Dave Brailsford - cycling genius

[sniper]

Another important lesson today i think is that Collins really seems to up to the task.

 

[red_flanders]

I love the blasting of the "marginal gains" nonsense.

At those World Championships I found I could not get basic repairs completed for my bicycle by the BC mechanics. After my win at Beijing, British Cycling had bragged that the program of “marginal gains” meant that they had produced a skin suit for me to use whilst most of my competitors rode in shorts and a jersey. I had insisted on this in 2000, against the wishes of the BC management, and now it was trumpeted as an advantage of their thoroughness. However, for late 2008 they had once again “forgotten” to organise one and I was told to ride in shorts and jersey, which they had provided. Expecting this, I had brought to the championships my skin suit from the year before. Dave Brailsford was insistent that I could not wear it as it did not feature the logo of the new Sponsor Sky. Eventually a compromise was reached on the eve of the race, in which Emma Pooley, who had a needle and thread with her, cut out the Sky logo of the jersey and sowed it onto my old skinsuit. I won the World Title and became the first person, male or female to be World and Olympic road race champion in the same year.

And this straightforward, all-too-common, and damning criticism of testing and the groups who conduct it.

UKAD recently stand accused of not investigating Dr Bonar when evidence was brought to them by Dan Stevens. My total experience as an elite athlete brings me to a condition where I am not surprised that UKAD have done nothing. I have no faith in the actions in support of investigations conducted by UKAD or the testing they conduct, both completed at significant expense to the public purse.

Internationally, the conflicts of interest of so many of those charged with defending clean riders are such that they cannot be trusted to carry out their responsibilities effectively. National and International Federations can not be allowed to have any part in anti-doping activity. They are compromised at so many levels.

 

[yaco]

I love the blasting of the "marginal gains" nonsense.

At those World Championships I found I could not get basic repairs completed for my bicycle by the BC mechanics. After my win at Beijing, British Cycling had bragged that the program of “marginal gains” meant that they had produced a skin suit for me to use whilst most of my competitors rode in shorts and a jersey. I had insisted on this in 2000, against the wishes of the BC management, and now it was trumpeted as an advantage of their thoroughness. However, for late 2008 they had once again “forgotten” to organise one and I was told to ride in shorts and jersey, which they had provided. Expecting this, I had brought to the championships my skin suit from the year before. Dave Brailsford was insistent that I could not wear it as it did not feature the logo of the new Sponsor Sky. Eventually a compromise was reached on the eve of the race, in which Emma Pooley, who had a needle and thread with her, cut out the Sky logo of the jersey and sowed it onto my old skinsuit. I won the World Title and became the first person, male or female to be World and Olympic road race champion in the same year.

And this straightforward, all-too-common, and damning criticism of testing and the groups who conduct it.

UKAD recently stand accused of not investigating Dr Bonar when evidence was brought to them by Dan Stevens. My total experience as an elite athlete brings me to a condition where I am not surprised that UKAD have done nothing. I have no faith in the actions in support of investigations conducted by UKAD or the testing they conduct, both completed at significant expense to the public purse.

Internationally, the conflicts of interest of so many of those charged with defending clean riders are such that they cannot be trusted to carry out their responsibilities effectively. National and International Federations can not be allowed to have any part in anti-doping activity. They are compromised at so many levels.

Yes, but at the same time, Cooke discussed UKAD doing nothing even after three cyclists admitted to doping - So that's hardly a ringing endorsement of a NADO - And we know WADA is hardly a paragon of virtue - So its not just the sporting organisations that cause concern.

 

[red_flanders]

I love the blasting of the "marginal gains" nonsense.

At those World Championships I found I could not get basic repairs completed for my bicycle by the BC mechanics. After my win at Beijing, British Cycling had bragged that the program of “marginal gains” meant that they had produced a skin suit for me to use whilst most of my competitors rode in shorts and a jersey. I had insisted on this in 2000, against the wishes of the BC management, and now it was trumpeted as an advantage of their thoroughness. However, for late 2008 they had once again “forgotten” to organise one and I was told to ride in shorts and jersey, which they had provided. Expecting this, I had brought to the championships my skin suit from the year before. Dave Brailsford was insistent that I could not wear it as it did not feature the logo of the new Sponsor Sky. Eventually a compromise was reached on the eve of the race, in which Emma Pooley, who had a needle and thread with her, cut out the Sky logo of the jersey and sowed it onto my old skinsuit. I won the World Title and became the first person, male or female to be World and Olympic road race champion in the same year.

And this straightforward, all-too-common, and damning criticism of testing and the groups who conduct it.

UKAD recently stand accused of not investigating Dr Bonar when evidence was brought to them by Dan Stevens. My total experience as an elite athlete brings me to a condition where I am not surprised that UKAD have done nothing. I have no faith in the actions in support of investigations conducted by UKAD or the testing they conduct, both completed at significant expense to the public purse.

Internationally, the conflicts of interest of so many of those charged with defending clean riders are such that they cannot be trusted to carry out their responsibilities effectively. National and International Federations can not be allowed to have any part in anti-doping activity. They are compromised at so many levels.

Yes, but at the same time, Cooke discussed UKAD doing nothing even after three cyclists admitted to doping - So that's hardly a ringing endorsement of a NADO - And we know WADA is hardly a paragon of virtue - So its not just the sporting organisations that cause concern.

Of course! I used the term "groups" not sporting organizations because the conflict of interest and the clear lack of action (intentional) are happening at every level. I do think she paints a clear picture of the corruption involved in having Cookson in the position he is, and she paints a very clear picture of what a joke the TUE process is, as well as the notion that somehow things are different in Britain WRT doping and doping controls.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re:

Even if no doping dirt came out of this, it's still a damning indictment of BC's commitment to women's cycling.

V incitefull comment. It's a wonder she hasn't made this stuff public before...

 

[IndianCyclist]

Bcos now she has nothing to lose and DB and his team can only look on impotently and cannot threaten her like they did Varnish.

 

[Electress]

Wow! Full marks Cooke - BC et al. are utterly demolished/ A number of folks will surely be slinking off rather sooner than they may have hoped. I honestly don't think any one or any organisation emerged from that with their credibility / integrity intact. Brava.

 

[Robert5091]

Re:

Wow! Full marks Cooke - BC et al. are utterly demolished/ A number of folks will surely be slinking off rather sooner than they may have hoped. I honestly don't think any one or any organisation emerged from that with their credibility / integrity intact. Brava.

Ian Drake disappeared earlier then planned - http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/38694814
UK Sport and HSBC must be following this closely.

 

[King Boonen]

I love the blasting of the "marginal gains" nonsense.

At those World Championships I found I could not get basic repairs completed for my bicycle by the BC mechanics. After my win at Beijing, British Cycling had bragged that the program of “marginal gains” meant that they had produced a skin suit for me to use whilst most of my competitors rode in shorts and a jersey. I had insisted on this in 2000, against the wishes of the BC management, and now it was trumpeted as an advantage of their thoroughness. However, for late 2008 they had once again “forgotten” to organise one and I was told to ride in shorts and jersey, which they had provided. Expecting this, I had brought to the championships my skin suit from the year before. Dave Brailsford was insistent that I could not wear it as it did not feature the logo of the new Sponsor Sky. Eventually a compromise was reached on the eve of the race, in which Emma Pooley, who had a needle and thread with her, cut out the Sky logo of the jersey and sowed it onto my old skinsuit. I won the World Title and became the first person, male or female to be World and Olympic road race champion in the same year.

And this straightforward, all-too-common, and damning criticism of testing and the groups who conduct it.

UKAD recently stand accused of not investigating Dr Bonar when evidence was brought to them by Dan Stevens. My total experience as an elite athlete brings me to a condition where I am not surprised that UKAD have done nothing. I have no faith in the actions in support of investigations conducted by UKAD or the testing they conduct, both completed at significant expense to the public purse.

Internationally, the conflicts of interest of so many of those charged with defending clean riders are such that they cannot be trusted to carry out their responsibilities effectively. National and International Federations can not be allowed to have any part in anti-doping activity. They are compromised at so many levels.

Yes, but at the same time, Cooke discussed UKAD doing nothing even after three cyclists admitted to doping - So that's hardly a ringing endorsement of a NADO - And we know WADA is hardly a paragon of virtue - So its not just the sporting organisations that cause concern.

I didn't hear most of the testamony but unless it differs from her written statement she did not say they ignored three riders admitting to doping. She said they ignored three team members who said riders were doping, there is a massive difference between those two things.

 

[mike75]

Re:

More highlights:

. In 2006, 12 of the 13 positive test results at the men’s Tour de France were discounted by riders having active TUEs. 105 of the 176 starters were tested, and 60% had TUEs. In 2008, 76 of the 180 riders who started the men’s Tour de France had TUEs

Dirty, dirty sport enabled by its governing body and "anti"-doping agencies. The years don't matter, nothing has changed.

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

Even if no doping dirt came out of this, it's still a damning indictment of BC's commitment to women's cycling.

V incitefull comment. It's a wonder she hasn't made this stuff public before...

BC already tried to screw Cooke over enough when she was active, imagine what would have happened had she come out with all of this.

 

[Mr.38%]

I didn't hear most of the testamony but unless it differs from her written statement she did not say they ignored three riders admitting to doping. She said they ignored three team members who said riders were doping, there is a massive difference between those two things.

Indeed she testified re cases of reports about doping, not actual doping cases (technically).

 

[pastronef]

Brian Nygaard ‏@nygaardbn
Important that all the relevant points about women's cycling are heard beyond the way they are used as ammunition against Sky and BC.

https://twitter.com/nygaardbn/status/823983853262041093

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Even if no doping dirt came out of this, it's still a damning indictment of BC's commitment to women's cycling.

V incitefull comment. It's a wonder she hasn't made this stuff public before...

BC already tried to screw Cooke over enough when she was active, imagine what would have happened had she come out with all of this.

You really do need to load up on your Iron supplements. You're not even getting it when it's signposted for you. She already has come out with this, several times...

 

[B_Ugli]

Stumbled across this on BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38573615

The interviewer begins to get pretty irritated by DB's continuing to avoid giving a straight answer to straight questions.

And therein lies the problem, the more DB gives politician/smart arse style answers the more he alienates the public.

The fact that he dismisses the whole saga as "regrettable" is astonishing :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[yaco]

I love the blasting of the "marginal gains" nonsense.

At those World Championships I found I could not get basic repairs completed for my bicycle by the BC mechanics. After my win at Beijing, British Cycling had bragged that the program of “marginal gains” meant that they had produced a skin suit for me to use whilst most of my competitors rode in shorts and a jersey. I had insisted on this in 2000, against the wishes of the BC management, and now it was trumpeted as an advantage of their thoroughness. However, for late 2008 they had once again “forgotten” to organise one and I was told to ride in shorts and jersey, which they had provided. Expecting this, I had brought to the championships my skin suit from the year before. Dave Brailsford was insistent that I could not wear it as it did not feature the logo of the new Sponsor Sky. Eventually a compromise was reached on the eve of the race, in which Emma Pooley, who had a needle and thread with her, cut out the Sky logo of the jersey and sowed it onto my old skinsuit. I won the World Title and became the first person, male or female to be World and Olympic road race champion in the same year.

And this straightforward, all-too-common, and damning criticism of testing and the groups who conduct it.

UKAD recently stand accused of not investigating Dr Bonar when evidence was brought to them by Dan Stevens. My total experience as an elite athlete brings me to a condition where I am not surprised that UKAD have done nothing. I have no faith in the actions in support of investigations conducted by UKAD or the testing they conduct, both completed at significant expense to the public purse.

Internationally, the conflicts of interest of so many of those charged with defending clean riders are such that they cannot be trusted to carry out their responsibilities effectively. National and International Federations can not be allowed to have any part in anti-doping activity. They are compromised at so many levels.

Yes, but at the same time, Cooke discussed UKAD doing nothing even after three cyclists admitted to doping - So that's hardly a ringing endorsement of a NADO - And we know WADA is hardly a paragon of virtue - So its not just the sporting organisations that cause concern.

I didn't hear most of the testamony but unless it differs from her written statement she did not say they ignored three riders admitting to doping. She said they ignored three team members who said riders were doping, there is a massive difference between those two things.

You may be right - Doesn't detract from the point there have been cases where NADO's have ignored cases where athletes and support people have admitted to providing/using banned substances - My theory is some are given protection for dobbing in others.

 

[yaco]

Stumbled across this on BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38573615

The interviewer begins to get pretty irritated by DB's continuing to avoid giving a straight answer to straight questions.

And therein lies the problem, the more DB gives politician/smart **** style answers the more he alienates the public.

The fact that he dismisses the whole saga as "regrettable" is astonishing :lol: :lol: :lol:

Why do you fail to understand that Brailsford is hamstrung in discussing anything about a current Anti-Doping investigation by UKAD - Process must be followed - Brailsford can talk as much as he likes after UKAD finish their investigation.

 

[Benotti69]

Stumbled across this on BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38573615

The interviewer begins to get pretty irritated by DB's continuing to avoid giving a straight answer to straight questions.

And therein lies the problem, the more DB gives politician/smart **** style answers the more he alienates the public.

The fact that he dismisses the whole saga as "regrettable" is astonishing :lol: :lol: :lol:

Why do you fail to understand that Brailsford is hamstrung in discussing anything about a current Anti-Doping investigation by UKAD - Process must be followed - Brailsford can talk as much as he likes after UKAD finish their investigation.

Brailsford is hamstrung by his teams doping of riders. Nothing more.

 

[yaco]

Stumbled across this on BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38573615

The interviewer begins to get pretty irritated by DB's continuing to avoid giving a straight answer to straight questions.

And therein lies the problem, the more DB gives politician/smart **** style answers the more he alienates the public.

The fact that he dismisses the whole saga as "regrettable" is astonishing :lol: :lol: :lol:

Why do you fail to understand that Brailsford is hamstrung in discussing anything about a current Anti-Doping investigation by UKAD - Process must be followed - Brailsford can talk as much as he likes after UKAD finish their investigation.

Brailsford is hamstrung by his teams doping of riders. Nothing more.

You go on and on about doping and corruption in sport, yet fail to grasp the basic concept enshrined in WADA's statutes and carried out by NADO's - That possible anti-doping breaches by athletes should be kept as confidential as possible - I actually believe the head of UKAD should be sacked for making inappropriate public comments about the ongoing investigation into the mystery package.

 

[Ironhead Slim]

Stumbled across this on BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38573615

The interviewer begins to get pretty irritated by DB's continuing to avoid giving a straight answer to straight questions.

And therein lies the problem, the more DB gives politician/smart **** style answers the more he alienates the public.

The fact that he dismisses the whole saga as "regrettable" is astonishing :lol: :lol: :lol:

Why do you fail to understand that Brailsford is hamstrung in discussing anything about a current Anti-Doping investigation by UKAD - Process must be followed - Brailsford can talk as much as he likes after UKAD finish their investigation.

Brailsford is hamstrung by his teams doping of riders. Nothing more.

You go on and on about doping and corruption in sport, yet fail to grasp the basic concept enshrined in WADA's statutes and carried out by NADO's - That possible anti-doping breaches by athletes should be kept as confidential as possible - I actually believe the head of UKAD should be sacked for making inappropriate public comments about the ongoing investigation into the mystery package.

You really need to let it go. Sir Brailsford looks like a child with puddin' on his face trying to explain he didn't know anything about the dessert in the icebox. The head of UKAD should be sacked for letting this charade continue.

 

[Benotti69]

Stumbled across this on BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38573615

The interviewer begins to get pretty irritated by DB's continuing to avoid giving a straight answer to straight questions.

And therein lies the problem, the more DB gives politician/smart **** style answers the more he alienates the public.

The fact that he dismisses the whole saga as "regrettable" is astonishing :lol: :lol: :lol:

Why do you fail to understand that Brailsford is hamstrung in discussing anything about a current Anti-Doping investigation by UKAD - Process must be followed - Brailsford can talk as much as he likes after UKAD finish their investigation.

Brailsford is hamstrung by his teams doping of riders. Nothing more.

You go on and on about doping and corruption in sport, yet fail to grasp the basic concept enshrined in WADA's statutes and carried out by NADO's - That possible anti-doping breaches by athletes should be kept as confidential as possible - I actually believe the head of UKAD should be sacked for making inappropriate public comments about the ongoing investigation into the mystery package.

WADA are the pr wing of dirty sport.

 

[Beech Mtn]

WADA are the pr wing of dirty sport.

Excellent post. If the Fancy Bears are still taking requests, they should hack the homepage and replace the offical motto with this.

 

[gillan1969]

Stumbled across this on BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38573615

The interviewer begins to get pretty irritated by DB's continuing to avoid giving a straight answer to straight questions.

And therein lies the problem, the more DB gives politician/smart **** style answers the more he alienates the public.

The fact that he dismisses the whole saga as "regrettable" is astonishing :lol: :lol: :lol:

Why do you fail to understand that Brailsford is hamstrung in discussing anything about a current Anti-Doping investigation by UKAD - Process must be followed - Brailsford can talk as much as he likes after UKAD finish their investigation.

Brailsford is hamstrung by his teams doping of riders. Nothing more.

You go on and on about doping and corruption in sport, yet fail to grasp the basic concept enshrined in WADA's statutes and carried out by NADO's - That possible anti-doping breaches by athletes should be kept as confidential as possible - I actually believe the head of UKAD should be sacked for making inappropriate public comments about the ongoing investigation into the mystery package.

you go on and on about the institutions that are meant to police doping.....you seem to fail to grasp the basic concept that that system doesn't work, arguably purposefully so...these organisations don't catch dopers these days...its the press, the police and hopefully soon to be MPs....

 

[sniper]

WADA are the pr wing of dirty sport.

Excellent post. If the Fancy Bears are still taking requests, they should hack the homepage and replace the offical motto with this.

A wise man once came up to me and told me "young lad, a photo says more than a 1000 words".

I provided benotti69 as counterevidence.

 

[King Boonen]

I love the blasting of the "marginal gains" nonsense.

At those World Championships I found I could not get basic repairs completed for my bicycle by the BC mechanics. After my win at Beijing, British Cycling had bragged that the program of “marginal gains” meant that they had produced a skin suit for me to use whilst most of my competitors rode in shorts and a jersey. I had insisted on this in 2000, against the wishes of the BC management, and now it was trumpeted as an advantage of their thoroughness. However, for late 2008 they had once again “forgotten” to organise one and I was told to ride in shorts and jersey, which they had provided. Expecting this, I had brought to the championships my skin suit from the year before. Dave Brailsford was insistent that I could not wear it as it did not feature the logo of the new Sponsor Sky. Eventually a compromise was reached on the eve of the race, in which Emma Pooley, who had a needle and thread with her, cut out the Sky logo of the jersey and sowed it onto my old skinsuit. I won the World Title and became the first person, male or female to be World and Olympic road race champion in the same year.

And this straightforward, all-too-common, and damning criticism of testing and the groups who conduct it.

UKAD recently stand accused of not investigating Dr Bonar when evidence was brought to them by Dan Stevens. My total experience as an elite athlete brings me to a condition where I am not surprised that UKAD have done nothing. I have no faith in the actions in support of investigations conducted by UKAD or the testing they conduct, both completed at significant expense to the public purse.

Internationally, the conflicts of interest of so many of those charged with defending clean riders are such that they cannot be trusted to carry out their responsibilities effectively. National and International Federations can not be allowed to have any part in anti-doping activity. They are compromised at so many levels.

Yes, but at the same time, Cooke discussed UKAD doing nothing even after three cyclists admitted to doping - So that's hardly a ringing endorsement of a NADO - And we know WADA is hardly a paragon of virtue - So its not just the sporting organisations that cause concern.

I didn't hear most of the testamony but unless it differs from her written statement she did not say they ignored three riders admitting to doping. She said they ignored three team members who said riders were doping, there is a massive difference between those two things.

You may be right - Doesn't detract from the point there have been cases where NADO's have ignored cases where athletes and support people have admitted to providing/using banned substances - My theory is some are given protection for dobbing in others.

Are there? I can't think of any cases like that. Which ones?