Circ

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
RobbieCanuck said:
The problem with Tilford's article is that he wants the Commission to clean up the sport but criticizes the process they propose to go about it. He says in the article,

"I was hoping that this commission would be the catalyst to get as much of the doping culture and facts exposed and then we can all start at square one with a clean slate."

The hard cold truth is one cannot get at the facts without riders, sponsors, soigneurs, DSs, team owners coming forward and talking to the CIRC. How else would one "expose the facts?" Tilford has not offered any better way of getting at the truth.
He does not wish for the commission to clean up the sport but to be the catalyst that cleans up the sport. There is a difference.

The only way the sport is going to get rid of the doping culture is if the sport gets itself wants to get rid of it. The only way that is going to happen is to rid the sport of most if its protagonists and introduce lifetime bans.

The sport needs to take lots of steps backwards before it can move forward and there are not many who are prepared to do that.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Dr. Maserati said:
You are basing this on the assumption that lots or the majority are still doping.

It may be true and if so, well tough, thats what has to happen to those teams.
The assumption is based on speeds not being down, riders still doping, very few voicing anti doping messages.

Dr. Maserati said:
Cookson is distant from the past. He was a committee member from 09, they met 3 times a year and were essentially kept out of the loop.

And regardless of what happens this puts a definitive break from himself and McQ/HV.
Cookson was part of the UCI during the McQ/HV era. If this CIRC does its job properly and to full effect then Cookson will have made a break from UCI's past. But for now I dont consider him as any new under the UCI sun.
 
RobbieCanuck said:
There are plenty of incentives

1. A reduced ban
2. A cleansing of the soul - the sense of relief that comes from telling the truth
3. A commitment to a clean sport
4. Redemption
5. Righting a wrong

Maybe Spain is so entrenched in the cheating culture fans cannot see the other side of the coin.
These are not incentives.

I've been told by someone working with various Pro tour teams that they all know what's going on but keep quiet. Doping stories are bad so rather than clean house, they keep quiet.

People that do know of doping / corruption do not have any way of revealing this unless they want their own careers damaged.

Dopers are all welcomed bad into the sport. Whistleblowers aren't.
 
never...never i'm tellin' ya

BroDeal said:
The UCI has created such a toxic atmosphere with its scapegoating policy that no rider will want to come forward. This is made even more problematic by teams like Sky that will fire anyone who gets publicly exposed but are happy to keep those aboard if it does not become common knowledge
never will happen though...........don't forget team sky staff have pledged that they have never been involved in doping

if however staff have transgressed then not surprisingly they would be sacked for dishonesty

this must break the hearts of many here who are desperate to see team sky exposed

me? as always.........hoping for a clean sport
Mark L
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Benotti69 said:
He does not wish for the commission to clean up the sport but to be the catalyst that cleans up the sport. There is a difference.

The only way the sport is going to get rid of the doping culture is if the sport gets itself wants to get rid of it. The only way that is going to happen is to rid the sport of most if its protagonists and introduce lifetime bans.

The sport needs to take lots of steps backwards before it can move forward and there are not many who are prepared to do that.
Ok.
Then how do you do that?

You keep mentioning the culture - and according to you the only way to change it is give the protagonists a lifetime ban.
How do you identify the protagonists? How do you get the required evidence against them, key alone the required evidence that warrants a lifetime ban?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Ok.
Then how do you do that?
Better testing, more OOC testing.........

Dr. Maserati said:
You keep mentioning the culture - and according to you the only way to change it is give the protagonists a lifetime ban.
The doping culture is not a mirage. A certain rider lost all his TdF wins and they were not handed to another. That shows the extent of the culture there was and I have not seen anything that changed that.

Dr. Maserati said:
How do you identify the protagonists? How do you get the required evidence against them, key alone the required evidence that warrants a lifetime ban?
Testing,testing and testing. Make the teams pay for it.

I propose that any doping (1st timers) gets a lifetime ban from competitive sport.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Benotti69 said:
Better testing, more OOC testing.........
Ok and I agree.
But there is much better testing for more products then even 10 years ago?
Which would mean a lot has changed.

Benotti69 said:
That shows the extent of the culture there was and I have not seen anything that changed that.[/B]
I assume this is the same guy who actually got away with it when he retired in 2005 because he had a lot of assistance from the like of JB, Ferrari, the UCI etc.

He got caught. Outed, gone, stripped of his results.
A lot of his enablers are gone to, including the protagonists.
I would consider that a pretty big change.

Benotti69 said:
Testing,testing and testing. Make the teams pay for it.

I propose that any doping (1st timers) gets a lifetime ban from competitive sport.
The teams already pay a significant amount, and there has been an increase in testing. But, you are one to suggest that has not been enough.
And that would be fair.

So, as a way to find out what more can be done would be to have an investigation that identifies the weak points in anti-doping so it can be addressed
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Ok and I agree.
But there is much better testing for more products then even 10 years ago?
Which would mean a lot has changed.
The only change has been in application and products.The culture to dope has not changed.

Dr. Maserati said:
I assume this is the same guy who actually got away with it when he retired in 2005 because he had a lot of assistance from the like of JB, Ferrari, the UCI etc.

He got caught. Outed, gone, stripped of his results.
A lot of his enablers are gone to, including the protagonists.
I would consider that a pretty big change.
USPS was one team. There are plenty of others who were not caught, outed, gone, stripped of their results. One team is twenty is not a big change.

Dr. Maserati said:
The teams already pay a significant amount, and there has been an increase in testing. But, you are one to suggest that has not been enough.
And that would be fair.
There is not enough testing. So then the teams need to pay more.

Dr. Maserati said:
So, as a way to find out what more can be done would be to have an investigation that identifies the weak points in anti-doping so it can be addressed
As i said, i will not be holding my breath that CIRC does much positive.

Cookson is of the opinion the sport is clean, he feels sorry for Froome.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8brdIJq4RI
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Benotti69 said:
The only change has been in application and products.The culture to dope has not changed.
Ok, so the fact that testing is better has not changed the culture. Yet you want the teams to pay more for more testing? Why waste that money since it has no effect on the culture?

You keep repeating the word culture.
As you appear to know what that is I will ask you to expand on it. My opinion is that a culture is something that is inherent, or a requirement.
Doping is not a requirement to ride a bike.

Doping is a way to gain an advantage - an advantage is always sought, so its not a 'culture' that can be changed. However, there are legal and illegal ways to gain an advantage, which would require detection and sanction to those using illegal methods, which you agree is happening.



Benotti69 said:
USPS was one team. There are plenty of others who were not caught, outed, gone, stripped of their results. One team is twenty is not a big change.
Of course, your maths are wrong - but its interesting that you use the number - not the fact that it was USPS had such a good program that required a great deal of deceit and assistance.
All exposed.

Benotti69 said:
There is not enough testing. So then the teams need to pay more.



As i said, i will not be holding my breath that CIRC does much positive.

Cookson is of the opinion the sport is clean, he feels sorry for Froome.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8brdIJq4RI
And he also added - "...but whats clear is that there are a large number of people out there who do believe that and frankly thats a problem for the UCI, because it is our job to restore the reputation of the sport. Its our job to convince people that what they can now see is something they can believe in".
 
Benotti69 said:
Better testing, more OOC testing.........

We know there are unsanctioned positives in the APMU system. More tests mean more unsanctioned positives.

Here's an idea that costs a whole lot less, let the NADO's open cases on their own regardless of which Anti-doping Authority (ex. race organizer) collects the sample.

I actually agree there needs to be more blood testing, but it's more important to have someone able to open cases in inconvenient times. See the IOC thread for another case where the IOC itself suppressed positives because it was too controversial.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Benotti69 said:
The assumption is based on speeds not being down, riders still doping, very few voicing anti doping messages.
Froome hitting it off on the AX3 Domaines with Porte is not the whole peloton. Combine the times more collectively with previous editions and there's a difference. Same with Alpe d'Huez. Angliru on the other hand was more concerning.

I remember Costa's MTT win last year in Suisse. The times were very encouraging. Barely a mention of it. Yet when someone nails it similar to past doping performances, the uproar is 10 fold in comparison and we're back to the height of the EPO era. You can't just propaganda it to one side of the argument.

You look at it in a more rounded view to get a better balanced opinion.
 
Benotti69 said:
Better testing, more OOC testing.........



The doping culture is not a mirage. A certain rider lost all his TdF wins and they were not handed to another. That shows the extent of the culture there was and I have not seen anything that changed that.



Testing,testing and testing. Make the teams pay for it.

I propose that any doping (1st timers) gets a lifetime ban from competitive sport.
As Dr.Mas has said, if improved testing has not changed the culture as you repeat over and over tirelessly, then what is the point of more testing if it is ineffectual. More testing does not equal better testing.

You only mention more testing for riders but always claim DS, team doctors, soigneurs are part of the problem but how do you prove they were up to anything. Take a former rider for example Max Sciandri or Fabio Baldato who are both at BMC now. What evidence would there be to have them ejected from the sport, right now there is none other than they rode in the EPO era for teams that were likely doping. So do you just ban everyone who rode as a pro from becoming a DS, that could mean also putting a lot of innocent people out of a job.

What was the name of the doctor who worked for dodgy teams but apparently had a good reputation, the guy that worked for Garmin and had a few people here vouch for him. Would it be fair on him if he were ejected from the sport using the same sort of guilt by association game played here.

You criticise those involved but your own ideas are no more better than those already involved. What DS has said regularly there should be more testing and more money spent on testing, oh thats right its JV but he is a leading part of the doping culture according to you.

Just look at one of the teams who have had a bright start to the season, Giant-Shimano, look at their staff, how many of them have bad reps. They would appear to be the closest to the type of set-up that you wish for but do you believe they are not doping?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Ok, so the fact that testing is better has not changed the culture. Yet you want the teams to pay more for more testing? Why waste that money since it has no effect on the culture?

You keep repeating the word culture.
As you appear to know what that is I will ask you to expand on it. My opinion is that a culture is something that is inherent, or a requirement.
Doping is not a requirement to ride a bike.
You really want to do nothing but split hairs. Culture? The culture to dope. What needs to be expanded? Teams looking for every single possible PED?technique to achieve an advantage to win. I am firmly off the opinion that Teams will do anything, while avoiding detection to cheat to win. Kittel and UV blood manipulation is just another part of that culture.

If teams put more (lots) money up for testing it also means new tests can be researched with the funding. Eventually the teams will come to realise that paying all this money to catch themselves cheating is a waste and go back to finding real talent and working with that talent on bread and water. Well that would be my hope.

Dr. Maserati said:
Doping is a way to gain an advantage - an advantage is always sought, so its not a 'culture' that can be changed. However, there are legal and illegal ways to gain an advantage, which would require detection and sanction to those using illegal methods, which you agree is happening
The choice of illegal advantage is always part of the sport. Hence the doping culture.

Dr. Maserati said:
Of course, your maths are wrong - but its interesting that you use the number - not the fact that it was USPS had such a good program that required a great deal of deceit and assistance.
All exposed.
Maths not my strong point, but however many teams there, which you can be bothered to correct, only 1 team busted and the rest ride on.


Dr. Maserati said:
And he also added - "...but whats clear is that there are a large number of people out there who do believe that and frankly thats a problem for the UCI, because it is our job to restore the reputation of the sport. Its our job to convince people that what they can now see is something they can believe in".
CIRC is one small step Cookson has made. He has only been in the job for a few months but to come over feeling sorry for Froome, whose metoric rise is extremely suspicious is not a good way to procede all imo.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Benotti69 said:
You really want to do nothing but split hairs. Culture? The culture to dope. What needs to be expanded? Teams looking for every single possible PED?technique to achieve an advantage to win. I am firmly off the opinion that Teams will do anything, while avoiding detection to cheat to win. Kittel and UV blood manipulation is just another part of that culture.
You introduced the term 'culture' - therefore I would assume you could explain what it is and its relevance.
The very term sounds like that it is ingrained and that the sport only functions because of dope.

To the highlighted, I would agree, but the underlined is exactly what changes that behaviour. You modify behaviour by catching and punishing people.


Benotti69 said:
If teams put more (lots) money up for testing it also means new tests can be researched with the funding. Eventually the teams will come to realise that paying all this money to catch themselves cheating is a waste and go back to finding real talent and working with that talent on bread and water. Well that would be my hope.
Teams are already paying lots of money - according to your theory it has little impact - how much to they need to spend? And to who?

Benotti69 said:
The choice of illegal advantage is always part of the sport. Hence the doping culture.
Hold on - is it a choice or a culture?

Benotti69 said:
Maths not my strong point, but however many teams there, which you can be bothered to correct, only 1 team busted and the rest ride on.
T-mobile, Rabo, Liberty off the top of my head - but again the fact is it was USPS, which was already gone - caught and exposed.


Benotti69 said:
CIRC is one small step Cookson has made. He has only been in the job for a few months but to come over feeling sorry for Froome, whose metoric rise is extremely suspicious is not a good way to procede all imo.
Cookson addressed that in the very piece you posted that its the UCIs responsibility to ensure that people like you have your concerns
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Dr. Maserati said:
<vortexing for vortexing sake>


Teams are already paying lots of money - according to your theory it has little impact - how much to they need to spend? And to who?
JV doesn't agree with you. JV bandied a figure about in his thread. Go look it up.

Dr. Maserati said:
Hold on - is it a choice or a culture?
It can be both.

Dr. Maserati said:
T-mobile, Rabo, Liberty off the top of my head - but again the fact is it was USPS, which was already gone - caught and exposed.
T-mobile metaphorphed into HTC highroad/Columbia(till 2011), Rabo now Belkin, Liberty now Astana all fully functioning teams


Dr. Maserati said:
Cookson addressed that in the very piece you posted that its the UCIs responsibility to ensure that people like you have your concerns
Feeling sorry for Froome is not my concern, so not sure why it should be UCI presidents either. If Cookson was truly concerned he would be advising teams to be much more transparent and doing it very publicly.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Benotti69 said:
JV doesn't agree with you. JV bandied a figure about in his thread. Go look it up.
JV? As well as irrelevant and baiting - I didn't offer an opinion, I queried yours because you repeat the culture mantra while wanting more money for testing.

JV wants more money for testing because he believes in the system.
But it is noted that you now agree with JV.

Maybe the fact that you have changed is a sign of a changing culture?


Benotti69 said:
It can be both.
You can choose a culture?

Benotti69 said:
T-mobile metaphorphed into HTC highroad/Columbia(till 2011), Rabo now Belkin, Liberty now Astana all fully functioning teams
And USPS morphed in to Disco (and have been gone since 2007) - but their doping was still exposed.


Benotti69 said:
Feeling sorry for Froome is not my concern, so not sure why it should be UCI presidents either. If Cookson was truly concerned he would be advising teams to be much more transparent and doing it very publicly.
Ah, transparency - isn't that another meaningless trite word like 'culture'?
What is it that you feel they need to show - and I would assume this would be to show the 'culture' has changed.
 
BSkyB were advised by Dave B against using a certain rider for their employee cycling events because he was dirty. As far as I am aware this rider has never had a publicly revealed offence and is still racing at a high level.

Secondly;

One of the finance people from a big pro team was told that his team were up to something dodgy - he now works directly for the team, never questioned it or raised it.

No one cares about how dirty the sport is at a corporate level, Just that they won't get caught.
 
bobbins said:
These are not incentives.

I've been told by someone working with various Pro tour teams that they all know what's going on but keep quiet. Doping stories are bad so rather than clean house, they keep quiet.

People that do know of doping / corruption do not have any way of revealing this unless they want their own careers damaged.

Dopers are all welcomed bad into the sport. Whistleblowers aren't.
I agree with your characterization of the culture, but it seems to me the incentives I cited are incentives for someone who possesses moral courage and who wants to look at himself n the mirror and not be ashamed of himself. This was incentive enough for David Millar!
 
RobbieCanuck said:
I agree with your characterization of the culture, but it seems to me the incentives I cited are incentives for someone who possesses moral courage and who wants to look at himself n the mirror and not be ashamed of himself. This was incentive enough for David Millar!
Millar got caught. He didn't come forward voluntarily.
 
bobbins said:
Millar got caught. He didn't come forward voluntarily.
That's true but once he did he felt so bad about his doping at least he tried to do something. In his book Racing Through the Dark, the dark refers to the abyss he personally sunk into due to the shame of being caught. He says in his book,

"If I was going to make a difference then I needed to share my experiences with the agencies responsible for anti-doping."

This is what CIRC can do for the cyclists with the gonads and moral courage to "cleanse their soul!"
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
RobbieCanuck said:
I agree with your characterization of the culture, but it seems to me the incentives I cited are incentives for someone who possesses moral courage and who wants to look at himself n the mirror and not be ashamed of himself. This was incentive enough for David Millar!
:confused:

Millar's apartment was searched by police, and they found an epo vial.

In 2008 his blood values are whacked.

JV explains them by saying Millar does not recover in a GT, and does not experience BV expansion, hence his increasing Hct. Despite this explanation, he sends Millar to all 3 GTs one year, where he places well in final TTs (2009).

Could you please find another example?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
RobbieCanuck said:
"If I was going to make a difference then I needed to share my experiences with the agencies responsible for anti-doping."
He was in France, where doping products are illegal. Do you know what he shared and what impact it had?
 
Dear Wiggo said:
:confused:

Millar's apartment was searched by police, and they found an epo vial.

In 2008 his blood values are whacked.

JV explains them by saying Millar does not recover in a GT, and does not experience BV expansion, hence his increasing Hct. Despite this explanation, he sends Millar to all 3 GTs one year, where he places well in final TTs.

Could you please find another example?
I agree Millar may not be the best example, but the point I was trying to make is in post #45. At least Millar had a conscious. Armstrong, Hincapie etal are devoid of conscious.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
RobbieCanuck said:
I agree Millar may not be the best example, but the point I was trying to make is in post #45. At least Millar had a conscious. Armstrong, Hincapie etal are devoid of conscious.
He certainly is willing to tell us he has a conscience, agreed. Whether that is true or not, I can't say for sure.

I am interested if there's a rider we can point to, not caught, who came clean at some stage. Probably impossible due to keeping it quiet but then given UCI over the last decade, believing they could keep quiet, meh.

What about the rider that got in touch with Ashenden?
 
Dear Wiggo said:
He was in France, where doping products are illegal. Do you know what he shared and what impact it had?
Without rereading Millar's book I cannot recall specifically what he did in terms of WADA or the UCI, but I do recall he met with Jean Leblanc of ASO to apologize. I am not aware of Armstrong or Hincapie have done this with the TDF people.

The issue here, to bring the matter back to context, is what is an incentive to fess up about doping and for Millar it was a chance at redemption.

Bobbins seems to think this kind of incentive is not an incentive to confess to doping but in my view it denies an understanding of the human condition, and that is people don't want their legacy to be that of a cheat or fraudster and if they can make amends it tends to "cleanse the soul" What others think of Millar is irrelevant to how Millar feels about himself.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY