Fuentes - evidence of wider offences destroyed?

First topic message reminder :

I'm shocked hear that Judge Julia Patricia Santamaria has ordered evidence in the form of blood samples that could have pointed to a broader event than cycling to be destroyed.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22353145

This just sounds perverse and does nothing to dispell concerns of wilder involvement. Still, when one thinks of what's been suggested in terms of Olympians etc, and suspicions of the integrity of the Spanish authorities, it isn't completely surprising to me. Regrettable though.

Article on drug use in football
http://www.4dfoot.com/2013/02/09/doping-in-football-fifty-years-of-evidence/

The thing is socal is that we don't know do we? We have no idea what drugs are being used and for what specific enhancement, as the anti-doping authorities are so inept, an athlete will take.
I agree I don't think it would be as effective in triathlons or cycling, but really we don't know, so much of it is pure conjecture.

L'equippe thought testers were 10 years behind dopers! They could be doing anything and anti-dopers and spectators would not have a clue about any of it.
There will be new drugs and concoctions constantly coming out on the doping conveyor belt i.e. mixing steroids with endurance ones.

Personally I think the greatest drug used in tennis would be to improve recovery, I think lot's would use that, such is the short turnaround in tennis.

But

LuvSports! wrote:The thing is socal is that we don't know do we? We have no idea what drugs are being used and for what specific enhancement, as the anti-doping authorities are so inept, an athlete will take.
I agree I don't think it would be as effective in triathlons or cycling, but really we don't know, so much of it is pure conjecture.

L'equippe thought testers were 10 years behind dopers! They could be doing anything and anti-dopers and spectators would not have a clue about any of it.
There will be new drugs and concoctions constantly coming out on the doping conveyor belt i.e. mixing steroids with endurance ones.

Personally I think the greatest drug used in tennis would be to improve recovery, I think lot's would use that, such is the short turnaround in tennis.

But

Yes the issues you raise is why I just don't care and think we need to move to regulation, testing, and approved PEDs that have less health risk than shady concoctions; as opposed to coming up with a series of tests that test for A and then the dopers move on to doping with concoction B that there is no test for.

As to recovery a lot of drugs help recovery, anti-inflammatories for example help you play the next day without Alleve I can't play singles 4 to 5 times a week my feet swell up like balloons. Sports crème helps loosen up and speeds up healing of muscles. Where do you draw the line? I know a lot of people who say HGH is a wonder drug with a lot of good effects and very little bad effects if used in small doses. Every drug enhances your performance (non-recreational) and they all have side effects. Maybe we should let them use whatever they like with disclosure, maybe we test drugs and issue a list of approved PEDS? I don't know, but the current system sucks and instill further and further testing doesn't work because as you say the dopers are ten years ahead of the game, and as soon as you test for A someone starts using B.

socal1976 wrote:Well Silver you make some good points, nobody is questioning that world class tennis is extremely physical. But I find this Djokovic as the fittest athlete in the world stuff to be a bit specious. Especially in light of people who run a marathon, swim, and bike all in the same day. Ironman contestants spend 9-12 hours doing constant cardio with no changeovers, no breaks between sets, and no time between points. Yes tennis players are at times during points at full sprint and move more dynamically in short bursts. But if we want to measure just cardiovascular fitness all the thousands of people who show up at ironman's and marathons are fitter than Djokovic and Nadal by a great deal. So I don't see the big advantage of blood doping in tennis that I would see in triathlons or cycling. Especially, in light of the fact that most matches Nadal and Djoko play all year round are decided in exactly two sets and under two hours. The grandslam epic might take place once or twice a year, at tops 4 or 5 times a year.

Yeah, I'd tend to agree. Tennis does bring a fairly unique set of stresses to the table, but in terms of pure energy expended it'd be difficult to argue against some sports out there! Interesting that you mention the grandslam epics socal, reminds me of one of the on-court interviews after the AO this year, I think it may have been Fed actually. Saying that after seven consecutive 5-setters at a slam a player would be 'feeling it for weeks or maybe years to come'. Paraphrased, but the idea is there. That said, although tennis is general is very physical at the highest level - regardless of playing style - surely other sports like cycling and x-country skiing require more cardiovascular endurance. Hard to measure aside from calorific output, but...

On topic, damn shame about the judge's decision. It just indicates an enormous coverup, this won't help public perception of either cycling or Spanish sport

LuvSports! wrote:Personally I think the greatest drug used in tennis would be to improve recovery, I think lot's would use that, such is the short turnaround in tennis.

But

Oxygen tents are already in use for such recovery and no one considers them 'doping'. EPOs increase blood-oxygenation, so there is no significant difference between the two anyway.

Netherlands have different personal-use policy than say Saudi Arabia.

Spain's so-called doping laws were non-existent then as they are now, when the judge even orders evidence destroyed, so that it cannot be used in the future. What a travesty and miscarriage of justice!

If the judge allows the evidence to produce names, and Fuentes corroborates, the named players can defend themselves, but the destruction of evidence disallows even that process to take place in the public eye.

Perhaps, France can now legalise doping and allow some Frenchman to win the RG, or should GB be the first one to?

My biggest issue with doping is that it would take us back to the dark days when it was a pharmaceutical war, I have no desire to watch a sport where, say Nalbandian can string off back-to-back-to-back five setters because he has the best juice. Is there a guarantee that talent (or at least hard work) will shine through?

I keep saying let the market decide. Have a dopers tour and a clean tour, and let people decide who to watch.

Personally, I think socal will have little problem getting a ticket for his preferred event.

Socal

I agree with a lot of that - the fitness requirements for tennis are very different from endurance sports (where EPO and blood doping have been commonplace). Not to say that there are not tennis players who've experimented with oxygen vector doping (as some professional sportsmen will try anything to get an edge over their opponents), but just that the benefits don't look on the face of it to be strong enough to be worth the risks (not sure bad practices in blood doping have ever killed anyone but Ricco* came very close, EPO has definitely been the cause of death of some abusers).

I suspect if there is serious doping in tennis it relates to products that assist recovery both between points and between matches - testosterone would potentially be useful in this regard, although there is the issue with potentially putting on too much muscle bulk (after all, most tennis players are skinny/wiry types, as a high power to weight ratio rather than high absolute power seems to be the key)

* Ricardo Ricco, Italian cyclist who burst to prominence around 2008 before failing a test for CERA (3rd gen EPO). Served his 2 year suspension, came back and then ended up in intensive care for weeks with liver failure after injecting with a blood bag that had not been properly stored.

dummy_half wrote: I suspect if there is serious doping in tennis it relates to products that assist recovery both between points and between matches

Quite. So where do we stand when we have guys like Djokovic using hyperbaric egg chambers to aid recovery (how he played those back to back energy sapping 11hr combined matches at AO12 between Murray and Nadal I'll never know) that effectively mirror the benefits of taking EPOs? Is it ok for Djokovic to use a CVAC device when other pro's cant use EPO to get broadly the same effects? If these sorts of devices aren't made illegal by WADA then its tantamount to allowing drug taking...after all a CVAC is a PED - Performance Enhancing DEVICE.

lydian wrote:

dummy_half wrote: I suspect if there is serious doping in tennis it relates to products that assist recovery both between points and between matches

Quite. So where do we stand when we have guys like Djokovic using hyperbaric egg chambers to aid recovery (how he played those back to back energy sapping 11hr combined matches at AO12 between Murray and Nadal I'll never know) that effectively mirror the benefits of taking EPOs? Is it ok for Djokovic to use a CVAC device when other pro's cant use EPO to get broadly the same effects? If these sorts of devices aren't made illegal by WADA then its tantamount to allowing drug taking...after all a CVAC is a PED - Performance Enhancing DEVICE.

Well exactly! What's the difference between legal performance enhancing drugs (or devices) and illegal performance enhancing drugs (and devises)? It's a matter of judgement. Also just because it's judged legal (or illegal) doesn't mean it always will be. What are the reasons for making some drugs illegal? Is it because they can do harm (so it's a sort of protective rule) or is it because it gives an unfair advantage? What if the drugs are required for health reasons but also can give a performance boost? (for example steroids for asthmatics).

I used steroids for asthmatics, I guess I have no standing ground haha. On a serious note, steroids have a lot of grey areas, but it doesnt absolve athletes from using roids because 'it was an area the shade of grey'. What ever happened to fixing your Stamina by going up a mountain? I did that every holiday (more like a hill, regardless), in high school, only to find out you can now just go into oxygen chambers!! That was hard work, its like 800m from my grandmothers to the summit!!

I love it what does the World Anti-doping Agency have to say about oxygen and air pressure? Last time I checked no one in their right minds considers that dope or drugs, and it is not illegal and against the rules. This idea that WADA doesn't approve of it is ridiculous WADA hasn't banned it either, and frankly I don't even know if they have the jurisdiction to ban oxygenated air. In the NFL you routinely see players breathing from tanks that give them oxygenated air, right there on TV, nobody considers it doping.

But I am glad Nadal fans have moved from "blaming it on the rain" to "blaming it on the egg". Now WADA is going to tell us what level of air pressure is legal and what amount of oxygen athletes can have. Silliness, pure silliness. I love how subtly the conversation was shifted from performance enhancing drugs to performance enhancing DEVICES.

If you analyse it they are both P.E.D's Socal ha ha

hawkeye wrote:

lydian wrote:

dummy_half wrote: I suspect if there is serious doping in tennis it relates to products that assist recovery both between points and between matches

Quite. So where do we stand when we have guys like Djokovic using hyperbaric egg chambers to aid recovery (how he played those back to back energy sapping 11hr combined matches at AO12 between Murray and Nadal I'll never know) that effectively mirror the benefits of taking EPOs? Is it ok for Djokovic to use a CVAC device when other pro's cant use EPO to get broadly the same effects? If these sorts of devices aren't made illegal by WADA then its tantamount to allowing drug taking...after all a CVAC is a PED - Performance Enhancing DEVICE.

Well exactly! What's the difference between legal performance enhancing drugs (or devices) and illegal performance enhancing drugs (and devises)? It's a matter of judgement. Also just because it's judged legal (or illegal) doesn't mean it always will be. What are the reasons for making some drugs illegal? Is it because they can do harm (so it's a sort of protective rule) or is it because it gives an unfair advantage? What if the drugs are required for health reasons but also can give a performance boost? (for example steroids for asthmatics).

Inhaled steroids won't give much of a help systemically and will only really make their respiratory function "normal" or more likely sub-normal. Insulin for type 1 Diabetics (Redgrave) is a better comparison- he was so big and therefore powerful in the boat because he could put on muscle quickly with insulin which is very anabolic, but this is countered by the restrictions having a debilitating and potentially life-threatening disease has on any athlete

Come on socal...in the space of 20 minutes one of those devices simulates going up and down a mountain 200 times. This isn't about air and pressure that occur naturally, its an artificial device being used to enhance performance by a means that you couldn't obtain otherwise.

Secondly, I'm not blaming anything on anything. But I do have an issue with CVAC devices - not because WADA haven't approved them but because normal athletes don't get access to them when they're $75,000 each and not commonplace. Djokovic is able to use his ranking and money to gain further unfair advantage on players below him who cant afford the services nor have the private jets to fly them into the egg locations.

Sure, let everyone use CVAC devices (but not drugs as what age do you start allowing artificial substances into people's bodies?) - not the few in privileged positions. But where does it all then stop? I'm more in favour of just banning the thing outright for sports use.

200 times??? so in twenty minutes, he did a years worth of my training?? Well, I feel particularly Luddite-ish, now Lydian!

lydian wrote:

dummy_half wrote: I suspect if there is serious doping in tennis it relates to products that assist recovery both between points and between matches

Quite. So where do we stand when we have guys like Djokovic using hyperbaric egg chambers to aid recovery (how he played those back to back energy sapping 11hr combined matches at AO12 between Murray and Nadal I'll never know) that effectively mirror the benefits of taking EPOs? Is it ok for Djokovic to use a CVAC device when other pro's cant use EPO to get broadly the same effects? If these sorts of devices aren't made illegal by WADA then its tantamount to allowing drug taking...after all a CVAC is a PED - Performance Enhancing DEVICE.

Nothing is banning other pros from using Egg chambers either, the whole world knows the story. WADA has no jurisdiction that is probably why they haven't tried banning it, because it isn't dope. The egg chamber costs 75000 dollars, and from what I understand there are places who now rent out time in it at affordable rates. If it helps athletes recover and it is not a controlled substance with side effects what exactly is your problem with it? Do you really believe that after every long match djoko goes in the egg chamber? AT a 75k price tag and with the potential to rent time there is nothing special about Djokovic's access to it. Bernard tomic has a yellow Ferrari and he has never won anything, I am sure if this egg chamber turns you into superman Bernie or enterprising federations can purchase it. What next are we going to ban ice baths because they help you with recovery?

Lets get back to basics,
axing trees
chasing chickens
box jumps
Tyre sprints
And you cool off in the river

lydian wrote:Come on socal...in the space of 20 minutes one of those devices simulates going up and down a mountain 200 times. This isn't about air and pressure that occur naturally, its an artificial device being used to enhance performance by a means that you couldn't obtain otherwise.

Secondly, I'm not blaming anything on anything. But I do have an issue with CVAC devices - not because WADA haven't approved them but because normal athletes don't get access to them when they're $75,000 each and not commonplace. Djokovic is able to use his ranking and money to gain further unfair advantage on players below him who cant afford the services nor have the private jets to fly them into the egg locations.

Sure, let everyone use CVAC devices (but not drugs as what age do you start allowing artificial substances into people's bodies?) - not the few in privileged positions. But where does it all then stop? I'm more in favour of just banning the thing outright for sports use.

Do you have any proof or evidence that in 20 minutes you get the same result as 200 times up and down a mountain this sounds like an unbelievable statement. 75,000$ device is not cost prohibitive if all you need is 20 minutes time on the machine and then you don't need to train for a week. If this is the case I will buy 10 of these devices and locate them next to big ATP events and charge you 250 bucks for 20 mins. MRI machines cost a million dollars can only Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic afford an MRI?

lydian wrote: I do have an issue with CVAC devices - not because WADA haven't approved them but because normal athletes don't get access to them when they're $75,000 each and not commonplace. Djokovic is able to use his ranking and money to gain further unfair advantage on players below him who cant afford the services nor have the private jets to fly them into the egg locations.

Can a player use his ranking and money to have his coach travel with him? To have a full time hitting partner? A physio? To fly business class? To get a better hotel?

All of these are things some players can't afford but nobody seems to have a problem with. At what point does it become unfair?

At no point, I say. Its capitalism.

HM Murdoch wrote:

lydian wrote: I do have an issue with CVAC devices - not because WADA haven't approved them but because normal athletes don't get access to them when they're $75,000 each and not commonplace. Djokovic is able to use his ranking and money to gain further unfair advantage on players below him who cant afford the services nor have the private jets to fly them into the egg locations.

Can a player use his ranking and money to have his coach travel with him? To have a full time hitting partner? A physio? To fly business class? To get a better hotel?

All of these are things some players can't afford. At what point does it become unfair?

Exactly, should players be banned from hiring a nutritionist to cook for them, from having their own physio, should Roger be required to fly coach and eat crappy airline cuisine as opposed to flying around in his gulfstream? By the way 75,000 dollars is not all that expensive, and why would any player buy an egg machine? Does Novak carry it around with him in his carry on luggage?

Mmmm. So imagine if Djokovic played Gasquet way back when.

Djokovic is allowed to use a $75,000 top of the range, at the cutting edge of sports science "egg". So new that WADA doesn't even know about it. But scientifically proven to be performance enhancing.

But later Gasquet is discovered to have used a miniscule amount of cocaine. So small that he wasn't even aware he had taken any drugs... all he knew is that he kissed a girl. This miniscule amount of cocaine was so small it would have had no effect whatsoever on Gasquet. In fact he wouldn't perhaps have been aware that the girl he kissed was a recreational drugs user until WADA discovered it. Cocaine isn't particularly known to be performance enhancing in fact it may be the opposite. But it is a well known drug and WADA can easily test for it (even miniscule particles).

So what player had the (unfair) advantage due to using something performance enhancing? And what player faces a ban. Ha ha! It's so stupid it's almost funny.

hawkeye wrote:Mmmm. So imagine if Djokovic played Gasquet way back when.

Djokovic is allowed to use a $75,000 top of the range, at the cutting edge of sports science "egg". So new that WADA doesn't even know about it. But scientifically proven to be performance enhancing.

But later Gasquet is discovered to have used a miniscule amount of cocaine. So small that he wasn't even aware he had taken any drugs... all he knew is that he kissed a girl. This miniscule amount of cocaine was so small it would have had no effect whatsoever on Gasquet. In fact he wouldn't perhaps have been aware that the girl he kissed was a recreational drugs user until WADA discovered it. Cocaine isn't particularly known to be performance enhancing in fact it may be the opposite. But it is a well known drug and WADA can easily test for it (even miniscule particles).

So what player had the (unfair) advantage due to using something performance enhancing? And what player faces a ban. Ha ha! It's so stupid it's almost funny.

A Gasquet owns a lamborginhi, I think poor Richie can afford the egg chamber if it is the magical bullet to his fitness problems. Hawkeye this is one of your most ludicrous posts. Does Djokovic even own an egg chamber? If he does own an egg chamber does he have a team of technicians and movers, moving it around for him in his 11 month tour of the globe? More excuses as to why someone's particular hero gets their ass kicked by Novak.

WADA is the world anti-doping agency, is oxygen and air pressure dope? If you watch NFL football the players inhale oxygenated air from tanks. Apparently, Novak holds the exclusive patent on egg chambers and has cornered the global market for donkey cheese, next we will find out that donkey cheese "has not been approved by WADA".

Really sad and pathetic, people can't give the man credit for his talent and hardwork and have to come up with lame excuses like only Novak has access to a 75k machine. Funny MRI machines cost a million dollars can only Novak afford an MRI? Nadal has 700,000 dollar watch, for the price of a watch he can buy 10 egg machines.

The watch was a gift, no?

We are now fully digressed from the OP and have taken corners of turf based on personal player affinities.

@HE... Salbutamol? - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salbutamol

Are we going to outlaw treadmills, weights, (and an axe and tires, and...)?

CVAC machines (in another incarnation called CPAP) are used for Sleep Apnea treatment.

All the top players started at 0, and based on individual capability/talent/work ethic/parental and national support... are where they are and now can afford what they need to stay at the top (including PEDs - if so desired). Let us not begrudge them what they can afford.

Is someone going to complain that even the ATP ranking is a Player Enhancement Device?

kingraf wrote:The watch was a gift, no?

An advertisement, for Richard B Mille, Rolex, et al, ...

I think a racquet should also be banned, because it enhances the players' ability to hit the ball, no?

LF, I haven't digressed, CVACs are a valid discussion point outside sleep apnoea.
So if a player can afford a performance enhancing device others cant that's fine? I find that an absurd position to take. As is the bat/ball analogy, its making a mockery of a proper discussion.
socal, I'm out and about but yes those devices rapidly simulate hyperbaric changes, that's why they're used. The links are out there. This isn't about Djokovic per se but performance enhancing devices or drugs in general.

Back on topic, good news here......

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/22392989

Time to shame this corrupt country.

Does anyone know the legal reason for which the judge ordered the destruction of the blood bags? I haven't seen it mentioned in the coverage I've read.

lydian wrote:LF, I haven't digressed, CVACs are a valid discussion point outside sleep apnoea.
So if a player can afford a performance enhancing device others cant that's fine? I find that an absurd position to take. As is the bat/ball analogy, its making a mockery of a proper discussion.

CVACs, Egg Chambers, BMR machines,... all fall in the same category. I am just trying to put a reasonable boundary, that is why my sarcasm vis-a-vis the racquet bit. Better strings, better racquets are also affordable as a player climbs the rungs of the Tennis ladder. Should Guga have been disallowed Luxis, or Nastase his Spaghetti strings?

As SoCal pointed out, even analgesics help enhance (perhaps within 'normal' variances) abilities.

My original comment was referring to the Oxygen tents anyway.

If there is a medically significant study to document enhancing effects of chemicals (and or devices), WADA's inclusion, despite our individual opinions, does provide a foundation for such discussions. If chemicals is the current focus of WADA, so be it.

Djokovic (and Hewitt in the 7 commentary box) did talk about recovery techniques during one of his post-match interviews. Perhaps Stupid Saturday and the like, play a role in players wanting to be top condition for the final hurdle, and will use legal means of recovery, like an ice bath.

@BB... should North Korea get the Olympics next? (Just kidding). Madrid should feel enough pressure if athletes get together. Hopefully it is not a repeat of 1973 W.

Oxygen Tents

Here is an example of a National use of an Oxygen Tent - http://mariposaxprs.wordpress.com/2011/09/19/now-a-bubble/

There is also a link describing differences between CVACs and Oxygen Tents.

Another issue with egg chambers is that they have been used to actually mask the use of EPO. Lance Armstrong was advised to use an egg chamber to cover up his use of EPO. Interesting hey....

http://www.dropshotdispatch.com/2012/10/11/usadas-lance-armstrong-report-suggests-hypoxic-chambers-can-fool-epo-tests/

kingraf wrote:The watch was a gift, no?

the one LA offered to the motorcyclist to aid his doping scheme?

You make the assumption that others can't afford to rent the magic twenty minutes you need in that device to get these miraculous gains. Again just because the machine cost a paltry 75000 does not mean regular people can't afford 20 minutes of access. Why does the purchase price bar access for a short time. A 747 cost 300 million dollars and any of us can afford access to it. An MRI machine is 15 times the cost of the egg chamber.

Droogle who posts on and off said he went into one of these devices to cure a headache from a hangover. If he can gain access to the holiest of the holy I am sure a low ranked pro or junior can as well. I mean tanning beds are about as expensive. And you state that just 20 mins will give you the impact of weeks of training I think if you can afford a cheeseburger you could rent twenty minutes now and then on this machine. Droogle went into to cure a hangover.

In short I find the logic lacking from this argument. And Lydian your argument is not about djokovic you claim but the analogy you use by how you still don't believe his 11 hour performance at AO and hawkeyes silly post kind of makes me suspicious.

Furthermore what about all the other advantages the top pros have that comes from money, should federer be allowed to fly in a private jet and have a giant team around him because some other athlete can't afford to match it? Money has advantages that is why people want it

So why is Djokovic the only guy using the device (to my knowledge) Socal?

lydian wrote:So why is Djokovic the only guy using the device (to my knowledge) Socal?

One good reason is that only 20 exist and they are all in the US. There's one in the facility Novak stays at during USO.

So it's not even as if Novak gets to use it very often.

You're coming at this from a strange angle, Lydian.

As far as I know, Federer is the only player who flies juniors and others out to a training camp in Dubai to act as hitting partners. Does this make it wrong? And can every player afford to do that?

lydian wrote:Another issue with egg chambers is that they have been used to actually mask the use of EPO. Lance Armstrong was advised to use an egg chamber to cover up his use of EPO. Interesting hey....

http://www.dropshotdispatch.com/2012/10/11/usadas-lance-armstrong-report-suggests-hypoxic-chambers-can-fool-epo-tests/

PRP and it's legalization also have similar issues.

Interestingly there are two CVAC centers within 5 miles of where I live in Orange county CA, and the company that manufactures machines is in my hometown of Irvine. In order to better assist my fellow posters I will schedule an appointment today for a CVAC session and then report back. All these claims about how 20 minutes substitutes for weeks of training will be tested by yours truly and I will respond back my findings. I want to see if I turn into superman after this this, I will play a match before and then go into the CVAC since Orange County seems to be the mecca of CVAC.

lydian wrote:So why is Djokovic the only guy using the device (to my knowledge) Socal?

He says he has used it a few times, you crediting his 11 hour marathon at Australia to it is not supported with any facts. Are we to assume that between the murray match and the Nadal match he flew to the west coast of CA a 20 hour flight to the nearest CVAC machine and flew back for the Nadal final. As I said I just found the number to a place close to my home and I will schedule some time on this wonder chamber because if 20 minutes of it are the equivalent of weeks of high altitude training then I want it. I will make sure I go in after a match on hardcourt to test its magical healing powers.

I read he hadn't used it since about 2010 - I think he said something like that in an interview last year, but can't remember whereabouts on-line that I read that.

lydian wrote:Another issue with egg chambers is that they have been used to actually mask the use of EPO. Lance Armstrong was advised to use an egg chamber to cover up his use of EPO. Interesting hey....

http://www.dropshotdispatch.com/2012/10/11/usadas-lance-armstrong-report-suggests-hypoxic-chambers-can-fool-epo-tests/

Wait a minute you told me on another thread that the egg chamber was twice as effective as blood doping and it is legal, so why would you use the egg chamber to cover blood doping when it is legal and more effective than blood doping. Again I would like some corroboration for this innuendo, you claim that now Lance Armstrong was advised to use it to cover his blood doping, well I think he should get a refund because it obviously didn't work. You claim that this isn't directed at djokovic and now you are suggesting that the CVAC is actually a cover for possible EPO use?

Back to my original thesis, Novak beats Nadal and first it gets blamed on the rain, and now it gets blamed on the magical egg, which could be a cover for blood doping, although on another thread you stated the CVAC was twice as effective as blood doping and its legal? So which is it, is the CVAC more effective than blood doping or a cover for blood doping?

If there is a magical egg CVAC is it I tell you. Get a quote as well, Socal, I think Im done spending 10 hours a week in a gym.

socal1976 wrote:Wait a minute you told me on another thread that the egg chamber was twice as effective as blood doping and it is legal, so why would you use the egg chamber to cover blood doping when it is legal and more effective than blood doping. Again I would like some corroboration for this innuendo...

Armstrong had a long relationship with Dr. Michele Ferrari, who allegedly knew what he was doing when it came to doping. Here's an example of how complicated things got in the USADA report:

"Dr. Ferrari recognized that the EPO testing method works through separating and measuring the quantity (known as “intensity”) of various types of EPO and comparing the ratio of EPO bands in what is known as the “basic” region (where the bands tend to be caused by the administration of synthetic EPO) to bands in the acidic region (where the bands are naturally produced). However, because the test operates by measuring a ratio, the test can be fooled to a degree by increasing the amount of EPO in the acidic region (i.e., those produced naturally), which can be accomplished by stimulating natural production of EPO either through going to altitude or by sleeping in an altitude tent (also known as a “hypoxic chamber”). Dr. Ferrari advised the use of hypoxic chambers to reduce the effectiveness of the EPO test in detecting the use of synthetic EPO. Regular training at altitude (such as at St. Moritz, Tenerife or Aspen) would achieve a similar result."

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-lance-armstrong-never-tested-positive-2012-10

By the way I read your link, it also says altitude training could be a cover for EPO and his doctor's advice didn't seem to work as a cover either.

JuliusHMarx wrote:I read he hadn't used it since about 2010 - I think he said something like that in an interview last year, but can't remember whereabouts on-line that I read that.

We don't know how many of these systems actually exist - would CVAC state if an athlete wanted to buy and receive one confidentially given they make money from selling the things? - pllus there are hypoxic tents you can easily buy anyway. Also, given the negative response to Djokovic's announcement of using them in Aug2011 he's hardly going to keep admitting to either CVAC or hypoxic tent use is he. We don't know either way.

Sure Socal, but how regular is training at altitude needed to be effective for touring sport stars? There are no easy answers here but we know Armstrong was told to use hypoxic chambers as a cover for using EPO. So my point is that the use of these devices could be dodgy, ie. allowing them to be used.

Actually the company on their website lists all the machines they have sold and their location, for those in private residence they don't list the owner but state the location of the device. And if a tennis player who travels around the world 11 months year from hotel to airport it would be a massive logistical nightmare to move one around with you like a travelling circus, trust it me you can't keep a travelling egg chamber secret.

I will do a report for you, I want to become the guinea pig.

Ok Socal, one might argue they arent needed to be taken everywhere if used as a masking device from time to time...just saying. Anyway clearly it's all above board, nothing to see here.

lydian wrote:Sure Socal, but how regular is training at altitude needed to be effective for touring sport stars? There are no easy answers here but we know Armstrong was told to use hypoxic chambers as a cover for using EPO. So my point is that the use of these devices could be dodgy, ie. allowing them to be used.

It didn't work for Armstrong either so his doctor seemed to be wrong. Again on another thread you mention how it is more effective than even doping, why use it as a cover for EPO when it is more magical than blood doping? Also no evidence that Armstrong actually followed the doctor's advice and even if he did, it didn't work.

And besides again, the device is not banned by any doping agency because it isn't dope, it is oxygen and air pressure.