Brian Holm's comments

[King Of Molehill]

From Cyclingnews:

...The Dane now sees more self-discipline amongst riders today than when he was a rider. "During my time as a rider there were rumors about those who had never used anything, but I never got to meet any of them. Today it is just the opposite. Now one hears rumors about those who do (use doping)."

“The new generation of riders look down on those who use drugs as if they were a bunch of criminals. They simply do not like them."

----------------------------------------------------------------

If the 'new generation' of riders really think this then why don't they DO SOMETHING about it? Do the supposed handful of dopers really hold that much power over everyone else that they can't simply just start calling them out if they care that much?

 

[Benotti69]

From Cyclingnews:

...The Dane now sees more self-discipline amongst riders today than when he was a rider. "During my time as a rider there were rumors about those who had never used anything, but I never got to meet any of them. Today it is just the opposite. Now one hears rumors about those who do (use doping)."

this is because of the risk of bans, but to say their are far fewer goes against what Frei said

“The new generation of riders look down on those who use drugs as if they were a bunch of criminals. They simply do not like them."

----------------------------------------------------------------

If the 'new generation' of riders really think this then why don't they DO SOMETHING about it? Do the supposed handful of dopers really hold that much power over everyone else that they can't simply just start calling them out if they care that much?

If the new generation were clean do you think they would not get upset with Contador winning the TdF doped.....i have not heard any critiscm.

Is he looking for a job?

 

[Oldman]

this is because of the risk of bans, but to say their are far fewer goes against what Frei said



If the new generation were clean do you think they would not get upset with Contador winning the TdF doped.....i have not heard any critiscm.

Is he looking for a job?[/QUOTE]

Or protecting what chances he has. This is the silly season for ProTeam selections so, given the somewhat "political" use by UCI of the bio-passport to sanction riders everyone's probably a little itchy and wants their best image out front.
Would one team improve their chances of selection by "outing" a major rider on another team competing for a ProTeam spot? I don't know but these guys have stooped low before.

 

[JPM London]

Or maybe he's just saying what he thinks?

Maybe the riders aren't too outspoken against dopers because a) sometimes they actually want to talk about something else than doping and b) it's not generally a good idea to do if you don't have proof and c) it's not the riders's job and they do have to keep riding in the peloton.

To me Holm's comments are a very positive sign. Please don't forget he put his own cards on the table far before it became fashionable and if you look at what he says it sounds genuine and not a calculated PR-conspiracy-thingie...

 

[Oldman]

Or maybe he's just saying what he thinks?

Maybe the riders aren't too outspoken against dopers because a) sometimes they actually want to talk about something else than doping and b) it's not generally a good idea to do if you don't have proof and c) it's not the riders's job and they do have to keep riding in the peloton.

To me Holm's comments are a very positive sign. Please don't forget he put his own cards on the table far before it became fashionable and if you look at what he says it sounds genuine and not a calculated PR-conspiracy-thingie...

I'd agree. My paranoia about DS manuevrings got the best of me on that one.

 

[Benotti69]

Or maybe he's just saying what he thinks?

Maybe the riders aren't too outspoken against dopers because a) sometimes they actually want to talk about something else than doping and b) it's not generally a good idea to do if you don't have proof and c) it's not the riders's job and they do have to keep riding in the peloton.

To me Holm's comments are a very positive sign. Please don't forget he put his own cards on the table far before it became fashionable and if you look at what he says it sounds genuine and not a calculated PR-conspiracy-thingie...

I will give him the benefit of the doubt, but his history does go against him. Yes he spoke out at a time when it was not the done thing but the omerta has a long memory.

It is the riders job to speak out about the doping, otherwise it wont change. If they don't, nothing changes. They are the biggest losers (i don't consider dopers who win winners). They are really the ones to affect change. How? Race protesting, look at what happened at this years TdF, riders dictated a stage be neutralised for the peloton due to the dangerous conditions. Same can be done for doping.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

I will give him the benefit of the doubt, but his history does go against him. Yes he spoke out at a time when it was not the done thing but the omerta has a long memory.

It is the riders job to speak out about the doping, otherwise it wont change. If they don't, nothing changes. They are the biggest losers (i don't consider dopers who win winners). They are really the ones to affect change. How? Race protesting, look at what happened at this years TdF, riders dictated a stage be neutralised for the peloton due to the dangerous conditions. Same can be done for doping.

Yes. Totally agree. There has been a lot of chatter about DSs and Mgrs being complicit (and how they should be held accountable), but it really does come down to the riders.

 

[Benotti69]

It is the riders job to speak out about the doping, otherwise it wont change. If they don't, nothing changes. They are the biggest losers (i don't consider dopers who win winners). They are really the ones to affect change. How? Race protesting, look at what happened at this years TdF, riders dictated a stage be neutralised for the peloton due to the dangerous conditions. Same can be done for doping.

to add to this, basically as i understand it the riders from almost day one have caved into their managers and race organisers and as i understand it let them dictate everything from race lengths to every change that has come about in pro cycling. well that has meant the riders took dope to cope with these demands. Time the riders said enough. shorter races, less racing at the beginning of an especially extremely long or difficult stages etc...

but i am not holding my breath.

 

[ergmonkey]

Brian Holm is a stone cold badass.

He could serve as an inspiration to all riders, great and anonymous:

-he was a loyal and powerful domestique;
-he directs a team with purpose and resolve; and
-he beat cancer and had the balls to confess to his own doping

 

[JPM London]

It is the riders job to speak out about the doping, otherwise it wont change. If they don't, nothing changes. They are the biggest losers (i don't consider dopers who win winners). They are really the ones to affect change. How? Race protesting, look at what happened at this years TdF, riders dictated a stage be neutralised for the peloton due to the dangerous conditions. Same can be done for doping.

I completely agree they should, but the problem is that historically no-one has had the riders's back if they speak out. If the rider's lucky he won't get total exclusion but only a cold shoulder. Whistleblowers have always been fckd - which is not a nice prospect if all you know is how to ride a bike and want to make a living...

 

[BroDeal]

Let me see...the first GT of the year won by a returned doper. The second GT winner tested positive for dope. The third GT's second place finisher tested positive for an illegal plasma expander, and the GT was won by a rider on the first GT winner's team, which has another top rider with blood values funky enough get him pulled him from competition.

These cycling boys sure know how to pick the best time to tell the public how everything is different than the past.

 

[luckyboy]

Wasn't Nibali (& Pellizotti) training with Ferrari at one point as well?

Yes he spoke out at a time when it was not the done thing but the omerta has a long memory.

Does confessing=speaking out?

 

[Kerbdog]

Wasn't Nibali (& Pellizotti) training with Ferrari at one point as well?

I think an Italian newspaper reported that last year alright. The 2 boys were quick to issue legal action in relation to it also IIRC. Rumoured but nothing proven.

 

[Benotti69]

Wasn't Nibali (& Pellizotti) training with Ferrari at one point as well?




Does confessing=speaking out?

no, it doesn't. but in cycling depending on how one confesses, it leads to the same thing, being banished by the omerta

 

[craig1985]

Wasn't Nibali (& Pellizotti) training with Ferrari at one point as well?




Does confessing=speaking out?

Ivan Fanini, the boss of Amore e Vita, claimed he saw them training in St Moritz, with Ferrari, Pellizotti and Nibali denied this and threatened to sue Fanini, but I don't think anything came off that.

 

[hrotha]

Ivan Fanini, the boss of Amore e Vita, claimed he saw them training in St Moritz, with Ferrari, Pellizotti and Nibali denied this and threatened to sue Fanini, but I don't think anything came off that.

Has anyone ever sued over something like this? It's always "we'll sue", the media reports the threat, the PR effect is achieved, and they don't have to prove anything in court.

Aside from Kohl, Jaksche, Manzano and a few others, I haven't seen anyone speak out. Confess, yes, but not speak out. It's even more exasperating when riders do like Barredo, say the sport is cleaning up and changing, all without admitting to ever having doped, seen doping or having been pressured into doping.

 

[python]

is this a joke ?

the sport is cleaning up ?

let’s turn to the wada report again... (funny, all media just passed over this)

..The vast majority of riders (122) had either a valid TUE or an applicable Declaration of Use during the period of the Tour

that’s 122/198=62% on legal chemicals. show me another sport where the majority are so ‘unhealthy’

the IO Team were advised of four Presumptive Analytical Findings, five Atypical Findings and one Adverse Analytical Finding

that’s 10 cases. and we’d never hear of ANY if wada wasn’t involved. only one case may be, just may be will have a suspension consequence.

jokesters !

 

[ergmonkey]

Has anyone ever sued over something like this? It's always "we'll sue", the media reports the threat, the PR effect is achieved, and they don't have to prove anything in court.

You're on the right track. It's very rarely a good idea to actually sue over something like this. The problem is that the lawsuit will not be resolved quickly, and the entire time that it is ongoing, the athlete risks having the press repeatedly issue reports about the "contested allegations." The effect of this, of course, is simply for the public to hear the allegations against the rider a lot. Even if the case is resolved favorably, that kind of long-term, repeated string of doping accusations is not good for the rider's image.

But, if the threat of a suit can make the accuser shut up right away, then the threat can be a great tactical move.

 

[TubularBills]

I completely agree they should, but the problem is that historically no-one has had the riders's back if they speak out. If the rider's lucky he won't get total exclusion but only a cold shoulder. Whistleblowers have always been fckd - which is not a nice prospect if all you know is how to ride a bike and want to make a living...

Agreed... if you want to win and have a career join the team, otherwise - fictitiously, best illustrated in "Breaking Away," pump in the wheels - you get sidelined by Cinzano and, in reality Simeoni TDF an abbreviated/shortened or failed career - the peloton doesn't appreciate dissension (omerta) - it would seem that the reason Pharmstrong was tolerated was because almost everyone realized they all benefited from his connections and realized the sport was actually being watched globally i.e. the World Stage brings larger salaries than the European Stage.

 

[TubularBills]

I completely agree they should, but the problem is that historically no-one has had the riders's back if they speak out. If the rider's lucky he won't get total exclusion but only a cold shoulder. Whistleblowers have always been fckd - which is not a nice prospect if all you know is how to ride a bike and want to make a living...

W's got their back, or else...