http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2010/01/ho...Cozy+Beehive%29

Interesting how many of the methods seems to rely on fooling/dodging/bribing the DCO. Time for cycling organizations to get out of the anti-doping testing business for good.

Also makes me wonder how serious the UCI has ever been, if these methods are anywhere near still current. "Distracting" the DCO? Jeez.

Thanks Lister.

Lots of interesting information, including the direct reference to Ferrari.

You have to appreciate the openness on facilitation payments as well:

When the guilty athlete can’t suppress his hot urine anymore, an agreement must be reached between all the stakeholders, like the Doping Control Officer, Lab Director, Race Director, rider, Team and Assorted Flunkies.
...
The upside for the cheater is that were sample collectors to visit that same race the following season, he would probably be able to prepay to avoid any doping hassles.

Ah, the golden rule and a new 'profesional' relationship established with repeat business at hand.

Dave.

Papps postings are for the most part useless. He has been out of the loop for 4 years. He has no idea what they are doing today post OP and Landis.

Experience counts for nothing.

But, feel free to update us on the latest techniques.

Dave.

I am sure methods have changed a lot and he would have no idea. I'll leave my other thoughts away from my key board.

EPO microdosing has changed?

Pray tell.

Dave.

I don't know and and neither does Joe Papp, is my point.

But your experience and knowledge trumps his, so that you can easily dismiss what insights he would possess?

In other words, how do you know enough to make such a statement?

Microdosing still exists. End of story.

Dave.

I never implied that my knowledge is more than his. I simply am saying his knowledge is becoming very dated. Is there doping, Yes. Does Joe Papp know through experience the current methods, NO. A lot has gone down since his bust, so while he was able to testify to current methods during the Landis Case he could not testify today.

Ok, let's agree to disagree then.

On some techniques, he likely would have little or no knowledge nor nothing to contribute.

But, there hasn't been that many dramatically new techniques initiated - certainly almost none in delivery sytems. Same with masking systems.

Perhaps we need to argue about whether new doping/doping techniques are evolutionary or revolutionary. Same with masking and avoidance.

The addage 'go with what got you there' must apply to some degree. Thus, if EPO and Testosterone remain the big bang for the buck, then the 'new' techniques will only be modifications on techniques of the past. Balco's 'The Clear' is a classic example.

Heck, while Actovegin is so 1998 - and has been a running butt of many jokes and sharp comments here on DPF - it appears to be in ever increasing favor. It hardly looks like current methods have changed much.

One of the few truly revolutionary things would be gene doping.

While there have been warnings about this, it is hard to know if this is an actual use. But, if athletes were using that we might see really strange things happen to athletes.

How strange?

I dunno. It is a wild guess, but maybe going from sterile to fertile. That would seem pretty dramatic. Even like a miracle.

Joe probably cannot provide any insight on gene doping and its side effects, however, which is unfortunate.

Dave.

You think these guys are really that smart? They're innovating new ways to cheat?

Urine substitution, or we could just call this "substitution" works the same way. They some how get a clean sample in place of the one that is to be tested.

Bribery is the same as it ever was. There could be some innovation in the world of bribery in terms of what is being bought, having someone toss a sample is a different kind of thing than say notifying a team in advance of testing or maybe giving them an hour to do whatever they have to do before the testing.

Micro-dosing is the same as it ever was, maybe replace the 'EPO' with a newer drug, the concept is the same, use a dose that is too small to be detected above a testing threshold but still enough to get some benefit.

Mixing the sample with something, be it an enzyme or mystery powder or whatever to some how remove traces of any drugs. The specifics might be different but the idea is the same, isn't it?

It's not like he get's specific anyways.

And how the not so pro's do it:



http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/suspect-sa...ed-in-guatemala

Yup, I guess Joe isn't familiar with this new technique.

the driver of the DHL van, Julio Eduardo López, was attacked by unknown assailants who destroyed samples taken by the Guatemalan Olympic Committee (COG) and being sent for testing in Canada. The report made to police also alleges that prior to the attack the two riders had gone to the DHL office looking for the samples.

Pay off some thugs to rob the coach. Novel. Wouldn't expect anything to be criminally organized.

Dave.

"Slim. You, Tex and Calico dress up like Injuns, ride on out to Deadman's Gulch and lay low. When them there varmints come a-ridin' through on the three o'clock stage, you fellers bushwhack 'em and vamoose with the strong box."

I love this area of DPF ... it's just like reality is an option which everybody gets to pick their favorite colour of.

And since your sense of reality is so blurred, you have innumerable colors from which to choose.

Still, it's troublesome that my addled brain is always drawn toward the same colour ... every time. Maybe there's something there worth looking at ?

(although I must admit ... I'm colour blind ... just like my faithful hound ... I love my dog)

tex? you're not talking about me, are you?

Thanks for this one.

Apparently the creative juices are firing on all cylinders.

Dave.