Are the UCI clowns, terrorists and "no different to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi"?

[Dear Wiggo]

My research leads me to take an unpopular stance. The UCI are no better or worse than anyone or anything else in the system of professional cycling, to wit:

The governing olympic committee, ie IOC.
The anti-doping governing body, ie WADA.
The governing cycling body, ie UCI.
The athlete's biological passport.
The UCI anti-doping panelists, eg Michael Ashenden, Robin Parisotto.
The national cycling federations, eg AIS, USAC, BC.
The anti-doping agencies, eg ASADA, USADA.
The drug companies, eg Amgen.
The drug testing labs, eg Lausanne.
The race organisers, eg ASO, RCS sport.
The team sponsors, eg Nike, BMC, Quickstep, Radioshack.
The team owners / managers, eg Jonathon Vaughters, Bjarne Riis, David Brailsford.
The team doctors, eg Gert Leinders, Carlos Gonzalez, Prentice Steffen.
The team trainers, eg Ufe Fuentes, Michele Ferrari, Juerg Feldmann, Tim Kerrison.
The team soigneurs, eg Txema Gonzalez, Willy Voet.
The riders themselves, eg Cadel Evans, Bradley Wiggins, Ryder Hesjedal.
The media who report, eg CN, Velonews, ProCycling, Paul Sherwen, Phil Liggett.
The defenders of the riders, eg armchairclimber, function, Krebs Cycle, acoggan.

It's easy to level the finger at the head of the UCI, they look like the bad guys and say the dumbest, most obviously false and corrupt things. But at every level of the sport, some money and / or some influence or specific knowledge can have a direct impact on a race result, which has a direct impact on the money earnt and to whom it is directed.

There is corruption at every single level of this sport, from the top to the bottom.

The system is complete. Whole. Functional. The only event demanding a change - people dying - has diminished to close to 0.

Remove one tiny aspect of the system - Hein and Pat, for example, and I believe, wholeheartedly, that nothing changes.

Nothing at all.

 

[Tinman]

Remove one tiny aspect of the system - Hein and Pat, for example, and I believe, wholeheartedly, that nothing changes.

Nothing at all.

Yes it will. 10-20 years (hopefully sooner) from now the public debate will have shifted from doping in cycling to doping in other sports to lack of accountability and corruption by sports administrations and these organizations will be much more accountable to the public and the fans.

As people move up the Maslov's pyramid, they will place higher demands from their sports administrations. That's why this battle at UCI and cycling is so important now. And yes, the rest also needs to happen, FIFA, IOC, etc. But remember 1. the public at large doesn't yet know 2. they don't yet care. But both of those reasons will change, in our kids' lifetime, hopefully sooner.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Yes it will. 10-20 years (hopefully sooner) from now the public debate will have shifted from doping in cycling to doping in other sports to lack of accountability and corruption by sports administrations and these organizations will be much more accountable to the public and the fans.

As people move up the Maslov's pyramid, they will place higher demands from their sports administrations. That's why this battle at UCI and cycling is so important now. And yes, the rest also needs to happen, FIFA, IOC, etc. But remember 1. the public at large doesn't yet know 2. they don't yet care. But both of those reasons will change, in our kids' lifetime, hopefully sooner.

We seem to be arguing different things. Yes, something may change, in 10-20 years time.

No, removing Hein and Pat will have no effect. They are insignificant in terms of what change is required. They are not important now.

Festina affair happened in 1998.

Since that time, 14 years, the system has become more sophisticated. People have carved out their niches. You cannot remove one cog from the great, corrupt machine and expect the corruption to be gone.

 

[Tinman]

From @UCI_Overlord tweet, quoting Patrice Clerc (TdF owner) after 2007 tour, about UCI and Pat McQuaid, querying why UCI never sued Patrice clerc:

"The owner of the Tour de France called for cycling chief Pat McQuaid to step down Saturday after a long-running feud that escalated at this race and threatens to divide cycling.
Patrice Clerc, boss of the Amaury Sports Organization (ASO) that owns the 104-year-old race, said a new way must be found to restore cycling's credibility following a succession of doping scandals at the Tour.

...

"In any society, public or private, those responsible would have no choice but to resign," Clerc said. "The UCI, by the way its acted, at minimum has lacked clarity, transparency, professionalism, competence and in every case has shown a complete lack of conscience.

"We don't want this system. We need to be independent of people who are either incompetent or have the desire to spoil (the race), to hurt the Tour de France."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2007-07-28-4055765673_x.htm

 

[Dear Wiggo]

From @UCI_Overlord tweet, quoting Patrice Clerc (TdF owner) after 2007 tour, about UCI and Pat McQuaid, querying why UCI never sued Patrice clerc:

"The owner of the Tour de France called for cycling chief Pat McQuaid to step down Saturday after a long-running feud that escalated at this race and threatens to divide cycling.
Patrice Clerc, boss of the Amaury Sports Organization (ASO) that owns the 104-year-old race, said a new way must be found to restore cycling's credibility following a succession of doping scandals at the Tour.

...

"In any society, public or private, those responsible would have no choice but to resign," Clerc said. "The UCI, by the way its acted, at minimum has lacked clarity, transparency, professionalism, competence and in every case has shown a complete lack of conscience.

"We don't want this system. We need to be independent of people who are either incompetent or have the desire to spoil (the race), to hurt the Tour de France."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2007-07-28-4055765673_x.htm

No. Patrice Clerc was only president of the ASO, the ASO own the TdF (and a bunch of other races).

Patrice Clerc no longer works there - ASO sacked him in 2008. UCI did not have that power to sack him, in fact UCI and ASO (actually Clerc) were at eachother's throats at the time. But they influenced the ASO to get rid of him - better than suing him by far. Especially when you consider they wanted to keep the status quo going: doping in but nice and quiet.

http://www.podiumcafe.com/2008/10/1/626044/aso-news-patrice-clerc-out

The news comes after speculation abounded in recent weeks over changes at the ASO, with some observers suggesting that Marie-Odile Amaury, who heads Éditions Amaury, was unhappy with the direction the ASO was heading, especially in relations with the UCI, with whom the ASO has fought a protracted war over cycling's future. Some observers worry that the replacement of Clerc may spell an end to the hard-line the ASO has taken against doping in the Tour de France. The ASO also organizes other events, including the Dakar Rally. In addition to the ASO, Éditions Amaury, which ranks as one of the largest companies in France, owns the sports daily, L'Équipe

Why do you think I listed the entire system, from top to bottom? Clerc never owned the TdF. Ever. Now we have people reporting anti-UCI sentiment from someone who allegedly "owned" the Tour de France, when nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[Tinman]

We seem to be arguing different things. Yes, something may change, in 10-20 years time.

No, removing Hein and Pat will have no effect. They are insignificant in terms of what change is required. They are not important now.

Festina affair happened in 1998.

Since that time, 14 years, the system has become more sophisticated. People have carved out their niches. You cannot remove one cog from the great, corrupt machine and expect the corruption to be gone.

so what are we arguing?

doping controls at UCI - should go to WADA and Nat doping agencies totally. and have retrospective testing

corruption? Need to demand more disclosure and no conflict of interest positions - via fans/public awareness and nat sports feds

anything else missing that cannot be changed?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

so what are we arguing?

doping controls at UCI - should go to WADA and Nat doping agencies totally. and have retrospective testing

corruption? Need to demand more disclosure and no conflict of interest positions - via fans/public awareness and nat sports feds

anything else missing that cannot be changed?

The fish rots from the head. While there is any corruption in the IOC, ie at the highest level, it remains unlikely that any org beneath that - WADA or the UCI or any race, organisation or racer under it will be able to escape corruption's influence.

There's a lot of research going into this - I do not know what the answer is, if there even is an answer.

I realise this is a very negative position to take. I do not intend to leave it there, but for now that is all I can say with certainty.

 

[Tinman]

I hear you Wiggo, and I suspect I agree with most of your sentiment. But if we hold the sport dear, and indeed "sport" dear, we must do our bit, beyond one liners on sports forums.

My conclusion is that public awareness is absolutely critical. We must help more people read these boards, and get them to talk to their friends. And talk at their local cycling clubs. and talk to their local politicians.

If instead this was about match fixing of premier league soccer games, you would see heads rolling very quickly. So that's where we need to take it, that level of public awareness, ie if you are a fan of the sport do you want to see a pro-wrestling type of joke, or do you want to believe you saw a fair contest.

By the way, did you see Philippe Gilbert's face straight after he came across the finish line last week? I thought I saw a good race, but my enjoyment quickly disappeared and cynical suspicion took over when I saw his face. As Tyler says in his book page 182:

"Did you ever look at the face of a rider who won a big race..." If you looked closely, beneath the smile, you might have seen something darker - worry. The rider was worried because he knew that winning creates other problems, like a 100% certainty of being tested..."

One small example of what needs to change before I get my real enjoyment back in watching competitive cycling. Yes Vuelta was great watching at times, but unless I can have a reasonable faith in the system and riders I can root for, it will never be the same. And I will try do my bit as best I can...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I have read Tyler's book now and just downloaded Bad Blood and Rough Ride - my history lessons for reference. I first saw that look on Piepoli's face when he stood on the podium a few years ago. Something wasn't right there, and perhaps it was merely conspiracy, or the way he smiles anyway, but it didn't look truly happy. Sure enough, he was pinged for epo.

I race and coach at an amateur level - I think the anwers lie there, to be honest. People like Michael Drapac who has started a conti team by insisting his riders continue their study, while maintaining a balance between normal life and the racing life.

The Olympics were for amateurs at one point, then money got in the way.

I intend on doing my bit through my racing and coaching. Via my blog: a bit of education, and by "stickying" posts I feel shed some light or truth on the matter, where the muckrakers and paid shills of the online world cannot muddy the message.

To anyone else who loves cycling like I do, and believes I am not a complete and utter fraud or demented conspiracy theorist - feel free to count me in for anything you have in mind to help return cycling to its innocence.

 

[Cloxxki]

I never get this. They know they are glowing, and winning would be failing the IQ test. Yet, they do. Betting on the intake of masking agents and lots of water? Couldn't help themselves in the race? Betting on an incompetant lab analysing their sample? About to make a call to Hein? It doesn't make sense to me. you either race and win clean, or have your details well covered, Lance style. Even failing the IQ test intensionally, why the worry in the smile?

 

[hrotha]

I never get this. They know they are glowing, and winning would be failing the IQ test. Yet, they do. Betting on the intake of masking agents and lots of water? Couldn't help themselves in the race? Betting on an incompetant lab analysing their sample? About to make a call to Hein? It doesn't make sense to me. you either race and win clean, or have your details well covered, Lance style. Even failing the IQ test intensionally, why the worry in the smile?

Hamilton says the discipline/IQ test thing near the beginning of the book, but towards the end he points out all the top riders of his generation were caught eventually and that it was a simple matter of probability. After years of doing it right, one day you'll miscalculate, and bam, positive.

In that particular example you're discussing here, the riders thought CERA was undetectable, so they didn't think they were glowing.

 

[thehog]

I have read Tyler's book now and just downloaded Bad Blood and Rough Ride - my history lessons for reference. I first saw that look on Piepoli's face when he stood on the podium a few years ago. Something wasn't right there, and perhaps it was merely conspiracy, or the way he smiles anyway, but it didn't look truly happy. Sure enough, he was pinged for epo.

I race and coach at an amateur level - I think the anwers lie there, to be honest. People like Michael Drapac who has started a conti team by insisting his riders continue their study, while maintaining a balance between normal life and the racing life.

The Olympics were for amateurs at one point, then money got in the way.

I intend on doing my bit through my racing and coaching. Via my blog: a bit of education, and by "stickying" posts I feel shed some light or truth on the matter, where the muckrakers and paid shills of the online world cannot muddy the message.

To anyone else who loves cycling like I do, and believes I am not a complete and utter fraud or demented conspiracy theorist - feel free to count me in for anything you have in mind to help return cycling to its innocence.

Is Wiggo happy? (Not you the real one)

 

[RichWalk]

I never get this. They know they are glowing, and winning would be failing the IQ test. Yet, they do. Betting on the intake of masking agents and lots of water? Couldn't help themselves in the race? Betting on an incompetant lab analysing their sample? About to make a call to Hein? It doesn't make sense to me. you either race and win clean, or have your details well covered, Lance style. Even failing the IQ test intensionally, why the worry in the smile?

and how do you maintain your pride/dignity/integrety by competing in such a manner? What an indictment on contemporary sport all of this is, you can blame the money/the failing dream and whomever else you like but at the end of it all the choice is personnal; plain and simple.

Amateur cycling taught me one the best lessons in life, until I tried it I was pretty decent at several sports, played county level badminton and passed exams with a couple of hours prep. I invested more time and energy in cycling than anything I'd previously done combined and still only proved average at best ; thats how to level your own playing field and it stays with me after all these years.

 

[Cloxxki]

I invested more time and energy in cycling than anything I'd previously done combined and still only proved average at best ; thats how to level your own playing field and it stays with me after all these years.

Cycling discrinates. Most are either born for it, or aren't. Few manage to become good with hard work alone, having limited talent. I was born for the bike myself (though off-road mostly due to bad aerodynamics), didn't need to train to compete nationally.

Hamilton says the discipline/IQ test thing near the beginning of the book, but towards the end he points out all the top riders of his generation were caught eventually and that it was a simple matter of probability. After years of doing it right, one day you'll miscalculate, and bam, positive.

In that particular example you're discussing here, the riders thought CERA was undetectable, so they didn't think they were glowing.

Thanks for responding. Yeah, the CERA folks must have known they were waiting for a test and retroactive testing. Most didn't get caught though. Few samples retested.

 

[RownhamHill]

..and underneath the quote a photo of Floyd with his fingers crossed.

That would be brilliant!

 

[frenchfry]

Hand it to Floyd to give us some comic relief in the middle of an otherwise depressing subject.

In the end this judgement might harm Verdruggen and Fat Pat more than it serves to defend their "reputations", especially when the USADA report and Kimmage's upcoming case with the corrupt ones will drag the ugly truth into the spotlight.

 

[D-Queued]

My research leads me to take an unpopular stance. The UCI are no better or worse than anyone or anything else in the system of professional cycling, to wit:

...

There is corruption at every single level of this sport, from the top to the bottom.

The system is complete. Whole. Functional. The only event demanding a change - people dying - has diminished to close to 0.

Remove one tiny aspect of the system - Hein and Pat, for example, and I believe, wholeheartedly, that nothing changes.

Nothing at all.

I was going to argue with you, but then this other Wiggo guy posted the answer.

The fish rots from the head. While there is any corruption in the IOC, ie at the highest level, it remains unlikely that any org beneath that - WADA or the UCI or any race, organisation or racer under it will be able to escape corruption's influence.

There's a lot of research going into this - I do not know what the answer is, if there even is an answer.

I realise this is a very negative position to take. I do not intend to leave it there, but for now that is all I can say with certainty.

Your second post has it. Your first post ignores leadership.

Where are the sports leaders directing the sport?

This is, perhaps, where Floyd's analogy to Ghaddafi has an element of truth.

Getting a bit theoretical, look to the Nobel prize winning theories of John Nash. The most successful/most stable groups are those with strong leaders (= Nash equilibrium). Moreover, the least successful and least stable groups are those with many leaders, which undermines the argument in your first post.

Flipping that around, the most difficult cultures to overturn are those created, encouraged and sustained by the leadership.

Fix the leadership, fix the mess.

Dave.

 

[Tinman]

I was going to argue with you, but then this other Wiggo guy posted the answer.

Dear Wiggo was riding The Big Ring. Had me fooled also. Keep riding big Wiggo, enjoy your posts and contributions.

 

[thehog]

Toto is back. http://nyvelocity.com/content/toto/2012/toto-turns-262

 

[sublimit]

Yes they are clowns but not the sinister version, and probably funnier than the typical performing circus clown.

Kind of a Clown thats supplied to a kids party or something.

 

[Digger]

CERA was meant to be undetectable. In the Gerolsteiner bus when it was announced that Ricco tested positive for CERA, all of them started cheering...someone looked around and saw Kohl and Schumacher looking a nervous wreck.

There was supposedly other cover ups that year. A whole host of CSC riders including O'Grady had positives swept under the carpet.

 

[krebs303]

 

[Cloxxki]

Toto is back. http://nyvelocity.com/content/toto/2012/toto-turns-262

Can't remember having fought a laughter behind a screen as much as just now, thanks for that. Toto is stepping up yet higher. How tall is this ladder really?

 

[krebs303]

 

[sniper]

Can't remember having fought a laughter behind a screen as much as just now, thanks for that. Toto is stepping up yet higher. How tall is this ladder really?

really spot on.

one indeed wonders what kind of dark powers have been causing Phat to stick his head so deep up verdrug'em's behind.