Columbia & Garmin Choose Catlin For Independent Testing Programme
by fmk on Dec 8, 2008 9:51 AM EST
Email
PrintAccording to CN, Don Catlin has secured the contract to carry out Columbia and Garmin's independent testing programmes. Testing has already commenced. Catlin had been Columbia's original choice for their testing programme but ACE ended up getting the gig.
According to Bob Stapleton, the new programme will be a step forward from the ACE programme and will take account of the ACE database of testing as well as the UCI's biological programme:
"We will be working with Garmin to bring the programme together. The direction is quite different to ACE as the UCI now have the biological passport in place, and we've already done a lot of baseline testing. We have a complete database on our athletes. That's a pretty powerful tool with a year or more of history."
Jonathan Vaughters added that Catlin's testing would differ from the UCI's testing in several ways:
"Don Catlin isn't restrained by so much protocol when it comes to testing, he can look at results and test for drugs that aren't even on the market and can then come to us and say 'the results for this guy are very strange' and from there we can act."
As well as having access to the UCI's bilogical passport data, Catlin's programme will also have access to WADA's comprehensive ADAMS whereabouts system. This brings to mind a recent comment from Lance Armstrong when faced with questions about the apparent foot-dragging in implementing his own much vaunted independent testing programme. Interviewed by Rupert Guinness, Armstrong offered this explanation:
"That is complicated to organise. You have the idea of Don Catlin. You have the reality of Damsgaard at Astana. You have the reality of WADA, USADA and the UCI. Then you have the reality that none of these people communicate. I think the idea that you have a comprehensive independent testing program is a great idea. [But] it is another step to post those results online. Keep in mind WADA does not support Catlin and Damsgaard. For them, an independent testing program is their worst nightmare."
Keeping in mind Armstrong's contention that WADA does not support Catlin or Damsgaard, that such programmes are supposedly their worst nightmare, one has to ask the obvious question: how come Columbia and Garmin have secured access to the UCI's passport data and WADA's ADAMS whereabouts system? Could someone be telling porkies here?
31 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Columbia’s press release.
pounding along in three ratios like a sonata
like a Ritter with pommelled scrotum atra cura on the step
Botticelli from the fork down pestling the transmission
tires bleeding voiding zeep the highway
And Garmin’s press release.
pounding along in three ratios like a sonata
like a Ritter with pommelled scrotum atra cura on the step
Botticelli from the fork down pestling the transmission
tires bleeding voiding zeep the highway
Can't tell
Are Garmin and Columbia coordinating with each other? There’s a misplaced quote in there that sounds like Stapleton talking about working with Garmin. Interesting.
It’s nice to hear that the two American teams seem very aggressive and sincere in running a clean program. We’ll see if it works, but all indicators are positive.
CQRanking.com, you complete me.
by Chris Fontecchio on Dec 8, 2008 2:45 PM EST reply actions
except
that last i saw they hadn’t started their program yet. they were still negotiating. has that changed?
the last PR on this was that negociations were still in progress
which means no samples taken, no tests done
press release
actually, it was an interview with Catlin now that I think about it… last week, right?
yes
It was an interview with Catlin, and he said negotiations were on-going, and that it would be a bad thing is they ended (roughly). That’s the last I’d heard of the thing, too.
‘kay, we’re all on the same page. The skeptical reader might ask: what exactly are Armstrong and Catlin negotiating? And further, how could two full teams reach an agreement more quickly than Catlin and Armstrong who are presumably working on a program only for him? That was a terrible sentence, but sadly, the skeptical reader doesn’t write very coherently.
'Cause . . .
. . . Astana already has an in-house anti-doping system supervised by Rasmus Damsgaard who is effectively a now a direct competitor with Catlin on anti-doping systems.
I think the hold up is really these two guys trying to find alignment on a lot of highly technical stuff and there is really no conspiracy going on.
It’s just two pure scientists working out details before they go public with what they are going to do because they both know there will be a lot of scrutiny on their process of this.
Catlin doesn't mention coordinating with Damsgaard
In the interview that I read, Catlin gives no indication that he is attempting to coordinate with Damsgaard, or that Damsgaard has anything to do with the hold-up on Armstrong’s testing program.
Instead, Catlin says that the problem is that Armstrong is “very busy,” and that “keeping up with him, testing him, takes a lot of planning.”
by Susie Hartigan on Dec 10, 2008 2:03 AM EST up reply actions
advice from a skeptical reader
Don’t go out with full press court stating complete transparency and a new testing program with Catlin before the program is agreed to. (oops ending with a preposition is bad right…)
But Catlin already has the system designed and this is why Columbia and Garmin got on board so quickly.
In fact, he has been very public about how he would set up an anti-doping system now for a few years.
This difference with Coulumbia, and Garmin when compared to Astana is they don’t require alignment with another completely private anti-doping system that Damsgaard built.
It takes a lot of time to successfully integrate systems like this and I am very confident that it will happen.
Damsgaard hires different labs/testing companies to do theactual testing
Presumably it’s easier/cheaper to get a network like that in place for a whole team than for just one guy.
That said I think it’s a major blunder that they weren’t even close to getting started when they annonced. The whole point of these programs is to cover the athletes in the off-season when, according to just about every expert I’ve heard from (Damsgaard, Saltin, Conte) , the the most effective doping takes place. And now they’ve screwed that up.
Carlos Sastre - Tour de France winner - Born From Jets
Interesting defence Ryan except … in the space of a few weeks, Columbia, Garmin and Catlin have worked out how to co-ordinate with the UCI and WADA and already commenced testing. Yes, they were already working with the UCI, feeding data up the food chain, but now they’re also taking data down the food chain as well.
If they can move these two great monoliths, who (some would have us believe) fear and shudder at the thought of independent testing programmes, then seriously, the sceptics have a point – WTF is going on with LA’s programme?
pounding along in three ratios like a sonata
like a Ritter with pommelled scrotum atra cura on the step
Botticelli from the fork down pestling the transmission
tires bleeding voiding zeep the highway
Often, it is actually easier to align with institutions like the UCI or the WADA because the responsibility for alignment is with you to them and their highly structured system. Afterall, great monoliths are not required to be all that flexible.
I would suspect that getting the personal agendas of Damsgaard, LA, & Catlin to align would be much more difficult then simply cordinating with a system already in place that is set up for a proactive involvment from teams.
Maybe you all can just chill out for a month and not jump to conclusions so quickly that something shady is going on?
But in the same way that the UCI and WADA system is already in place, so is Damsgaard’s, so your logic seems a bit iffy.
As for the ease of integrating with WADA and the UCI … my experience of large organisations is that small people wishing to feed off their data is not usually something that you can just flick a switch for. Yet Columbia, Garmin and Catlin have secured access to ADAMS, not just for feeding data in but for getting data out. They have secured access to the bio passport data, not just for getting data in but for getting data out. Large organisations are usually a lot less nimble than small organisations (eg Damsgaard) when it comes to granting such access privileges.
And, as has been pointed out already, in LA’s defence of his tardiness, and in Catlin’s explanation of the tardiness, no one has attempted to blame Damsgaard. LA has sought to blame Catlin, for taking so long to draft a contract, and Catlin has sought to put the blame on LA for not being available to discuss the details. Damsgaard is a red herring.
I for one am not suggesting that anything shady is going on. Just that, as usual, LA seems to be full of an awful lot of BS, particularly on this matter.
pounding along in three ratios like a sonata
like a Ritter with pommelled scrotum atra cura on the step
Botticelli from the fork down pestling the transmission
tires bleeding voiding zeep the highway
Probably the last guy I would piss off is Don Catlin and all I can hope is LA is just smart enough to know that jerking him around will create a very bad outcome.
That said, I wasn’t placing the blame on Damsgaard, or trying to make it out as if he is the root cause of this. I was trying to point out that Damsgaard, Catlin, and LA may have slightly different visions as how all this should roll out and I could see that it may take a little while for them to get a consensus between them.
I could also see that Damsgaard, and Catlin whom I am sure have a great deal of mutual respect for each others work want to coordinate the best system they can because there is going to be enormous amount of scrutiny once they present it.
If I was any of those guys shoes, I would totally error on a little extra time if that meant the system they put in place was without any possible room for criticism down the line.
Lastly, this may all just come down to the egos of three guys at the top of their professions.
Regardless, I bet in the next 30 days this will all play itself out.
If I was any of those guys shoes, I would totally error on a little extra time if that meant the system they put in place was without any possible room for criticism down the line.
But as Jens has pointed out, the off-season is the most important time to test, all experts say that. Erring here damages the integrity of the system going forward. Anything that starts in January – or even later – would be compromised by the fact that the three months and more that have elapsed since this system was first dreamt up (he’s been speaking to Catlin since August) are some of the most important months for such a programme. Even LA has been forced to admit that he’s been dinged a little by this.
LA has said all along that he’s happy for Catlin to do whatever Catlin wants to do, to test when and where he wants and for what he wants. That’s the great big shield he’s been holding up, that Catlin effectively has carte blanche in this. Yet the longer this goes on without the system starting, the more it looks like Catlin is being restricted. Especially when you see Columbia and Garmin achieving within weeks what LA has failed to achieve in months, a testing system in which tests have already commenced.
And if it is coming down to egos … well I think we all know who has the biggest ego in the room.
pounding along in three ratios like a sonata
like a Ritter with pommelled scrotum atra cura on the step
Botticelli from the fork down pestling the transmission
tires bleeding voiding zeep the highway
Scientists have pretty healthy egos too
We have a lot of media-attention on the Nobelprize-winners right now and judging by that they sure don’t seem to be above some pretty nasty turf-wars and infected clashes of egos.
Carlos Sastre - Tour de France winner - Born From Jets
While I do agree with what Jens said regarding the most important time test is the off season because it is highly likely that this is when the most effective doping takes place, I whole hearted disagree that an anti-doping system should be rushed into place as a means to create an appearance of validity.
I want to believe that everyone involved has a much farther reaching vision they are striving for.
I want to believe that this delay is due to a collaborative evolution in anti-doping testing and LA is the trail run of this while Columbia and Garmin will still be on the current version for this season.
I want to believe that this delay is not due to egos, or LA’s lawyers squibbling over details, or any of that sort.
That’s what I want to believe, and so far I have really seen nothing that actually demonstrates anything to the contrary.
I whole hearted disagree that an anti-doping system should be rushed into place as a means to create an appearance of validity.
Better instead to do what LA has done – claim for three months and more to have such a programme, then be caught out, admit to having been dinged a little by the lie and then try to blame Catlin for the failure to implement the testing programme you’ve happily been hiding behind.
Columbia and Garmin will still be on the current version for this season.
What current version? Catlin doesn’t have a current version and both Stapleton and Vaughters have been clear that the 2009 programme will be step forward on the 2008 programme ACE ran.
I want to believe that this delay is not due to egos
You introduced them as a possible excuse. Like you introduced Damsgaard as a possible excuse before saying you don’t really think he’s at fault in this. What comes next – Catlin’s costs?
pounding along in three ratios like a sonata
like a Ritter with pommelled scrotum atra cura on the step
Botticelli from the fork down pestling the transmission
tires bleeding voiding zeep the highway
I think it is funny you are choosing to pull quotes out of what I just stated right above your post.
As if that it is necessary to blatantly pars my words in order to win some frivolous debate that will have absolutely no impact on anything.
It is also very surprising you are claiming you are not up on the vision and direction Don Catlin has been advocating now for a few years. You always present yourself in a manner that seems to be even more well read on this stuff this most people here, including myself. Perhaps you missed this article, or you have just forgotten about it as is is now over 2 years old.
"He calls his idea the Volunteer Program. It’s driven by the concept of using science, testing, and free-will participation to prove that athletes who sign up are clean, based on thorough biological profiles of their bodies. Catlin would use these profiles to create a set of “biomarkers” that show what is and isn’t normal for each athlete. Armed with these indicators, he would institute ongoing, voluntary checkups for any athlete who chooses to participate. In return for entering the Volunteer Program, athletes would receive recognition as members. The public, press, sponsors, and governing bodies would be assured that members of the program were not doping." Outside Magazine, July 2005
I would be presuming this is his basic outline of what Columbia and Garmin are going to be doing, which I think is really great, and it is my hope that a version 2.0 would be what is in the works to roll out after his work with LA as a trial run.
I also believe that you have somewhat of a technical background and if so regardless of your specialty, you know very well that a quality system cannot be created and implemented in a very short time. Also, if you have ever dealt with creating a valid system with multiple entities, which I think maybe you have, you know very well it is not the size of the institution that creates the speed of implementation, but rather getting the people who are actually responsible all in agreement to work together that is important.
So, getting back to what has been reported as to how amazingly fast Catlin was able to coordinate with the UCI & WADA is actually irrelevant for two reasons.
The first, as I keep trying to point out, is each individual or organization requires it’s own time line and negotiation to gain alignment with. If is very foolish to compare apples and oranges, especially when you as far away as we are from the situation.
Which brings me to my second point and that is you really have no idea if the UCI & WADA are actually coordinating with Catlin. They just made a press release and maybe some initial info/data has been transferred. This does not equate to actual coordination, just the initial appearance of it.
What I see is slightly different then what you see.
I see that Columbia, Garmin, the UCI & WADA all have better PR managers then LA.
I see that the likely root cause of you indignation is really that for whatever reason Lance is basically the ‘Tom Cruise’ of cycling all runnin’ around ‘n jumpin’ on couches and female celebrities while twittering about it like a kid in college.
Lastly, as I keep saying, my speculations are just that; merely speculations that I threw out there in an attempt to present that there are far more potential possibilities for this essentially minor delay then you seem to be focused on.
As of today, there is no grassy knoll, there is no third gunman.
um, picking parts of arguments and responding to those bits...
…actually is considered one the higher forms of logical argument. You can see through that to some ulterior motivation—and be right about that—but it’s still legit for someone to pick apart your argument. More respectful of the person than telling someone what they are like, or what they appear to be, as if the reader (you) brought nothing to that interpretation.
I’m not saying you are necessarily wrong, only that—unless you in fact know the identity and job of fmk—you’re analyzing the screen persona of a fellow PdC poster, which risks crossing the (fuzzy and shifting) ad hominem line. Now, if someone is promoting themselves as a source of inside knowledge, that’s different: their background and identity could well matter. But for logical arguments? If the argument is sound, it shouldn’t matter much who makes it. If the argument is weak, ditto.
And if your point is strong, but your argumentation has gaps or mushy spots? Then getting the weak bits picked apart is a Good Thing—good for honing the argument, and good for honing your argument skills.
Are Garmin and Columbia coordinating with each other?
They have been for a while. It was joint comments after ACE closed, remember?
In the Columbia release, Stapleton explains it:
Our partnership with Don Catlin and our collaborative effort with Team Garmin-Slipstream is a perfect example. We may be competitors on the road, but we strongly believe that by working together, we can continue to help create change in the sport. Our common goals are to reinforce team values, ensure proper conduct and respect personal commitment to the team. This essential trust between teammates and management is a vital part of the team’s success. We succeed as a team together.
And Vaughters in the Garmin release says:
We’re collaborating with Team Columbia on this effort with ADSI because we strongly believe that by working together, we can continue to help inspire fair sport. Trust between teams and management is essential to success – on and off the road – and our fans and athletes alike deserve that trust.
pounding along in three ratios like a sonata
like a Ritter with pommelled scrotum atra cura on the step
Botticelli from the fork down pestling the transmission
tires bleeding voiding zeep the highway
by fmk on Dec 8, 2008 5:46 PM EST up reply actions
Didn't know
thanks
CQRanking.com, you complete me.
by Chris Fontecchio on Dec 8, 2008 5:50 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
![This is funny on so many levels. [Html should open bigger]](http://cdn3.sbnation.com/fan_shot_images/239959/flagged_small.jpg)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
