you it's your fault. An AAF for a specified substance of the type Froome tested for is not an automatic rules violation, you get a chance to mount a defense.

CrankAddictsRich
Posts: 1789
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:39 pm
Contact:

by CrankAddictsRich

AJS914 wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 4:00 am
Well, it seems that they bought her story. She got lucky.

This was the story that said AAF. I guess they were wrong.

https://www.cxmagazine.com/denise-betse ... e-steroids

Velonews also reported AAF:

https://www.velonews.com/2019/04/cycloc ... est_492198

It's hard to even find a consistent story on the internet.
It is interesting that both of those articles written in April of 2019 are only listing the Jan. doping violation, not the February doping violaton at the race she won, that is also being shown in the latest articles about her being allowed to race again. Those early articles are listing it as an AAF, where as te latest articles seem to be showing it as an ADRV. All of it seems awfully suspicious.

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post