Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11101  
Old 12-31-12, 18:01
Joachim Joachim is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 531
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper View Post
http://www.examiner.com/article/tour...ng-cycle-sport



@Joachim/Kingoftheworlds:
ask yourself this: why are both McQuaid and Prudhomme talking about Sky/Wiggins with so much friggin confidence? Considering the Lance earthquake, surely we'd expect them to be a hell of a lot more prudent, right? So why aren't they? Smells fishy. period. They know there aint gonna be no postests.

Just close your eyes now and imagine what a Wiggins postest would mean for both ASO and UCI.

not gonna happen.
Lance never tested positive.

His cheating came out through other means, and started before his first win was cold.

What you suggest is betting the house, the car and the kids on one thing.

You might be right, but I dont think an organisation like ASO would like those odds. Remember, the Armstrong stuff came out. It's still coming.
Reply With Quote
  #11102  
Old 12-31-12, 18:07
taiwan's Avatar
taiwan taiwan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim View Post
That is what is known as a 'false dilemna'

Those weren't the only two choices available to them, although quite possibly the only two that youm can think of
Do tell. AFAIK you can have someone who dopes and serves your purposes or someone who dopes and doesn't.
__________________
Scientific Expert
Reply With Quote
  #11103  
Old 12-31-12, 18:11
sniper sniper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,408
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim View Post
Lance never tested positive.

His cheating came out through other means, and started before his first win was cold.

What you suggest is betting the house, the car and the kids on one thing.

You might be right, but I dont think an organisation like ASO would like those odds. Remember, the Armstrong stuff came out. It's still coming.
Joachim, you're not getting it, though you're getting close:
indeed, Lance never tested positive, he singlehandedly made anti-doping testing look like a joke.
So tell me, with that knowledge, how the hell can prudhomme and pat be so darn confident about Sky being clean?
Reply With Quote
  #11104  
Old 12-31-12, 18:18
Joachim Joachim is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 531
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taiwan View Post
Do tell. AFAIK you can have someone who dopes and serves your purposes or someone who dopes and doesn't.
You can also have someone who doesn't dope.
Reply With Quote
  #11105  
Old 12-31-12, 18:24
Hugh Januss's Avatar
Hugh Januss Hugh Januss is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: socal
Posts: 5,767
Default

This same argument started mid 1999 and we know how that eventually played out. The only difference is now we know for a fact that this sort of thing can and does happen in the UCI world. It is not just wild conspiracy theory speculation to think that there is something more than meets the eye when a team is that dominant, and the fact that all the same catch phrases are present and accounted for does nothing to reduce the suspicions.
__________________
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings."

Proud member of the Clinic 1200
Reply With Quote
  #11106  
Old 12-31-12, 18:26
taiwan's Avatar
taiwan taiwan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim View Post
You can also have someone who doesn't dope.
Not on the top step the Tour podium.
__________________
Scientific Expert
Reply With Quote
  #11107  
Old 12-31-12, 18:32
Benotti69's Avatar
Benotti69 Benotti69 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,001
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim View Post
Lance never tested positive.

His cheating came out through other means, and started before his first win was cold.

What you suggest is betting the house, the car and the kids on one thing.

You might be right, but I dont think an organisation like ASO would like those odds. Remember, the Armstrong stuff came out. It's still coming.
Armstrong tested positive in 99 for steroids and the UCI broke their own rules by accepting a backdated TUE.

ASO and UCI did bet everythig on Armstrong so much so that they enabled him to win 7 in a row.
__________________
"ahaha, ever had the feeling you been cheated?" JL SF Jan'78
Reply With Quote
  #11108  
Old 12-31-12, 18:34
Joachim Joachim is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 531
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper View Post
Joachim, you're not getting it, though you're getting close:
indeed, Lance never tested positive, he singlehandedly made anti-doping testing look like a joke.
So tell me, with that knowledge, how the hell can prudhomme and pat be so darn confident about Sky being clean?
I understand the point you are making and it is a good point, they can't be certain. I'm not certain. How can anyone be certain?

If I've understood you correctly you are suggesting that they feel able to say Sky are not doping because they are going to rig the testing procedures somehow to ensure that Sky never test positive.

However, that strategy, if such a one existed, did not work for Armstrong, the UCI and by implication the ASO. It didn't matter that he never tested positive, the truth came out in ways beyond the UCI/ASO's control.

* slight point of order: I was using the phrase 'Armstrong never tested positive' to illustrate the above point, and how his ability, with the UCI's help, to cheat tests didn't keep him safe. He did test positive. Also , he didn't make a mockery of the tests singlehandly, he had the help of pretty much the entire peloton.


Not trying to score points here, and would genuinely be interested in if I've understood your point correctly and if so, whether you can accept mine.

@Benotti, read the above, I think it answers your post.

Last edited by Joachim; 12-31-12 at 18:37.
Reply With Quote
  #11109  
Old 12-31-12, 18:41
Hugh Januss's Avatar
Hugh Januss Hugh Januss is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: socal
Posts: 5,767
Default

Pat and Hein aren't that stupid, they won't help anybody win 7 ever again, no matter how much money they might stand to get out of it.
__________________
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings."

Proud member of the Clinic 1200
Reply With Quote
  #11110  
Old 12-31-12, 18:43
Joachim Joachim is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 531
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taiwan View Post
Not on the top step the Tour podium.
That would only be likely true if everyone underneath the podium was doping. Historically true for a couple of decades in the history of the Tour, but for the last three we don't know yet.


Remember we are talking about possibilities here.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:06.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.