ADD ( Anti Doping Denmark) report..

[sniper]

Re: Re:

They really do have a low opinion of the intelligence of cycling fans.

it's a mistake to think they care about cycling fans let alone form opinions about the intelligence of cycling fans.
they care about their wallet.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Ofc, everyone dopes during the early parts of their careers but they only win when they are clean

 

[spalco]

Re:

Ofc, everyone dopes during the early parts of their careers but they only win when they are clean

What a coincidence, eh? Imagine what Lance could have achieved had he only stopped doping before catching cancer.

 

[The Carrot]

Re: Re:

They really do have a low opinion of the intelligence of cycling fans.

it's a mistake to think they care about cycling fans let alone form opinions about the intelligence of cycling fans.
they care about their wallet.

Agree with Sniper but why should they analyse the intelligence of cycling fans when, historically, they'll keep coming back for more, no matter how badly they get mugged off. Off course that doesn't apply to everyone but so many believe in their heroes no matter what. Even if a 'hero' get taken down, the fans will move to a new rider or believe the BS about the fact that 'I'm clean now'. The UCI, managers riders etc don't have to factor in the intellect of the fans as history teaches us that the vast majority keep coming back, they'll believe absolutely anything as an escape from their humdrum lives. If the fans voted with their feet doping would cease overnight!

 

[mrhender]

http://www.tinkoffsaxo.com/news/tinkoff-saxo-statement-nicki-sorensen/

Tinkoff-Saxo statement on Nicki Sørensen

Nicki Sørensen informed the management of Tinkoff-Saxo at the time he spoke to Anti Doping Danmark (ADD) in 2013. Sørensen advised Tinkoff-Saxo that the matters he talked about with ADD were related to before 2004 and he expressed his deep regret that they had occurred. Tinkoff-Saxo accepted that these were matters to be privately resolved between ADD and Sørensen. Tinkoff-Saxo has a deep-rooted anti-doping culture that is implemented throughout the entire team. Tinkoff-Saxo was convinced at the time and remains of the view that Sørensen has conducted himself fully in accordance with this culture over the past decade of working with the team. Additional information, if required, will be made public in due time.

Tinkoff-Saxo has supported the cooperation and collaboration by all its members with any entity involved in creating a better environment in professional cycling. The team believes that a full disclosure of negative past practices should be encouraged in order to identify and implement appropriate measures to prevent wrongdoing in the present and future sport.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

So are Sorensen's kids old enough now to understand daddy took a needle to the arm to give them fresh nappies...

 

[ciranda]

Well yeah also the moralism from some people is sort of nauseating. If he lives better w saying he only used early on that's okay with me, I can't get upset over that.

I agree very much with Willem S, the main contentious point here is if Riis is found to have organized or facilitated use. I guess most of the team were using hard until Puerto or later but no one has talked in detail about how.

 

[Netserk]

From what I have gathered, it is pretty clear for all parties that Bjarne was helping his riders to dope, but all they have on him is before SOL.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Was Nicki Sorensen sick or injured in 2008, when the UCI's ABP was introduced?

 

[Benotti69]

Well yeah also the moralism from some people is sort of nauseating. If he lives better w saying he only used early on that's okay with me, I can't get upset over that.

I agree very much with Willem S, the main contentious point here is if Riis is found to have organized or facilitated use. I guess most of the team were using hard until Puerto or later but no one has talked in detail about how.

The moralism of some people is righteous when a rider only admits to doping over 8 years ago when he was winning f**K all then he got amazing results when he claims to have been clean. Yeah lets say he had to put food on the table to justify his cheating! Then to cap it he lies about no one helping him, no team program and letting Riis off the hook.

Go do one.

 

[neineinei]

According to the Tinkoff Saxo press release Nicki Sørensen told them that his doping ended before 2004, or at least that the stuff he admitted to ADD was from before 2004.

Sørensen advised Tinkoff-Saxo that the matters he talked about with ADD were related to before 2004 and he expressed his deep regret that they had occurred. http://www.tinkoffsaxo.com/news/tinkoff-saxo-statement-nicki-sorensen/

But the redacted quote from Rasmussens first version of the report says Sørensen had admitted doping at the 2004 Olympics. You'd think they'd be able to get the story straight when it has already been printed in the paper.

 

[D-Queued]

Re:

Was Nicki Sorensen sick or injured in 2008, when the UCI's ABP was introduced?

He was obviously naive or misinformed, and didn't realize that he should have doped to the gills for his first, and any subsequent, ABP tests in order to maintain a flat profile.

A doping vacation, as appears to be confirmed here, just highlights how much real doping one normally does.

Dave.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

Re: Re:

And now Nicki Sørensen admits to doping in the early parts of his career. Thank God, he was clean when he won stages at the Tour and the Vuelta.

http://www.bt.dk/cykling/nicki-soerensen-eksklusivt-til-bt-ja-jeg-har-dopet-mig

Yes, thank God...it would be a real shame for his victories to be sullied by a small amount of doping, early in his career, that was entirely his own choice...you know, like the fact that we can be happy that all of the victories of O'Grady after his one time shooting up, and every victory after 2006 by the people who spoke to the USADA about Lance Armstrong are also not sullied...just really thanking God that we can be sure of things like that...

They really do have a low opinion of the intelligence of cycling fans.

1,000,000 Treks can't be wrong.

 

[neineinei]

Re:

It's quite a messy affair and the report is not even out yet...

-Rasmussen testified that Sørensen is a doper...
-Rasmussen receives report drafts for his approval saying Nicki admitted doping to them..
-Then Rasmussen recieves a letter from a lawyer threatening him to silence on the report that now has redacted Sørensen's name...
-Rasmussen lambasts ADD for protecting Sørensen.

-Sørensen publically admits to doping prior to SOL in the old "era" and says no deals were struck with ADD...
Sørensen also says that Rasmussen recieving the original draft must have been a mistake on ADD's part...

-Rasmussen is at a lost not understanding why ADD would protect Sørensen or anyone else for that matter...

So what happened that made it so important for ADD to redact Sørensen's name and threaten Rasmussen...

What did Sørensen tell ADD that would make them proritize removing his name from an admission of ten year old doping in the dark era?

If he did not tell them anything of importance, then why the hell go through all that trouble risking undermining the report if it is all just a few years of his own doping dating ten years back?

Something is being concealed here....

And of course Sørensen says no deals where made with ADD.. Such deal would be confidential anyway...

If Sørensens explanation is true, that ADD by mistake sent Rasmussen a version meant for Sørensen (a huge, unforgivable mistake by itself, a faceplant de luxe), then why were ADD and their lawyer telling Rasmussen that he had to be silent about Sørensens admittance for ever, not just until the report was published? Couldn't they just tell Rasmussen they'd done a horrible mistake, please don't tell anyone, it will be in the report? Instead they were aggresive, sending angry letters and involving a lawyer.

And there were no announcement about the publication of the report untill an hour after Ekstrabladet printed Rasmussens story. Was Ekstrabladet/Rasmussen releasing the story because they knew the publication of the report was right around the corner, or were ADD suddenly publishing the report in a hurry to overshadow Rasmussen and his claims?

 

[mrhender]

Re: Re:

It's quite a messy affair and the report is not even out yet...

-Rasmussen testified that Sørensen is a doper...
-Rasmussen receives report drafts for his approval saying Nicki admitted doping to them..
-Then Rasmussen recieves a letter from a lawyer threatening him to silence on the report that now has redacted Sørensen's name...
-Rasmussen lambasts ADD for protecting Sørensen.

-Sørensen publically admits to doping prior to SOL in the old "era" and says no deals were struck with ADD...
Sørensen also says that Rasmussen recieving the original draft must have been a mistake on ADD's part...

-Rasmussen is at a lost not understanding why ADD would protect Sørensen or anyone else for that matter...

So what happened that made it so important for ADD to redact Sørensen's name and threaten Rasmussen...

What did Sørensen tell ADD that would make them proritize removing his name from an admission of ten year old doping in the dark era?

If he did not tell them anything of importance, then why the hell go through all that trouble risking undermining the report if it is all just a few years of his own doping dating ten years back?

Something is being concealed here....

And of course Sørensen says no deals where made with ADD.. Such deal would be confidential anyway...

If Sørensens explanation is true, that ADD by mistake sent Rasmussen a version meant for Sørensen (a huge, unforgivable mistake by itself, a faceplant de luxe), then why were ADD and their lawyer telling Rasmussen that he had to be silent about Sørensens admittance for ever, not just until the report was published? Couldn't they just tell Rasmussen they'd done a horrible mistake, please don't tell anyone, it will be in the report? Instead they were aggresive, sending angry letters and involving a lawyer.

And there were no announcement about the publication of the report untill an hour after Ekstrabladet printed Rasmussens story. Was Ekstrabladet/Rasmussen releasing the story because they knew the publication of the report was right around the corner, or were ADD suddenly publishing the report in a hurry to overshadow Rasmussen and his claims?

http://sporten.tv2.dk/cykling/2015-06-23-tv-2-erfarer-rasmussen-fik-citater-ved-en-fejl

ADD claiming it indeed was a mistake....

Don't know what to believe.... Other than this is a complete mess...

 

[mrhender]

They had *** three years and yet end up on the reaction side with the late sunday night announcement and now this "procedural error"..

They had all the time in the world doing this right...

No wonder they said they where in over their heads....

 

[mrhender]

Joint Press Release Anti Doping Denmark (ADD) and Sports Confederation of Denmark (DIF)

Doping Report uncovers huge mismanagement in cycling
Danish leaders in the sport has failed to respond to specific knowledge about their own riders' use of doping. There is after the group's assessment talk about criminal violations of anti-doping rules, but because of limitation periods can not be called cases.

Bjarne Riis, Johnny Weltz and Alex Pedersen, all of which have previously been associated with the cycling team, which among other things has been called Team CSC has to study the group admitted that they had knowledge that used doping on the crew. Yet they did not react. Johnny Weltz also admitted to having participated in the supply of doping.

"Unfortunately, the investigation revealed that doping at Team CSC not only can be loaded each of the riders. Management with Bjarne Riis as the Chief has at least had knowledge of doping on the team, but failed to intervene. It is totally unacceptable. It has as leader a particular responsibility and an obligation to act, as they, in our view has not adhered to, "says Michael Ash, director of ADD.

"But when circumstances beyond the limitation periods, we can not travel doping cases," adds Michael Ash.

The study group also notes that several riders have violated anti-doping rules, but that these violations also located outside the limitation period.

Fluctuating cooperation
A total of 50 people from both home and abroad have been interviewed and recorded approximately 100 hours of interviews in connection with work on the report. The interviewees have participated in voluntary conditions and has subsequently had to approve any quotes to the report. Some interviewees have spoken with the requirements of anonymity, and some interviewees have objected to either all or parts of their statements were included in the report.

"We have not had the same opportunities, such as a state commission of inquiry. Everything has taken voluntarily, and it has of course led to some significant limitations of exploration possibilities, but we have had to accept, "says Morten Mølholm Hansen, director of DIF and member of the study group, and adds:


"There has been a swinging cooperation. Some interviewees have contributed very candidly and constructively, while others have not been particularly cooperative or have had a failing memory. But through the work of the report, the study group gained a thorough insight into the culture of doping in professional cycling, providing a good basis for future anti-doping work. "

"Given the many interviews the investigating team's assessment that improved controls are crucial for anti-doping work. One must also work with attitudes and code of ethics, but it is clear that it is effective controls, which have the greatest deterrent effect. It is primarily the risk of being exposed, which plays a role, "says Morten Mølholm Hansen.

Recommendations
Study Group report made a number of recommendations for future anti-doping work in cycling. The recommendations include, inter alia, that anti-doping organizations use the possibility to carry out checks at night by reasonable suspicion, and that information about blood values ​​delayed for athletes or entirely withheld.

In addition, it is also recommended that the teams will have an increased responsibility to keep track of their employees and that the International Cycling Union (UCI) introduces a fit assessment in its licensing of sports directors and doctors.

"Furthermore, we must in future be better to systematically gather intelligence about who sells, distributes, uses, and the second shows the support the use of doping substances and on that basis even initiate actual investigations in cooperation with the police and SKAT" says ADD-director Michael Ask.

Click here to download the 'Report on doping in Danish cycling 1998-2015' (pdf).

Tuesday, June 23 at 12:00 will be held press conference in the House of Sports, Brøndby Stadion 20, 2605 Brondby. Here, representatives from ADD and DIF review the contents of the report and make themselves available for media questions. Neither ADD or DIF have further comments on the report before the press conference.
Registration for the press conference must occur with Lars Hestbech, communication consultant at DIF, on lhe@dif.dk / mobile 23,323,784th

Facts about the report:

Study Group:
The study group was set up administratively in January 2013 under the cooperation agreement with the now former cyclist Michael Rasmussen. The cooperation went out that Michael Rasmussen had reduced its quarantine penalty against providing essential information on its own and others' abuse of doping. The group was tasked to seek verification Michael Rasmussen's information. In continuation of this work, it was decided to prepare a report for the following purposes:

To investigate cases against a number of named and unnamed individuals in order to clarify, first, whether they have violated anti-doping rules, and also to clarify whether that could be raised doping against one or more of the foregoing persons.
To elucidate and possibly uncover doping use in Danish professional cycling since 1998, including general cultural patterns that have been the hallmark of the sport.
To discuss past efforts against doping in cycling environment in the light of section. 1-2.
To make a number of recommendations to the sport in the light of section. 1-2.
The study group consisted of:
Christina Friis Johansen, Senior Consultant, ADD
Morten Mølholm Hansen, Director, DIF
Lone Hansen, Director, Team Denmark (Until February 15, 2015: ADD)
Jesper Frigast Larsen, Legal Adviser, ADD (Until April 1, 2015: DIF)

Interviewees:
Active riders: 11
Former riders: 15
Managers and support staff: 24
Total: 50

The category of "workers and support personnel" includes persons who are interviewed at a time when they have had a leadership function or other support function in relation to the sport of cycling and includes directors, team managers, doctors, communication experts and administrative staff. Of the 24 people interviewed in this category, is a single foreigner, and 9 has a past as elite cyclists. 4 of the former riders who are interviewed, are foreigners. 5 people, all former riders did not want to participate.

Some of the interviewees has decided to study the group, but did not want their opinions reflected in the report. Some interviewees have only wanted to get some of their replies reproduced in the report, while they have declined to get other answers included. This study group had to respect.

 

[neineinei]

www.dif.dk/da/nyt/dif-nyheder/2015/juni/20150623_rapport

http://www.dif.dk/~/media/nyt/pdf-filer/rapport_om_doping_dansk_cykelsport_1998-2015.pdf

 

[neineinei]

In conclusion, the investigation group finds that the statute of limitation in the World Anti Doping Code - and in the Danish Antidoping Regulations - which was 8 years until 31st January 2014 and 10 years from 1st January 2015 prevent ADD from bringing forward a doping case against Bjarne Riis for an anti-doping rule violation. The same apply to Johnny Weltz and Alex Pedersen.

 

[mrhender]

Re:

In conclusion, the investigation group finds that the statute of limitation in the World Anti Doping Code - and in the Danish Antidoping Regulations - which was 8 years until 31st January 2014 and 10 years from 1st January 2015 prevent ADD from bringing forward a doping case against Bjarne Riis for an anti-doping rule violation. The same apply to Johnny Weltz and Alex Pedersen.

SOL'en skinner.....

 

[neineinei]

Sørensen doped 1999-2003, and only had a little relapse in August 2004, who'd have thought?

Nicki Sørensen har over for undersøgelsesgruppen oplyst, at han ikke husker den konkrete episode under OL i detaljer, men han erkender at have taget Synachten forud for landevejsløbet. Nicki Sørensen har i øvrigt erkendt over for undersøgelsesgruppen, at han har benyttet sig af doping, herunder EPO, kortison (og kortison-lignende præparater) samt en enkelt gang væksthormon i perioden fra 1999- 2003, hvorefter han stoppede og kun anvendte Synachten en enkelt gang ved OL i 2004.

 

[sniper]

cheers guys.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Lots of work and resources involved.
Very little, if any results.

 

[Netserk]

Re:

Lots of work and resources involved.
Very little, if any results.

Due to SOL (and Omerta), they were never going to get results. I and many others have said that over and over again.

 

[neineinei]

Asked whether they even asked about Frank Schleck linked to Fuentes to clarify the truth in the story, several riders told to study the group that they were reluctant to interfere in the matter. As one of the riders study group spoke with put it: "The fact that some riders have been to Fuentes, means that I have a job."