• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Caisse puts Piti on non-active status

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Escarabajo said:
Where did you get this from? How did Ferrari know this? Do the Doctors share the files now? That proves the riders are at fault inmediatly.

How in the world you know Valverde was riding clean?
all good questions, but i'll be satisfied with a link or a reference to a public source where ferrari compared contador and valverde talents.

to my knowledge, and im not exactly an obsessed bookkeeper but an informed fan, this is a news.
 
Jun 23, 2009
128
0
0
Bicicleta said:
Can someone confirm or is it a rumor??

I think it's not a rumor as I read about the issue.
:rolleyes: But I don't understand the title of this thread because piti ist Valverdes dog and I cannot believe that the dog has ever doped. :rolleyes:
 
Mar 25, 2010
1
0
0
valverde

valverde may be tatanted but so is basso and scarponi do the the right thing give him 2 years , look at all the uci and conti money he has wasted in the legal fight imo he should get 4 years
 
ak-zaaf said:
Yes. If a case drags along for this long a suspension makes no sense. He's won a monument and a GT since the sh|tstorm started.

There isn't a good alternative because the UCI is full of idiots, the ASO only cares about money and individual countries can't get along and make the rules the same regarding doping.
That is not the fault of some guy who was on a team program years ago.

I'm all for catching dopers. But not after so many years and not randomly.
Puerto should be closed if the Spaniards won't give every last detail to the 'doping-investigators'.

Not many will agree with me, but I think this has gone on for far too long and a suspension for Valverde will not make things better for anyone.

I'll agree with you. Banning him at this point is ridiculous. The hypocrisy of the investigation, which supposedly had a couple of hundred athletes from many sports and only a couple from cycling have been punished?

I'm all for a cleaner sport, but let's have some transparency and not witch hunts. Maybe Piti should give Pat McQuaid a Pinarello. Maybe that will soften him up.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
The main reason that this has delayed so long is because of Valverde and his legal team.

CAS said thet would have given a ruling before the Tour last year to allow his participation (if he won the case), Valverde refused.

Basso and Scarponi both were caught through Puerto - both served their suspensions, both are back racing.

Bingo! (and +1)

Valve could have ended this long ago, himself. He's won a sh*tload in the meantime, so he is not hard done by. It's time for a 2 year holiday, funded by his own vacation fund.

And btw, for all those who have noted how it's not fair that others have not been nailed, and suggested if everyone does not face the piper, then neither should Valve - that would be a recipe for moving nothing forward.
 
Jan 20, 2010
713
0
0
ak-zaaf said:
Not many will agree with me, but I think this has gone on for far too long and a suspension for Valverde will not make things better for anyone.

It makes it better for me as a cycling fan, and club rider. It gives me some glimmer of hope that the battle might be being won, that may be a false hope but it's still a hope.

Many people said Piti was too high profile to be taken down by corrupt authorities so this is a positive step in that others may also be caught.
 
Aug 4, 2009
286
0
0
If he is banned worldwide for two years, will he be allowed to ride in Italy sooner, since he's already served one year of the ban in that country?
 
Jan 20, 2010
713
0
0
If UCI win their CAS appeal Valverde won’t get an additional two year ban worldwide, he will get his current ban extended worldwide i.e. the finish time of the initial ban will remain the same.
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
2
0
I read a cycling blog today where the author says that this is good for cycling but is it really does this actually help cycling I don't think so it probably does more harm than good what do you guys think
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
BroDeal said:
They should void all his wins since the Italian ban.
that will be one of the decision points for the second cas panel looking into the question of globalizing his italian ban.

if the rumour of caisse suspending valverde is true, it would indicate to me that the second panel's hearing (i believe over just a day or two ago) did not go valverde's way and the writing on the wall was pass on from the uci semi-officially.
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
1
0
franciep10 said:
I read a cycling blog today where the author says that this is good for cycling but is it really does this actually help cycling I don't think so it probably does more harm than good what do you guys think

Is the alternative, turning the other cheek and letting him get away with a doping offence because he managed to drag the case out for a few years, good for cycling? I think that would be like raising the white flag and giving in to dopers once and for all. Bad enough we have a governing body that is full of talk and nearly devoid of action. If we cannot even follow through when outside agencies put together a convincing case, we might as well give up. My two cents anyway.
 
BroDeal said:
They should void all his wins since the Italian ban.

While I strongly feel that makes sense on an 'abstract notion of justice' sense, realistically I don't think that's a very attractive thing to do for anyone involved with cycling, as it just reminds the casual fan that a whole lotta bike races have dopers in them. Plus, if they voided all his wins since the Italian ban, then his suspension would probably have to be up sooner (like when Petacchi was banned for salabutamol and they took his Giro wins off the record books and he came back sooner, treating him as if he were banned from that time). If they just ban him for 2 years (or more) from now, he loses all his potential results for the next 2 years on top of not getting any in Italy last year.

In other news 'not getting any in Italy last year' can be used to describe a recent trip I took.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
python said:
that will be one of the decision points for the second cas panel looking into the question of globalizing his italian ban.

if the rumour of caisse suspending valverde is true, it would indicate to me that the second panel's hearing (i believe over just a day or two ago) did not go valverde's way and the writing on the wall was pass on from the uci semi-officially.

Ah, thank you Python....of course!

I was wondering why Caisse acted now. The 'other' CAS case was due today - obviously things did not go well for Mr. Valverde and his legal team.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
franciep10 said:
I read a cycling blog today where the author says that this is good for cycling but is it really does this actually help cycling I don't think so it probably does more harm than good what do you guys think
it's a valid question awaiting it's answer and i dont believe it will be in 'black and white'.

i have two negative concerns with valverde's case:
(i) if he is stupid enough to 'flandilize' it, it would be a huge set back for cycling in my view. worse than flandis's.
(ii) coni being the italian authority banning a spaniard may set an international precedent for some vigilante kookoos (sufficiently in position to act) to retaliate on nationalistic grounds. it would certainly be bad for the sport.

otherwise, administering justice in the form of banning a blatant doper is a good thing.
 
Jan 20, 2010
713
0
0
BroDeal said:
They should void all his wins since the Italian ban.

I agree, I nearly added on the end of my post that as the UCI wouldn’t be successful in extending the time duration of the ban then they may seek to retrospectively remove results.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
riobonito92 said:
If he is banned worldwide for two years, will he be allowed to ride in Italy sooner, since he's already served one year of the ban in that country?

He should be allowed to race in Italy next year since he was baned last year, that would really put it to the Italians for banning him without the UCI. Then he'd rip up a ton of wins in Italy since he wouldn't be allowed to race elsewhere.

So if Valverde gets banned how many of the remaining riders on the list are next? (yea, I know none as they won't garner any headlines)
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Berzin said:
I'll agree with you. Banning him at this point is ridiculous. The hypocrisy of the investigation, which supposedly had a couple of hundred athletes from many sports and only a couple from cycling have been punished?

I'm all for a cleaner sport, but let's have some transparency and not witch hunts. Maybe Piti should give Pat McQuaid a Pinarello. Maybe that will soften him up.
Yet again I will repeat - the main reason this has dragged on so long is because of Valverde. Quite simply he and his legal team have ran out of avenues.

You have a point in that it is a disgrace that more people have not faced sanction - however in many cases all they had were 'pseudonyms' on bloodbags.

In the cases of Basso and Scarponi they had more evidence that did not even require them matching blood bags. Both walked in to CONI maintaining their innocence and walked out hours later admitting their 'discretions'.
franciep10 said:
I read a cycling blog today where the author says that this is good for cycling but is it really does this actually help cycling I don't think so it probably does more harm than good what do you guys think
But who has harmed the sport?

If Mr. Valverde didn't go to an apartment owned by a gynecologist(who he claims to not know even though he was the team Doctor at Kelme) and have his blood extracted, have EPO added and have it stored under the name bag#18 valv piti' (which is the name of a dog that he claims to not have) and has his DNA matched to the bag of blood .... then CONI does not have a case.

Of course CONI should not have been the ones to bring this case - that was the responsibility of the Spanish Federation (RFEC), they and Valverde are the ones who have prolonged this case.

Adiós Valverde.
 
python said:
i have two negative concerns with valverde's case:
(i) if he is stupid enough to 'flandilize' it, it would be a huge set back for cycling in my view. worse than flandis's.

He has already flandilized it. At least FLandis was not racing (and winning) while he was fighting his case.

The sad thing is that Valverde could have fessed up at some point, given a little info about Dr. Fuentes, and the Spanish fed probably would have given him a single year ban. The UCI would have complained about the reduced ban, but there is no reason the Spanish could not have given the UCI the bird the same way they have done with the rest of OP.
 
Apr 16, 2009
394
0
0
ElChingon said:
So if Valverde gets banned how many of the remaining riders on the list are next? (yea, I know none as they won't garner any headlines)

Unfortunately, it's this attitude that makes the fight against dopers so much more difficult. Valverde doped, he was caught and now (albeit belatedly) he will do his time. I'd prefer a lifetime ban.
 
May 11, 2009
190
4
8,835
ElChingon said:
He should be allowed to race in Italy next year since he was baned last year, that would really put it to the Italians for banning him without the UCI. Then he'd rip up a ton of wins in Italy since he wouldn't be allowed to race elsewhere.

So if Valverde gets banned how many of the remaining riders on the list are next? (yea, I know none as they won't garner any headlines)

No major Italian organisers would invite him to start their races under those conditions. He couldn't ride the Giro anyway because if the route includes even just a 2km detour into San Marino then he can't ride.

Puerto justice has been slow-coming and highly random, but we are getting towards the end of it and at least in cycling there will be an element of equal treatment once Valverde goes into the sin-bin. Ullrich, Basso, Scarponi, Sevilla have all had some kind of penalty - Don Alejandro has always been the stand-out name and now he's getting his. It's still a mess of course and the chances of "a big-name Spanish tennis player" going down are exactly zero, nevermind Real Madrid and Barcelona coming back into the story.
 
May 15, 2009
550
1
0
python said:
all good questions, but i'll be satisfied with a link or a reference to a public source where ferrari compared contador and valverde talents.

to my knowledge, and im not exactly an obsessed bookkeeper but an informed fan, this is a news.

OK, my bad. Actually Ferrari said Valverde is potentially stronger than Contador. I read that in 2008, kinda forgot the details.

Anyway, the link is here- http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=indepth.view&id=99
 
Delicato said:
OK, my bad. Actually Ferrari said Valverde is potentially stronger than Contador. I read that in 2008, kinda forgot the details.

Anyway, the link is here- http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=indepth.view&id=99
Thanks for the feedback. His comments can be taken in different ways. But there is still a probability that he has studied both files from these riders. His comments are a little vague of course; he would not want to be liable for anything he says.