Clean Protocol

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Parker said:
No, there's several ways to prove doping. You must be thinking of someone else.
No no I am pretty sure it is. Unless there's a positive test that also survived a CAS appeal, it's not proof, right?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Anyway, I applaud people trying to do something for the culture of sport - period.

I think the attitude displayed by certain posters is worse than any potential short falling in the attempts being made to upgrade the culture of pro sport.

Like I said many times before, it's really easy to p1ss on something. Far harder to come up with an idea and execute it.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Parker said:
Marginal gains is sound principal which was around for ages before Brailsford had heard of it.
Christ almighty. YOu believe Brailsford but not the 100CHF piece of paper.

Sprung bad dude. Sprung bad.

Here's a clue, despite the moniker, people are not machines. Nor do they travel at F1 speeds.
 
Dear Wiggo said:
No no I am pretty sure it is. Unless there's a positive test that also survived a CAS appeal, it's not proof, right?
No that's just one method. Bio passports for examples. Overwhelming witness statements supporting incriminating documentation. As examples.

Lie detectors are not proof of anything though.
 
Dear Wiggo said:
Anyway, I applaud people trying to do something for the culture of sport - period.
Certificates, wristbands, appeals, funds, petitions, movements. You'll lap it all up unquestioningly, won't you? You've picked your side and now everything is black and white.

Dear Wiggo said:
Christ almighty. YOu believe Brailsford but not the 100CHF piece of paper.

Sprung bad dude. Sprung bad.
No, I believe that progress is made in small steps. Little by little in a variety of areas which aggregate to large steps. It underpins all advancement in all fields. That's all marginal gains is.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Parker said:
Certificates, wristbands, appeals, funds, petitions. You'll lap it all up unquestioningly, won't you? You've picked you side and now everything is black and white.
.
Pretty funny coming from the Sky believer. Pretty damn funny.

I've picked the side that wants to let riders race clean and win.

Pretty sure you've picked the UK side as long as they win.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Parker said:
No, I believe that progress is made in small steps. Little by little in a variety of areas which aggregate to large steps. It underpins all advancement in all fields. That's all marginal gains is.
You believe Brailsford. Nuff said.
 
Dear Wiggo said:
You believe Brailsford. Nuff said.
And what if I do? What gives your opinion more merit than mine?

Dear Wiggo said:
Anyway, I applaud people trying to do something for the culture of sport - period.
How about not employing doctors and coaches who have previously worked in cycling as Brailsford does. Do you applaud that? Seems better than selling paper to me.

If not, I'm sure another Joe Papp or Aaron Brown will be along soon for you to give a standing ovation.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Parker said:
How about not employing doctors and coaches who have previously worked in cycling as Brailsford does. Do you applaud that? Seems better than selling paper to me.
Bahahhahahahahahaha

Like Leinders? Sutton? Ellingworth?

Gotcha.

You're blind.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Parker said:
Just typing names won't convince anyone.
Oh you don't think they worked in cycling before they were at Sky?

Goodness.

And here you are the omniscient cycling god.

Goodness.
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
Parker said:
Given that the lie detector tests it relies on are not credible that's a pretty safe assumption. They belong in the movies and the Jeremy Kyle show, not reality.


Correct. Cleaniness can't be proved. So, the certificate - like I said - is meaningless. It has no clout, credibility or authority. It wouldn't convince anyone of anything. They're selling pieces of A4 paper for 100 CHF.

You can believe it's some new dawn if you wish, but you're the kind of mark they're hoping to rope in.

Imagine this conversation:
Athlete: "I'm clean"
Observer: "How do I know that"
A: "I have a certificate"
O: "From whom"
A: "A lawyer in Australia"
O: "And how did you show you were clean"
A: "I did an online test and sent him 100 bucks"
O: "You're a chump. They saw you coming"
A: "No I'm not"
O: "Do you have a certificate to prove it? Cos I can get you one for 50 bucks"
A: "Deal!"
As I see it you have chosen the apocalyptic stance on the subject of anti-doping.. You refuse to answer to the key points of my postings.
Yet I'am giving you the benefit of doubt by answering to your points...

Only then to see you defending Brailsford, the one name that got you posting in this thread right?
 
mrhender said:
As I see it you have chosen the apocalyptic stance on the subject of anti-doping.. You refuse to answer to the key points of my postings.
Yet I'am giving you the benefit of doubt by answering to your points...

Only then to see you defending Brailsford, the one name that got you posting in this thread right?
Your key points were that this idea was at a 'futile stage' (so if it's futile, how do these certificates have any merit) and that the powers that be should invest and back it. Should they do that without criticism? Without someone pointing out that lie detectors are BS? Without people questioning if this is scam.

And as for Brailsford. He's irrelevant. You and particularly DW diverted the arguement to him as you can't display the merit this half baked scheme or even call the certificate credible in any way.
 
Dear Wiggo said:
Sutto is an Aussie. Where do you think he worked before BC?
Welsh Cycling

Still. This thread isn't about Sky. There's plenty of threads about that. And it's not about me either.

It's about Clean Protocol.

Now why do you think anyone should believe someone just because they have a certificate from an unheard of Australian lawyer?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Parker said:
Now why do you think anyone should believe someone just because they have a certificate from an unheard of Australian lawyer?
Is that the intent?

Or is it different?

Given I already know the answer and you clearly don't, I'll leave it for you to work out.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Parker said:
Now why do you think anyone should believe someone just because they have a certificate from an unheard of Australian lawyer?
Sky is relevant because you drink their kool aid but try and kick this idea.

What about the document the riders signed to prove they were clean at Sky - and had never doped? Do we have posts from you p1ssing all over that as well?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Parker said:
How about you save us both more time and confusion and just tell me then.
Better that you work it out yourself. You won't believe an unknown Aussie poster any more than an unknown Aussie lawyer.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY