Bikepure - Omerta

[blackcat]

I never said all riders dope, and I definitely never said all those riders on the BikePure list doped. That is just stupid. They would all have to be psychopaths like StrongArm. I think BikePure makes a strategic error allowing riders names to be placed on their website. Everyone was told Hamilton was clean, and one of the good guys, when it was utterly false, and he took the fans money in donations for his defense. I see commentators using this brand, to tell the audience this rider is a member of BikePure. Implicit in that statement are two things. 1. The other riders are not. 2. This is a differentiation, and why is it necessary to have this PAC called BikePure. I really dont think clean riders give a hoot about something like this, as they are resigned to the realpolitik. It aint happening, wont, and and cant. The ironic thing is number 2. Jibbering idiots like Liggett, use this org, when it is implicit of #2. And then they spout "only a few bad apples". Only "Vino" etc. Come on. This enterprise is a big show. (cycling, not BP, it just happens, BP is gonna be a little part, no matter how good their intentions are).

I agree with the poster above, and the fans should definitely not believe in dreams. Dreams are for Dimspace and AusCycleFan94.

 

[blackcat]

Blackcat believes EVERYBODY dopes, just at different levels of doping. If anybody does anything in cycling, they are definitely jacked. The Blackcat mantra is guilty until proven innocent. Blackcat wants Kimmage & Walsh to question the Irish guys as to how they got be decent middle ranking pros!!

good one. I take a view. And you misrepresent my view. Funnily enough, I dont give a crap now, as I have given up being betrayed by liers. If they feel that it aint cheating, not my problem, but misrepresenting the truth, thats another thing. But wont give a crap. As much as Wigans was a major disappointment and betrayal, I will be actually in his corner in 2010, seeing what he can do on Sky. I know he is lying, but it will be good to see if he can make the podium.

I am in a minority, I think Wigans has another 10% improvement in him, and he will make the podium this year. Everyone else thinks he will go out the back when the race hits the mtns. Bunkum.

 

[pmcg76]

good one. I take a view. And you misrepresent my view. Funnily enough, I dont give a crap now, as I have given up being betrayed by liers. If they feel that it aint cheating, not my problem, but misrepresenting the truth, thats another thing. But wont give a crap. As much as Wigans was a major disappointment and betrayal, I will be actually in his corner in 2010, seeing what he can do on Sky. I know he is lying, but it will be good to see if he can make the podium.

I am in a minority, I think Wigans has another 10% improvement in him, and he will make the podium this year. Everyone else thinks he will go out the back when the race hits the mtns. Bunkum.

Perhaps you can explain how I misrepresent you, perhaps you can tell us who you think is clean in the pro peloton then. I have never seen you once state that you believe a certain rider/team to be clean. On the contrary, any rider who has achieved any sort of performance is automatically a doper in your books.

Lets take Dan Martin as an example, a signed up member of Bikepure who has come across as anti-doping in interviews yet you have said repeatedly that he is part of the Garmin A team who dope. Your only evidence? he finished 2nd in the Tour of Catalonia behind Valverde, thats enough for you to label somebody as a definite doper, that is just one example.

If you consistently take a stance on something, then that is how others will perceive your opinion.

 

[BikePure NY]

I know he is lying, but it will be good to see if he can make the podium

How do you ‘know’?
May I speculate, that you are speculating?
Dangerous stuff isn’t it. There is allot to be said ‘facts’.

Lets keep it simple (my level!): the essence of all debate is identifying a problem and forming a solution to deal with said problem through airing of constructive opinions.

-Pointing a finger at a flat wheel is easy.
-Slagging the person of with the puncture is easier, and is the -realm of idiots.
Advice on repair of the puncture, or better still- on your knees with two tire levers, is the essence of, the brotherhood of cycling.

If you are just moaning about all the defects in our wonderful sport, why don’t you go kick a football? Moaning about something is OK, IF followed by a solution, no matter how off the mark- it’s a positive idea and an effort.
Collect up and correlate ALL the ideas, from ALL the bikers and we are moving forward.

BikePure was formed to unite all the cyclists, fed up with their sport being the laughing stock of the planet and riddled with drugs. It was formed to give the grass roots cyclists a voice and a platform to the clean cyclists; a platform that has been all to regularly stolen by cheats.

Cycling has been good to me, and we have found people in 83 countries, that cycling has improved their lives also. They also want to give something back. So we will try and try hard. Just because doing nothing, and watching (moaning) our sport continue to destroy itself isn’t an option.

 

[luckyboy]

As for the LA thing, seeing as he blocked them from Twitter I don't think him wanting to join will be a problem they have to deal with!

He did? I never saw an article or anything about that. Sad..

 

[pmcg76]

Great to see Bikepure members enter the discussion & very welcome you are. Your right there is no point in eternal pessimism, i couldnt watch cycling on Tv or go to a race just giving up on all of them because i felt all of them were jacked. For the record i dont think all are boosted, not 100 %. You just hope those that are that are fooling the rest do get caught. Yeah its bad press but thats how you get rid of them. And yeah I know all about the percentage of Podium positives & implications also, im not blinkered entirely.
To go back to my point i made earlier, i used Wiggins as an example as i like his attitude & could picture him giving someone grief. He was mouthing off at a couple on Verbier last year in the Tour to follow him. I picked him cos for whatever reason i feel the guy could be clean. Im not sure why, maybe its his attitude, the fact he goes on about been clean & hating the rest for sullying the sport (Moreni etc). Of course i could be wrong & maybe it will blow up in my face one day. Ill live with it then. As stated above Foolish optimism maybe but whats the harm in having it?
Previously some posters went on about Wiggins values last year, could you please provide a link to that or a basic explanation just so i may see as i havent seen that yet.
Also the Irish riders were pointed at earlier, could someone shine a light on that fully please & back it up.
Kimmage put a piece in the revised edition of Rough Ride a few years ago clearing the confusion that eminated from the original publication regarding Roche & Kelly. If he has said anything since id like to read it as i havent yet. And yes im aware of the Roche Conconi issue but im only interested in the Kimmage part mentioned above.
No use giving up on all of them, pointless for you to keep watching when you could be doing or watching something more positive for your life. But look regardless of views we enjoy watching it right?

Well there is a catch 22 situation here, you say if you thought everybody was doping then you couldnt watch cycling but most other sports do so little in regards to doping but most of us follow other sports, I know I watch soccer, rugby, irish sports and have followed NFL and Aussie Rules when I lived in the respective countries, I also follow tennis/athletcis on occasion.

These sports do little in regards to anti-doping in comparison to cycling so how do we know they are any cleaner than cycling. Most of these sports have cheating on and off the playing field. Football(soccer) is currently ruined by money, clubs in debt etc, its a hinderance to run a club properly nowadays but everyone still watches football. Why is cycling the only sport held up to scutiny when it does more than any other sport in regards to cheating.

I know people will say other sports are irrelevant as cycling is what we care about but there is definite double standards here by everyone including myself.

 

[blackcat]

How do you ‘know’?
May I speculate, that you are speculating?
Dangerous stuff isn’t it. There is allot to be said ‘facts’.

Lets keep it simple (my level!): the essence of all debate is identifying a problem and forming a solution to deal with said problem through airing of constructive opinions.

-Pointing a finger at a flat wheel is easy.
-Slagging the person of with the puncture is easier, and is the -realm of idiots.
Advice on repair of the puncture, or better still- on your knees with two tire levers, is the essence of, the brotherhood of cycling.

If you are just moaning about all the defects in our wonderful sport, why don’t you go kick a football? Moaning about something is OK, IF followed by a solution, no matter how off the mark- it’s a positive idea and an effort.
Collect up and correlate ALL the ideas, from ALL the bikers and we are moving forward.

BikePure was formed to unite all the cyclists, fed up with their sport being the laughing stock of the planet and riddled with drugs. It was formed to give the grass roots cyclists a voice and a platform to the clean cyclists; a platform that has been all to regularly stolen by cheats.

Cycling has been good to me, and we have found people in 83 countries, that cycling has improved their lives also. They also want to give something back. So we will try and try hard. Just because doing nothing, and watching (moaning) our sport continue to destroy itself isn’t an option.

his results are just not credible. Believe if you wish.

pmcg76, I think I agreed with Ludwig, that it is not easy to podium in a PT race. Also, VC La Pomme has had some interesting graduates.

Scanlon, I reckon he was clean. And AG2R had faith in his talent. Credible. Pity those riders miss out. That is where my loyalty lies. Martin may be a phenom, and a phenom could probably get a podium in a race with weak depth, perhaps Catalunya. I get surprised when riders turn up at u23 Worlds and rip the legs off riders. In 08 Martin was by far the strongest in the race, just misread the move. Great ride. But the marrying of form to big races, has come down to the syringe in my opinion, form but a euphemism for the physiological parameters that may be determined by docs. That may well be wrong, and unfair to riders, but u23 Worlds is a big race, lots of incentives for the riders, contracts on the line. Ofcourse, Martin had his contract by that stage.

 

[Oncearunner8]

Apples

"A few bad Apples! Yeah, in the hypothetical Johnny Appleseed spread his seed over the whole of YAMerica like Armstrong babymomas, and it was APPLEseed poisened by dodgy fertilizers from Monsanto"

 

[craig1985]

Perhaps you can explain how I misrepresent you, perhaps you can tell us who you think is clean in the pro peloton then. I have never seen you once state that you believe a certain rider/team to be clean. On the contrary, any rider who has achieved any sort of performance is automatically a doper in your books.

Lets take Dan Martin as an example, a signed up member of Bikepure who has come across as anti-doping in interviews yet you have said repeatedly that he is part of the Garmin A team who dope. Your only evidence? he finished 2nd in the Tour of Catalonia behind Valverde, thats enough for you to label somebody as a definite doper, that is just one example.

If you consistently take a stance on something, then that is how others will perceive your opinion.

blackcat has said that he believes somebody like Thomas Lövkvist is clean. big boat is the one who goes around saying every rider who finishes in the top 40 is blood doping etc. He said Sastre won the Tour because he was able to get his blood transfusion, whilst Evans couldn't. It was pretty much a WTF moment.

 

[blackcat]

blackcat has said that he believes somebody like Thomas Lövkvist is clean. big boat is the one who goes around saying every rider who finishes in the top 40 is blood doping etc. He said Sastre won the Tour because he was able to get his blood transfusion, whilst Evans couldn't. It was pretty much a WTF moment.

You need to study the results. Lovqvist and Rohregger start by holding wheels in the mtns at the Giro in 2009, and then they progressively go backwards on the classification. They are not getting the recovery doping and their physiological parameters (see: blood, via whatever technique) seen to, so they cannot maintain their position in the classement.

Just my theory.

Simoni said of Andy Schleck in 2007 Giro: "so much for the new clean generation".

Bruyneel knew Sastre was gonna win in 2008. He said he would win, from the tt. Bruyneel may have had intelligence, re: inside information, on who can "recover". Bruyneel could make a packet by doubling down in the gambling market with such info that helps him get an automatic overs spread.

 

[BYOP88]

You need to study the results. Lovqvist and Rohregger start by holding wheels in the mtns at the Giro in 2009, and then they progressively go backwards on the classification. They are not getting the recovery doping and their physiological parameters (see: blood, via whatever technique) seen to, so they cannot maintain their position in the classement.

Just my theory.

Simoni said of Andy Schleck in 2007 Giro: "so much for the new clean generation".

Bruyneel knew Sastre was gonna win in 2008. He said he would win, from the tt. Bruyneel may have had intelligence, re: inside information, on who can "recover". Bruyneel could make a packet by doubling down in the gambling market with such info that helps him get an automatic overs spread.

On another forum there was 1 French guy who said the word on the street was that baby Schleck was a doper in his VC Roubaix days.

 

[blackcat]

On another forum there was 1 French guy who said the word on the street was that baby Schleck was a doper in his VC Roubaix days.

His brother was a Fuentes client. I know that aint sound Socratean logic, guilt by association. There was an article by a sociologist I believe, in the NY Times who set this out, how all those riders on the podium in the past two decades, have been sanctioned or been involved with doping, dissects the possibility of riders actually separating themselves from the norm. This was an academic.

 

[blackcat]

I think Bikepure should cultivate a number of sources, guys who rode in the top tier, the GTs, who will talk transparently about what occurs. I think they are a little in the dark. I would attempt to get the best information possible, before forming a strategy. Manzano, Kohl, Jaksche. There are other riders who will talk off the record, if they know they will not get burnt. I know that they tell journalists, what they would require, to ride clean.

 

[craig1985]

Has Cadel ever been implicated in anything and he has finished on the podium of a GT, same with Sammy Sanchez?

 

[luckyboy]

The only thing I can think of for Evans is that he rode for Mapei and T-Mobile (only one not 'food poisoned'), not that that's evidence at all. Bassons was on Festina after all.

I do find it hard to believe that riders challenging for GT wins aren't doped though. It's hard to try and figure out..

 

[craig1985]

Casar and Le Mevel have both placed high up in the Giro and Tour and I have never heard anything negative about the two of them. Particulary Casar, rather how much of a waste of talent he has been, 'everrybody else dopes' etc.

 

[blackcat]

Casar and Le Mevel have both placed high up in the Giro and Tour and I have never heard anything negative about the two of them. Particulary Casar, rather how much of a waste of talent he has been, 'everrybody else dopes' etc.

normalize Casar for selective stages.

That is, subtract the stage where he was in a "free move" where the peloton allowed the break to go out and maintain 20 odd minutes.

Casar is like Pereiro, when Oscar Pereiro won by being in the break with Jens Voigt and gaining 20 minutes, because Phonak needed a team to relieve the pressure on Landis' team for a few stages.

So, if you do not give Casar that time, it is instructive. If you want to keep him with that time up his sleeve, it means little.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I'm not sure if that's Myles or Andy or whom posting as BikePureNY, but do know that one of them posted last year as just BikePure. Confusing.

I joined their cause some time ago and advocate what they do, I've also swapped e-mail with Andy before, and have to say I'm a little surprised by this article. Not that it isn't written by or about them. Just that it seems even overly optimistic for them.

No one really thinks the omerta is gone or dying, do they? I mean, we'll know it's over when riders have a silent code of honor - speaking out to authorities whenever they hear about doping, and actively, proudly stating they'll do so and saying they're disgusted by the cheating. Plus volunteering for whatever testing there is, and advocating it. We're nowhere near that. Riders, even those who are likely clean, are much more intimidated by the dopers and bullies who support the omerta into silence, or vague criticisms of doping.

I would also like to remind people something they already know. Just because you speak out against doping doesn't make you clean. Bernard Kohl spoke out against doping before being busted. Richard Virenque spoke out against doping.

The numbers also simply belie that the majority of the peloton is anywhere near clean. They continue to show superhuman efforts near the lines of the power and speed Bjarne Riis showed in his "prime".

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Casar is like Pereiro, when Oscar Pereiro won by being in the break with Jens Voigt and gaining 20 minutes, because Phonak needed a team to relieve the pressure on Landis' team for a few stages.

Yes, and no. I've posted on this many times. The reason why Oscar got his break was because he was so far behind, having bonked in the heat a few days previously and losing 29 minutes. Thus, when he was in a 30 minute break, he never got the half-hour head start people think he did. Oscar was a pretty darned good racer and it was dangerous for Phonak to let him get out there and they had to know it. Top 10 even before the 2006 Tour. With Lance/Jan/Ivan and the other dopers out that year, and Levi bonking (riding clean?!?), Oscar was set to finish top 5 that year, maybe even podium. Circumstances being what they were, he won the Tour. And I'm okay with that. He was a better rider than people remember before that, and no more doped up that those around him - certainly much less than the guy who stood atop the podium before him.

 

[craig1985]

I'm not sure if that's Myles or Andy or whom posting as BikePureNY, but do know that one of them posted last year as just BikePure. Confusing.

I joined their cause some time ago and advocate what they do, I've also swapped e-mail with Andy before, and have to say I'm a little surprised by this article. Not that it isn't written by or about them. Just that it seems even overly optimistic for them.

No one really thinks the omerta is gone or dying, do they? I mean, we'll know it's over when riders have a silent code of honor - speaking out to authorities whenever they hear about doping, and actively, proudly stating they'll do so and saying they're disgusted by the cheating. Plus volunteering for whatever testing there is, and advocating it. We're nowhere near that. Riders, even those who are likely clean, are much more intimidated by the dopers and bullies who support the omerta into silence, or vague criticisms of doping.

I would also like to remind people something they already know. Just because you speak out against doping doesn't make you clean. Bernard Kohl spoke out against doping before being busted. Richard Virenque spoke out against doping.

The numbers also simply belie that the majority of the peloton is anywhere near clean. They continue to show superhuman efforts near the lines of the power and speed Bjarne Riis showed in his "prime".

And a certain 7-time winner liked to sprout how clean he was, even though in his second book he talked about how he worked with a certain Italian doctor who's namesake is also a very fast sports car (you know, he is in an expert in terms of training advice, his words not mine)

 

[blackcat]

Yes, and no. I've posted on this many times. The reason why Oscar got his break was because he was so far behind, having bonked in the heat a few days previously and losing 29 minutes. Thus, when he was in a 30 minute break, he never got the half-hour head start people think he did. Oscar was a pretty darned good racer and it was dangerous for Phonak to let him get out there and they had to know it. Top 10 even before the 2006 Tour. With Lance/Jan/Ivan and the other dopers out that year, and Levi bonking (riding clean?!?), Oscar was set to finish top 5 that year, maybe even podium. Circumstances being what they were, he won the Tour. And I'm okay with that. He was a better rider than people remember before that, and no more doped up that those around him - certainly much less than the guy who stood atop the podium before him.

no, Pereiro was used to get the yellow to take the responsibility off Phonak. Landis knew he had one minute at the very minimum, up his sleeve in the chrono. Pereiro was a gun. Finished tenth, in the two previous Tours. But he was allowed to take the jersey, intentionally. Phonak weighed up strategy, and this was in their interest on the weight.

Casar got times through a breakaway. That was my point. Pereiro was the biggest name and example, of a rider who ascended on classement, because the peloton allowed him to go into a move which gained a truckload of time.

 

[Escarabajo]

Has Cadel ever been implicated in anything and he has finished on the podium of a GT, same with Sammy Sanchez?

There are many riders who haven't been implicated in anything. I just don't think that it is any proof of riding clean at all.

I would not put my money on Samy Sanchez at all. Just my opinion.

 

[Anonymous]

There are many riders who haven't been implicated in anything. I just don't think that it is any proof of riding clean at all.

I would not put my money on Samy Sanchez at all. Just my opinion.

I would not put any money on any spaniard, anyone whos ridden for a spanish team, had a spanish doctor, been to spain on holiday, full stop.

 

[Anonymous]

I would not put any money on any spaniard, anyone whos ridden for a spanish team, had a spanish doctor, been to spain on holiday, full stop.

Hell, if the eat Spanish rice, I find them suspect...

 

[blackcat]

I would not put any money on any spaniard, anyone whos ridden for a spanish team, had a spanish doctor, been to spain on holiday, full stop.

jesus christ. What about Wigans blood values. What about Hayles. What about Millar going back to Cecchini? What about Sciandri as the Coach of the Academy.

This is frankly, borderline bigoted. Glass houses Dim, glass houses.