Friday, May 18, 2007

Hearing - Friday Papp Direct and Cross I.

Beginning to file in at 2:14. Looks like we're here tomorrow. The only good news is that Mrs. TBV is coming down for the weekend.

BRUNET: Welcome back. Sorry for being 45 minutes late. Meeting in chambers on scheduling. Agreement close of evidence by Weds 5pm May 23, arguments later. Witness list to be called through Wednsday, now closed.

[ ARRRGH!!!! No closing arguments while we are here. ]

Saturday hearing 9:30-5:00 Monday start 8:00am Tues/Weds 9:30-5:00.

time will be adjusted equally.


q: career?
a: 1989 junior 1994 senior; various national races, competed extensively.


q: In 1996 did you take a break?
a: Graduated HS 1993, went to college on scholarship, put on the side for cycling, invited to join Olympic Training. Teammate Christian Van de Velde, but decided to go back to school 1996.

q: ever testified before?
a: no.

q: from 1989-1996 did you dope?
a: no.

q: was dope prevelent in those events, in your opinion?
a: no

q: when did you return?
a: 2001:

q: what changed?
a: big differnece in speed of peloton.

q: how?
a: faster.

q: talk to teammates?
a: yes.

q: what did they suggest?
a: they said things should change, see this doctor...

q: what did he say?
a: do a course of epo.

q: this is 2001?
a: yes

q: did you?
a: yes.

q: did you struggle with that decision?
a: yes.

q: how?
a: felt I didn't had an option to compete at previous level. if he wanted to continue, he felt he needed to.

q: did you take t in 2001?
a: no

Q: what did you compete in?
a: 2001 multistage UCI races international and us single day races, and italian races.

q: in 2004 did you get more information about T?
a: made acqaintance of a spanish racer, and he provided me explicit detailed information as a recuperative agent for stage races.

q: will talk later of details. when did you start?
a: winter 2005.

q: why?
a: I began to improve my recovery in competition.

q: where did you receive the T?
a: by prescription from doctor in California?

q: did he now you were a testable cyclist?
a: yes.

q: what did the doctor do?

q: who referred you?
a: a physiologist?

q: it was clear this was a doping doctor?
a: yes.

q: do you have the product the doctor prescribed?
a: yes.

BARNETT: may I approach?

ANDROGEL testosterone gel 1% on elmo.

q: this is what you used?
a: yes.

q: did you take this to build muscles?
a: no.

q: you've learned about the practices of doping?
a: yes.

q: you are familiar with microdosing?
a: yes.

q: describe.
a: using enough for benefit, not enough to turn positive.

q: how would you use in a stage race?
a: after doping control, a discrete location rub on your chest.

q: why so soon
a: in 30 minutes you'd have high levels, in 4 you'd be normal levels.

q: you rode a while without, then you used it what did you feel.
a: significant improvement in recovery. on a day to day basis had a significant ability to affect my performance.

q: important in stage races why?
a: a race isn't won by the fastest, by the guy who recovers best, daily.

q: were you tested while using this?
a: yes.

q: how many times?
a: yes.

q: was it detected?
a: no.

q: t/e screen did not.
a: no.

q: in 2006 did you start riding with an italian team,
a: yes.

q: did they provide you with alternative substances?
a: yes.

q: no longer using androgel?
a: exhausted my supply.

q: they gave you someting else?
a: yes.

q: describe.
a: there was a more organized and sophisticated program, and i was encouraged to participate.

q: did you think you could stay without participating?
a: no

q: were there different regimes?
a: yes

q: did you have to work your way up to get more?
a: yes.

q: did you test positive in turkey?
a: yes.

q: t/e?
a: metabolites of testosterone.

q: when?
a: may 7 2006.

q: have you taken a sanction?
a: yes, 2 years.

q: when you were notified did you think of fighting it?
a: thought about it.

q: you know you were doping?
a: yes.

q: what made you fight though you knew you'd been caught?
a: within the culture of the team, and the sport, it's the expected thing to do. there's so much pressure to protect teammates, sponsors, family, tooth and nail. you know it's not just you who stands to suffer if you test positive. You know you're disposable.

q: pressured to keep silent?
a: yes, especially on an italian team.

q: you were close?
a: yes.

q: what was your reaction once you tested positive?
a: almost clinical in that it wasn't shocking or unexpected. there was a course of action to follow. how one should compose oneself.

q: did they cut you off?
a: yeah, they did. when they realized there was no way out, they disowned me. these were guys I considered my brothers.

q: why did you decide to accept responsibility?
a: what made me own up and brought me here was when my wife told me we were pregnant with my son, and I knew i had a responsibility to my family and that

q: based on that, you accepted the sanction
a: yes.

q: reason announcement was delayed.
a: cooperating with US attorneys, and they asked for a delay.

q: offered to cooperate?
a: yes.

q: are you familiar with monitoring power data?
a: yes.

q: when?
a: began in 2001.

q: did you take t to increase functional threshold power?
a: no.


q: you see "what does power mean to a cyclist"
a: yes.

q: did you review?
a: last night?

q: you think it's important?
a: yes.

q: it's the most imporant thing.
a: yes.

q: what is a powertap?
a: a device in a hub for measuring power.

q: this is a chart for power data for page S17.
a: yes.

q: this is a discussion on the brief. Landis had an average intensity of 281 watts over 6 hours. Only 7% of his efforts were more intense than S17.
a: yes.

q: functional threshold power. did you expect with microdosed T you'd expect a new high?
a: no.

q: what was the desired result?
a: to enable the athlete, as the race goes on, to come as close as possible to their best power on a daily basis. not necessarily to set records, but to get back to that level.

q: to get be as good on S17 as S1?
a: I don't know anything about Mr. Landis, I have no ill will towards him.


q: in your experience do riders take T knowing they will be tested?
a: yes.

q: why?
a: because you don't need a single dose in small quantities that don't trip the ratios. you could easily stop using it for 24-48 hours

q: Is "doesn't have a beneficial effect during an effect like the tour" true?
a: not by my experience. It does have a beneficial effect, for me.

q: so they've asked us to believe two things so far... you believe he could take it knowing he'd be testing.
a: yes. I'm not getting anything out of being here. I've been cut off.... It denies,

q: next claim -- "in an amount too small to raise his T above the level of an average male."
a: if you take it, your hoping to raise it to the normal, rested level, not the decreased level due to fatigue. It's not about being a body builder building 25 pounds of muscle mass.

q: about staying fresh during long stages.
a: yes.

q: another claim "that 4 of 5 tests his tests t/e screens were normal'
a: I was 2 for 2.



q: you said you have been cooperating with us attorney, which.
a: southern district, ca, San Diego.

q: any other contact with DoJ about doping violations?
a: yes.

q: which?
a: those in san diego.

q: in conjunction with the doping case.
a: don't know. i'm not privy to the discussion.

q: what did you share?
a: the same kind of information I'm sharing here today.

q: have you been notified you are a subject?
a: I have not been notified I'm a subject of their investigation.

q: when did you meet with the us attorney in San diego?
a: earlier this year, once.

q: do you have an attorney?
a: I had one at the meeting?

q: who?
a: stefan andenian.

q: you don't know floyd landis?
a: no.

q: spoken to him?
a: no?

q: friends with his teammates at phonak?
a: no

q: you weren't at the 2006 TDF?
a: no.

q: or 2005
a: no.

q: 2004?
a: not a single one.

q: how many times have you won Paris Nice.
a: never.

q: how many times have you won ToC?
a: none.

[ goes on ]

q: do you hold any national championiships?
a: no.

q: you were racing between 1989 and 1996.
a: US and internationally?

q: where?
a: europe and latin america?

q: which teams?
a: various.

q: names?
a: 1996 pittsburgh power; 1995 same; 1994 same; internationally w/nationally; 1993 junior.

q: so there was only one professional team?


a: team with Matt Eaton.

q: you didn't win...
a: no.

q: you chose not to get a contract or weren't able to?
a: I'd set a deadline for scholarship renewal, and didn't have a contract, so registered for classes.

q: after undergraduate you returned?
a: yes.

q: and the peloton was faster.
a: yes.

q: and he advised epo?
a: yes.

q: and epo increases hematocrit?
a: yes.

q: and it's not T?
a: yes.

q: but you weren't taking T in 2001?
a: correct.

q: affect of EPO on racing career?
a: can describe on my physiology.

q: no, about your training and racing?
a: by increasing your hematocrit, better oxygen.

q: you said before T had a beneficial effect for you, and described the effect. What effect did EPO have for you?
a: raised hematocrit?

q: did you measure hematocrit?
a: of course.

q: what effect did it have?
a: what do you want?

q: describe as you did for testosterone the beneficial effect, how you felt, impact on racing or training.
a: increased functinal threshold power, the power I had at threshold.

q: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006?
a: yes.

q: all the time until you got caught for T?
a: yes.

q: did you take anything else during that period?
a: yes.

q: what else during that timeframe 2001-2006
a: caffeine.

q: anything else?
a: with the italian team, I can't speak to the specifics.

q: was this the whistle team?
a: yes.

q: that team was giving you substances and you didn't know what they were?
a: the team wasn't.

q: the coach?
a: no

q: an individual?
a: yes.

q: who, a name?

BARNETT: objection.

BRUNET: overrruled.

a: may I consult my attorney?

BRUNET: you may.

BARNETT: can we do it away from an open mike?

BRUNET: we'll recess.

RECESS 15 minutes.


Anonymous said...

He took EPO what does that have to do with testosterone or with floyd?

Anonymous said...

Just as an aside, because I now realise it needs to be said.

Any analytical procedure requires ABSOLUTE attention to detail. That's particularly true when dealing with chemical substances. Even the most simple of procedures can go wrong for apparently insignificant reasons. If you've never worked in that environment, you wont understand what I'm talking about. That's not meant to be condescending, it's just a fact.

What's happening here is that the authorities are trying to give the impression that these tests are bomb proof and you just press the button and the results are always 100% accurate and their interpretation of those results is always 100% accurate. If that is what you think, then you have been mislead. If you don't believe me then contact your nearest university and ask them. Science is just not like that ... If it was, there'd be doping testing stations on every corner of your town. These people are in self defence mode. Recognise that.

Anonymous said...

I was thinking that if Landis has a "shotgun defense" with points scattered all over the place, USADA has a "shotgun offense" with random points scattered all over the place.

The thing is, that it doesn't make sense if there is really a strong case against Landis to begin with. Why should you need to have your points scattered everywhere. You'd stick to the science and it would speak for itself if it the test a valid one.


Unknown said...

I qualify as a lay person...but I agree with your assessment of the situation...try making biscuits with baking soda instead of baking powder and you get something completely different than what you expected out of the oven...

What do you mean no closing statements...

Anonymous said...

Interesting how Joseph Papp can describe in great detail the benefits of testosterone on his cycling performance, but is now confused on how EPO could (and did) improve his performance.

The coaching on his testimony is ringing loud and clear

Anonymous said...

I feel sorry for Mr. Papp. After taking all those drugs, he still didn't win! So, we have now established that the drugs don't turn you into superman. Why do all of the USADA witnesses bring their own attorneys?

Anonymous said...

Papp won lots of races - not on the level of Landis, but nothing to sneeze at either.

Sacky said...

Anonymous said...
Papp won lots of races - not on the level of Landis, but nothing to sneeze at either.

Exactly my thoughts.

So this guy takes banned substances to improve his performance. Yet -- he lacks the natural ability to perform on the world stage and then goes further and shows that even _WITH_ the dope he still can't win.

In my eyes his statements have no bearing on this case. He's never participated in the major races; he's never won anything big.

He can't be compared to Floyd Landis in any way because he is not of the same caliber as Floyd Landis.

Anonymous said...

Ali your comment is absolutely on point. When I took analytical chemistry I could ace the exams but my lab work dragged me down.

They are using Papp to try to lay a basis for using the late round of B tests. That Landis used some medium to absorb light doeses of T to recover which would be missed in the A sample test and would not necessarliy be used every day. Their argument will be that after the bonk on Stage 16 he used it and that let him recover to ride Stage 17 as he did. Very artful becasue it does not require him to super perform on that day, just to be back to normal.

Interesting thing is that this is another use of the "non-analytical positive" approach to support questionable lab results. Real question for me is if they are going to bring in an expert to support Papp's statements. Recent brain imaging studies have shown that the "placebo effect" actually is reflected in brain activity in a way that deos have physical effects. Strong suggestion that it is not just a psychological phenomenon. Not saying that Papp had magic lotion rubbed on his chest and, believing he would recover faster, he did. But science is saying something similar.

I want an endocrinologist (sp?) to tell me about this, not a second tier rider.

Ken ( said...

Ali and bannaoj, thank you for your insightful comments. They were good food for thought.


BTW: it is so nice to see things getting back to "real" investigation rather than monkey dance drama.

LeMond used to be a big hero of mine, but over the past few years his behavior in the press has really tarnished my image of him. I hate to see him constantly getting entangled in this type of controversy. I've always felt that he started getting bitter when he was forced to retire for health reasons and this bitterness has just festered over the years.

Anonymous said...

yes I understand quite well, all you want is superheros. A world full of superheros, just for you and your bier in the sofa.
Go back to reality man, the world you dream of is the one sold by your baseball & superball teams. Just a fantasy, nothing real.