Brits don't dope?

[wrinklyvet]

how does that article contradict that he lied about it?

Nobody has volunteered what the lie was supposed to have been. Pressed on that, I have not had a response from him. Just other stuff.

P.S. This was all I asked, so as to be informed:

Find me one where Brailsford lied - that is the point, not that they were dining together, which is well known. Are you saying Brailsford lied about being there (i.e. that he was not there)?

 

[sniper]

Quite how Millar's relationship with Cecchini became public knowledge and quite why he ended it has various versions. One involves David Brailsford. That would be David Brailsford's version, the version which overlooks how Brailsford and British Cycling were happy to work with Max Sciandri and send young riders to train with him in Tuscany, but were horrified to be directly linked to Sciandri's mentor.

http://www.podiumcafe.com/2011/6/17/2228568/Racing-Through-The-Dark

 

[Benotti69]

Here ya go:

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/gaumont-watches-from-a-distance-8925/

Rofl, no doubt a Benotti apology will soon follow.

Well, how about the apology, now the article has been found that was contemporaneous and mentions Brailsford was at the dinner? How did he lie about that? That is what you alleged.

That is not the Sunday Times article.

That article does not mention that Brailsford was arrested along with Millar.

Interesting in the article Gaumont says the sport is a circus, "the system disgusted me"........ Nothing has changed, ring masters like Brailsford come and go.......

 

[Benotti69]

http://www.podiumcafe.com/2011/6/17/2228568/Racing-Through-The-Dark

Good find. Brailsford has shown he was more than happy to work with dopers, Sciandri, Barry, Yates, De Jongh, Rogers, and hire a doping Doctor, Leinders.

Remember Fran Millar knew her brother was doping in 2004 when Brailsford was lining him up for TeamGB Olympic TT Greece team.

Brailsford was happy to work with dopers in 2004. Nowt has changed. Sky still employing Servais Knavens are big time charlie juicer as a rider.

 

[Benotti69]

Find me one where Brailsford lied - that is the point, not that they were dining together, which is well known. Are you saying Brailsford lied about being there (i.e. that he was not there)?

Well according to various articles Brailsford was at the restaurant with his heavily pregnant girlfriend. I suspect he wanted to get her back to the UK asap.

I repeat, the articles do not mention Brailsford was arrested along with Millar.

Kimmage asked Brailsford about Biarritz and the 'truth'. Brailsford regretted not being 'truthful'. For those who doubt, go find the Sunday Times article by Kimmage. It is behind a paywall and i will not give Murdoch a cent.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Brailsford has a known history of lying over doping. He lied about being with David Millar when Millar was arrested by Gendarmes.

Now try again to answer my question relating to this. What was Brailsford's lie? Fair enough that you don't want to pay for the Sunday Times article but you should be prepared to substantiate your assertion.

The fact of the matter is that you seem to be wrong. He does not appear to have denied being with David Millar on that occasion. You were about to build on this and it seems you can't. It's another near-truth, or should we say non-truth. Or, if not, where's the evidence to support you? Is it in the article you don't have access to?

 

[sniper]

if the article linked by mattparker doesn't mention the arrest, it's not far-fetched to assume that's because brailsford had lied about it.

 

[Benotti69]

Now try again to answer my question relating to this. What was Brailsford's lie? Fair enough that you don't want to pay for the Sunday Times article but you should be prepared to substantiate your assertion.

The fact of the matter is that you seem to be wrong. He does not appear to have denied being with David Millar on that occasion. You were about to build on this and it seems you can't. It's another near-truth, or should we say non-truth. Or, if not, where's the evidence to support you? Is it in the article you don't have access to?

People who quote or write "the fact of the matter" are always lying.

I never said Brailsford lied about Biarritz. Read Kimmage.

But you continue to ignore that Fran Millar knew her Brother was doping so must have Brailsford who was meeting Millar to discuss Olympic TT.

When you (or other) get access to Kimmage's full article we can continue the discussion about Brailsford regret about not being truthful.

Till then, "Brits dont dope?"..................

 

[Freddythefrog]

Now try again to answer my question ..................

That's a bit cheeky. We are still waiting on you sharing with us your ideas on how Sir Bradley and the dietitian he had been working with since 2003, came up with a cracking wheeze that had Sir Bradley lose over 7 kg and retain and even enhance his power output, just at the same time the latest undetectable drug aicar was ripping through the peloton http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/afld-president-suspects-new-drugs-in-peloton and turned himself from pack-fill to hardened GT winner.

 

[wrinklyvet]

People who quote or write "the fact of the matter" are always lying.

I never said Brailsford lied about Biarritz.


.

No, I don't think you should carry on like that. You did. It's there in black and white above.

 

[Benotti69]

No, I don't think you should carry on like that. You did. It's there in black and white above.

......................

Till then, "Brits dont dope?"..................

Find the article. End of.

Keep pushing this and i'll report you for trolling and baiting.

 

[wrinklyvet]

That's a bit cheeky. We are still waiting on you sharing with us your ideas on how Sir Bradley and the dietitian he had been working with since 2003, came up with a cracking wheeze that had Sir Bradley lose over 7 kg and retain and even enhance his power output, just at the same time the latest undetectable drug aicar was ripping through the peloton http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/afld-president-suspects-new-drugs-in-peloton and turned himself from pack-fill to hardened GT winner.

I don't recollect that I was making any proposition relating to that at the time. You seem to be, but are you a dietician, nutritionist or cycling coach?

You want me to somehow prove it can't be done without Aicar. I can't tell you. I have never tried. I am not Wiggins' nutrition or training adviser (or anyone else's) and I don't propose to try to do that.

Benotti is making a strong allegation about a particular alleged lie and now you try to deflect the particular issue because he has no answer.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Find the article. End of.

Keep pushing this and i'll report you for trolling and baiting.

I will be pleased to stop, noting that you cannot support your assertion. If the mods find my queries unacceptable it's just too bad.

 

[Benotti69]

I will be pleased to stop, noting that you cannot support your assertion. If the mods find my queries unacceptable it's just too bad.

I pointed you to the article. No doubt available at your local library on file. I dont live in the UK.

But you fail to address all the other important parts of the discussion "Brits dont dope?" and are labouring (some might say trolling) on this one, which conveniently for you is behind a paywall and therefore not linkable.

 

[gillan1969]

wrinkly

you seem to be either naive or blind...

wiggins and froome are wearing stripy jumpers, have masks on, need a shave and have large bags with swag written on them...


you just don't/cant recognise it....

 

[wrinklyvet]

wrinkly

you seem to be either naive or blind...

wiggins and froome are wearing stripy jumpers, have masks on, need a shave and have large bags with swag written on them...


you just don't/cant recognise it....

Yes of course. Silly of me. It's so convincing, put like that.

 

[red_flanders]

You want me to somehow prove it can't be done without Aicar. I can't tell you. I have never tried. I am not Wiggins' nutrition or training adviser (or anyone else's) and I don't propose to try to do that.

I recall asking you how you thought he lost all the weight and gained power. I don't expect anyone to prove it, I just wonder if you think he did it clean or not, and how you think he did it. I don't recall getting any answer.

 

[wrinklyvet]

I recall asking you how you thought he lost all the weight and gained power. I don't expect anyone to prove it, I just wonder if you think he did it clean or not, and how you think he did it. I don't recall getting any answer.

I think he did it clean, by nutrition and training. That's my answer. i am not an expert, even though many think they are. Please note what I said in what you quoted. As Benotti said about his point about the lie he said was made by Brailsford, "End of."

Please don't pursue what I can't add anything to. All the best to you.

 

[Freddythefrog]

Yes of course. Silly of me. It's so convincing, put like that.

Yes it really is only that tiny step away. A guy who has a known alcohol problem and curses the dopers suddenly wakes up one day, as if having seen the arc-angel Gabriel during the night. Sir Bradley now believes in he can beat the dopers clean. He achieves miracles with his body and takes on a proven dirty Armstrong, clean, at the same time as a new undetectable wonder drug rips through the peloton. He also has selective amnesia, doesn't remember riding with Lance and all the time is surrounded by creeps like Sutton and Yates as well as other hired doping experts.

That you have told us you believe he did it by diet is eye-opening. I find it astonishing that you can hold so true to your belief with such a trivial resource in the face of such overwhelming evidence. I am puzzled about your motives.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Yes it really is only that tiny step away. A guy who has a known alcohol problem and curses the dopers suddenly wakes up one day, as if having seen the arc-angel Gabriel during the night. Sir Bradley now believes in he can beat the dopers clean. He achieves miracles with his body and takes on a proven dirty Armstrong, clean, at the same time as a new undetectable wonder drug rips through the peloton. He also has selective amnesia, doesn't remember riding with Lance and all the time is surrounded by creeps like Brailsford, Sutton and Yates as well as other hired doping experts.

That you have told us you believe he did it by diet is eye-opening. I find it astonishing that you can hold so true to your belief with such a trivial resource in the face of such overwhelming evidence. I am puzzled about your motives.

I don't have motives. I have taken note of Wiggins for years and against the weight of opinion in the Clinic I believe in him. These things may not stand analysis by others of a different view. I see opinions. You see "evidence." End of, like I said.

 

[red_flanders]

I think he did it clean, by nutrition and training. That's my answer. i am not an expert, even though many think they are. Please note what I said in what you quoted. As Benotti said about his point about the lie he said was made by Brailsford, "End of."

Please don't pursue what I can't add anything to. All the best to you.

Thanks. So you're asking me not to ask you why you think he was able to do that even though he was already a top cyclist presumably optimizing his weight already? I know you don't know what he did, but I am certainly curious why you think he was able to do it with nutrition and training, assuming he was using nutrition and training before, like every other cyclist.

I'm not suggesting plans can't be optimized and gains can't be made, but to make the kind of physical transformation he did is dramatic. I certainly would like a better explanation from his camp than "gluten free" or some such rot.

You're not the least bit suspicious that his weight loss coincided exactly when AICAR and other drugs started appearing the peloton?

I don't have motives. I have taken note of Wiggins for years and against the weight of opinion in the Clinic I believe in him. These things may not stand analysis by others of a different view. I see opinions. You see "evidence." End of, like I said.

OK, just saw this. Well it sound to me like faith rather than an opinion formed from the information available, which is your right. But there seems to me much more evidence that he doped to do it than not. The evidence is that there was a new drug which allowed people to lose weight and gain power coming on the scene at the same time he lost fairly dramatic amounts of weight and gained power.

It's not proof, and it's not damning, but it is evidence.

 

[wrinklyvet]

So what do you think Bordry based his comments on - opinion or scientific facts. At the leading edge of anti-PED detection he knows that they are desperately working to come up with a test to deal with two new drugs. Has AFLD met the same Arc -Angel Sir Bradley did ? Is he is spouting *** on the basis of what somebody told him down the boozer ? They are working on what they are being informed about. Etc, etc. Then look at the way Sir Bradley has conducted himself since. Not my character profile of someone I want my children to look up to, not far from idiot premiership footballers.

I can live with mamils new to the sport being disciples to the new faith, but I have little sympathy with the Brit long-term follower of cycling being hoodwinked. It isn't complicated.

We know it is a let down for the Brits who believe. The "plucky Brit loser eventually gives dirty johnny foreigner a thrashing at his own game" is a great tale. My true ire is for the likes of Cookson who has been "on watch" determined never to see the evidence in front of him. Shams like Sir Dave and Sir Bradley have spotted who is above them, Shane is a do-er who makes a lot of it happen and talks them into it. Cookson should have been showing leadership, instead he takes selfies with Eddy and spouts nativities in respect of doping. It is going to take some bottle to catch Sir David and Sir Bradley, he is actually helping disguise them and making it a lot harder for anyone to expose them later and for that exact reason I think he is a very bad UCI President.

Look, I am somewhat beyond middle age and I am not in any way new to cycling. I don't have the time to be obsessed with this site and the desire of others to persuade me of the error of my ways.

I know you think me rude not to keep answering people but I have other preoccupations. If it turns out I am hoodwinked I will think of you. We are different people, different in background and in my case, I expect, professional experience. So please do me a favour and stop telling me what I should think.

I've not made a statement that others need to pick at. I have politely tried to make a brief response to what I regard as a genuine question and that's all I propose to do for now. Over and out Freddy.

 

[blackcat]

I don't have motives. I have taken note of Wiggins for years and against the weight of opinion in the Clinic I believe in him. These things may not stand analysis by others of a different view. I see opinions. You see "evidence." End of, like I said.

lots believed in Armstrong too. Lots still believe in Armstrong. even after Oprah. Wigans loved Armstrong. He believed in Armstrong. Its only fit that we believe in Wigans too.

 

[SeriousSam]

I've not made a statement that others need to pick at.

But they can, and do, if they find fault with it. If you want your opinions to go unchallenged, you must be content with just thinking them, not stating them. Or maybe there's a Wiggo forum where you can find like minded individuals.

 

[wrinklyvet]

But they can, and do, if they find fault with it. If you want your opinions to go unchallenged, you must be content with just thinking them, not stating them. Or maybe there's a Wiggo forum where you can find like minded individuals.

That's a bit strong. I was asked for a reply to a point I was not discussing and I gave one. One thing leads to another, I know. But I am not going to continue now and if you can't accept that it's too bad. It's not a treadmill and I am not on the witness stand either. In fact I am going to bed now. Goodnight.