Dave Millar - anti doping hero

[ianfra]

I have just read Dave's book - I have here in my home a collection of some 400-500 cycling books. His is number one. It is a brilliant, brilliant read. I speak to many people about cycling and some (cycling friends) will dismiss the pro sport by saying "they are all at it" - a stance with which I fundamentally disagree.
Reading Dave's book gives the doubters very little room for their views. Dave's honesty is so unbelievably revealing that no one (except the most cynical) can doubt just one word. He even swung Paul Kimmage over to his cause and that was after Paul had taken every opportunity to rubbish Dave in his articles.
David Millar is a giant amongst men, of that I have no doubt. His honesty, his intelligence and the way he reveals his emotions certainly opened my eyes to the inside world of cycling.
Listen. I've been in love with this sport for 50 years. I'm not an old fogey - I have a modern attitude, I ride every day, I still race at times. I've been a cycling journalist in the dim and distant past, so I know a thing or two about this sport. I am disappointed with the administration of the sport at the highest level and one of the UCI's recent moves in particular. They want to ban those convicted of doping offences from taking any future management role once their punishment is finished.
I think Dave would agree that it is people like him who are making the difference. Having experienced the bad times in our sport, he has worked relentlessly towards getting the sport cleaned up. He has never been in denial (a la Hamilton, Armstrong & Landis to name but 3) and as such he could wield enormous influence over the younger generation of riders. He's already done a lot of good work on behalf of a clean sport. We will need him in a management role in the future.
Dave: You are my sporting hero. Love your book. Long may you ride.

 

[Benotti69]

<snip>
I think Dave would agree that it is people like him who are making the difference.

i imagine his big ego would agree with you.

Having experienced the bad times in our sport, he has worked relentlessly towards getting the sport cleaned up. He has never been in denial (a la Hamilton, Armstrong & Landis to name but 3) and as such he could wield enormous influence over the younger generation of riders.

Where does it in his book slam the likes of Armstrong and Vino etc...please can you provide a quote. As i remember he wasn't to happy to hear Landis speaking out.

He's already done a lot of good work on behalf of a clean sport. We will need him in a management role in the future.

Pity he never helped the AFLD with information on how to avoid positives since he never tested positive, the police found empty vials of epo in his bathroom cabinet.

Can you provide any instances of how he has helped the sports anti doping apart from blowing his own trumpet.

Dave: You are my sporting hero. Love your book. Long may you ride.

glad he has one fan.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Millar is, was and always will be a liar, a doper and an upholder of omerta.

Don't believe the hype or the bs from him or the media about him being anti-doping.

Check out the other threads on Millar in the Clinic.

 

[Swabian Lass]

In what way has David Millar made any difference? As said above he never helped the AFLD, He's not been supportive of other riders who've spoken out, he's not really done anything to challenge the culture, but he's got this big reputation as an anti doping crusader in the main-stream English speaking media.

I think it's more about building a new image and it's fundamentally dishonest.

 

[happychappy]

Your "hero" bar is set way too low.

 

[roundabout]

He supposedly blew the whistle on Saunier (according to Millar himself if I'm not mistaken) but apart from that?

 

[egtalbot]

Look, I'm glad you have a hero to respect. I love watching David Millar race, and I certainly don't harbor any ill feelings about him, but. . .

1.He got caught
2.He broke down and admitted it, perhaps even with eloquence and emotion.
3.He didn't break the code of silence that helps keep doping going.

I fail to see these as the acts of a giant among men.

 

[ianfra]

I think most of you guys are talking from a lack of knowledge. I suggest you read the book. The book will answer all your questions and baseless statements. To name-call him only shows your lack of understanding of the human condition. I stand by every word I wrote about David Millar and I believe he should be shown the respect he deserves. Read the book, please and then come back and make your comments.

 

[hrotha]

He supposedly blew the whistle on Saunier (according to Millar himself if I'm not mistaken) but apart from that?

Does anyone have more info about that? If he truly did, I'd say it was a half-ased job, what with only two riders being caught, and by conventional anti-doping tests at that.

 

[ianfra]

Again, read his heartfelt and honest book. The beauty about his book is that it teaches us how easy it is to criticise the pro riders and their doping, without having any understanding of the pressures that these guys were under. Millar wasn't a Hamilton, Landis or Armstrong with their deny, deny, deny denials. He was happy to unload and explain how the doping occurs and the kind of pressures he (and others)faced. You see the sad thing is that many of the original European pros were from the peasant classes (I hate to say that but that's more or less how it was) and theirs was an environment of success at all costs. Dave Millar's book explains so much. Read it and then comment.

 

[fmk_RoI]

I have here in my home a collection of some 400-500 cycling books. His is number one. It is a brilliant, brilliant read.

Out of 500 hundred cycling books you really think this is the best? Man, you must have read a lot of turkeys.

Regardless of how well the book reads (and it does read well), how true do you think it is? Remember, it's not meant to be a novel.

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

 

[hrotha]

Are you David Millar's sales manager?

Look, I'm not going to buy this book without a good reason. Right now I think he's one of the biggest hypocrites in the peloton, and that's not changing anytime soon. If you want to share the knowledge you learned from the book to sway me so that I might consider giving it a chance, go ahead, but if you insist on discussing this only with people who have read the book, this is going to be one lonely thread.

 

[Benotti69]

I think most of you guys are talking from a lack of knowledge. I suggest you read the book. The book will answer all your questions and baseless statements. To name-call him only shows your lack of understanding of the human condition. I stand by every word I wrote about David Millar and I believe he should be shown the respect he deserves. Read the book, please and then come back and make your comments.

so what you are saying is you cannot quote a passage from the book that proves he has helped clean up cycling.

you are not the first to worship false idols and you wont be the last

 

[fmk_RoI]

A bigger or smaller hypocrite than DaveB? I'm trying to fig out how he can say no to Sean Kelly and Neil Stephens and yes to Sean Yates and Max Sciandri. Funny how few in Brit media even want to ask that Q (see the ans in this one: http://www.podiumcafe.com/2011/7/27/2295560/Richard-Moore )

 

[L'arriviste]

Does anyone have more info about that? If he truly did, I'd say it was a half-ased job, what with only two riders being caught, and by conventional anti-doping tests at that.

I haven't seen anything that suggests Millar blew the whistle on SD. Whistelblowing is all but non-existent in cycling, though I can think of a couple of isolated examples.

Whistleblowing is about communicating dangerous truths publicly, usually to one's own detriment. Memoirs are about communicating no longer dangerous but still titillating truths publicly, usually for one's own profit.

Of course, that observation has nothing to do with Millar or his book, on which I couldn't comment since I haven't read it.

 

[sniper]

(...)
Reading Dave's book gives the doubters very little room for their views. Dave's honesty is so unbelievably revealing that no one (except the most cynical) can doubt just one word. He even swung Paul Kimmage over to his cause and that was after Paul had taken every opportunity to rubbish Dave in his articles.(...)

another example of Kimmage growing softer, less critical.
I stated this in the voeckler thread, based on Kimmage's relatively uncritical interview with Bernardeau and Voeckler.
He's losing his touch. A petty.

 

[Orvieto]

I think most of you guys are talking from a lack of knowledge. I suggest you read the book. The book will answer all your questions and baseless statements. To name-call him only shows your lack of understanding of the human condition. I stand by every word I wrote about David Millar and I believe he should be shown the respect he deserves. Read the book, please and then come back and make your comments.

Since you have read the book, perhaps you could give us some more details on the particular objections raised by others in this thread.

Does Millar expose other dopers, or does he maintain what many here call "omerta"?
Does Millar describe his co-operation with AFLD, WADA or other anti-doping agencies?

Specific examples would help make your point and encourage others to read the book.

 

[Swabian Lass]

Again, read his heartfelt and honest book. The beauty about his book is that it teaches us how easy it is to criticise the pro riders and their doping, without having any understanding of the pressures that these guys were under. Millar wasn't a Hamilton, Landis or Armstrong with their deny, deny, deny denials. He was happy to unload and explain how the doping occurs and the kind of pressures he (and others)faced. You see the sad thing is that many of the original European pros were from the peasant classes (I hate to say that but that's more or less how it was) and theirs was an environment of success at all costs. Dave Millar's book explains so much. Read it and then comment.

I have read the book (I read a lot of cycling books). It didn't tell me anything new. He doesn't give any real information about the doping networks and who's involved (hell, even when we know who he's talking about he doesn't name names). I have a good idea of the pressure these guys are under actually, which is why I'm always careful with personal criticism (there but for the grace of God etc. etc.). However, Millar is trading on his involvement for personal advantage without really doing anything to solve the problem from where I'm sitting.

I'm not sure why you say he's better than Hamilton, Landis etc. Like them Millar didn't admit anything until he was caught. Unlike them he's not done anything to bring other people involved to justice.

And what's this about the "peasant class"? I'm from the "peasant class" and I've participated at a reasonably high level in a couple of sports where doping was present. I have never doped. Frankly, I find that comment insulting. If you're less likely to dope if you come from a nice middle class background, then doesn't that make Millar's behaviour worse?

 

[luckyboy]

Out of 500 hundred cycling books you really think this is the best? Man, you must have read a lot of turkeys.

Regardless of how well the book reads (and it does read well), how true do you think it is? Remember, it's not meant to be a novel.

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

With another team-mate, Millar resolved to screw them all, they'd do it their way, clean. That other rider was David Moncoutié. They wouldn't even use injected recuperation products. Millar's resolve made it as far as the Vuelta a Asturias before he gave in to the needle and accepted his first récup injections: prefolic acid, vitamin B and iron ("And that was that. A line had been crossed. I now did 'recovery'.").

Moncoutié was the only hero at Cofidis.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Again, read his heartfelt and honest book. The beauty about his book is that it teaches us how easy it is to criticise the pro riders and their doping, without having any understanding of the pressures that these guys were under. Millar wasn't a Hamilton, Landis or Armstrong with their deny, deny, deny denials. He was happy to unload and explain how the doping occurs and the kind of pressures he (and others)faced. You see the sad thing is that many of the original European pros were from the peasant classes (I hate to say that but that's more or less how it was) and theirs was an environment of success at all costs. Dave Millar's book explains so much. Read it and then comment.

You said you have read 500+ cycling books -so I assume in there somewhere you read Rough Ride by Paul Kimmage - Millars's book is the 00's version of that.

Those same 'pressures' that were placed on Millar were the exact same as what Kimmage felt and articulated 20 years ago.

I don't know where you're going with "European pros were from the peasant classes" -as in Millars case he came from a well off and privileged family.
Yes, his parents divorce certainly effected him but whose life if put under the microscope wouldn't reveal cracks or flaws?
It explains his need for acceptance but it is not an excuse for doping.

That's the thing with unscrupulous DS's or teams - they will find that weakness in everyone's character and play it.
For Millar it was sit down when he was low after retiring from the Tour -you need to perform, get some discipline in a nice environmet, go train with Lelli .

I got a kick out of when you wrote this in your OP:

Reading Dave's book gives the doubters very little room for their views. Dave's honesty is so unbelievably revealing that no one (except the most cynical) can doubt just one word. He even swung Paul Kimmage over to his cause and that was after Paul had taken every opportunity to rubbish Dave in his articles.

How did Kimmage "rubbish" Millar in his articles? PK said DM was full of crap and probably a doper...... thats wasn't rubbish, it was correct.

Also:

Having experienced the bad times in our sport, he has worked relentlessly towards getting the sport cleaned up. He has never been in denial (a la Hamilton, Armstrong & Landis to name but 3) and as such he could wield enormous influence over the younger generation of riders. He's already done a lot of good work on behalf of a clean sport. We will need him in a management role in the future.
Dave: You are my sporting hero. Love your book. Long may you ride.

He never denied???
He was caught by the Police - did he admit his doping on the way to his apartment or did he sit there and say nothing until they found the syringe with EPO in it? Of course not.
He didn't deny because he was caught with an EPO syringe in his house - good on him for trying to get his life back in order, but it not heroic.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

so what you are saying is you cannot quote a passage from the book that proves he has helped clean up cycling.

you are not the first to worship false idols and you wont be the last

Firstly - I would recommend reading it.
Nothing particularly new or suprising but it fills in some gaps on his story.

Also - for those saying he does not name people that is because of the draconoian laws of libel that are in the UK - it was the same with the English version of "Breaking The Chain", which omitted (or made up) the names.

Here is a passage from the book:

"Riccos arrogance and the episode at Flanders had tipped me over thee edge. I contacted the UCI saying that I had my suspicions about doping within my team, and that I wanted them to be aware of this. They told me they were looking in to it.

But there were issues. Marco Zorzoli, the UCI's chief medical officer, is a good friend of Mauro Gianetti. I am not suggesting that this affected Zorzoli's work, but it was indicative of a wider conflict of interests. The UCI's positioning, as both promoters of cycling and guardians of its ethics, has always been controversial."

another example of Kimmage growing softer, less critical.
I stated this in the voeckler thread, based on Kimmage's relatively uncritical interview with Bernardeau and Voeckler.
He's losing his touch. A petty.

And its another example of where you are wrong.
You hadn't read the full Kimmage piece from the ST before you wrote in the other thread and now you are happy to take "Ianfras" word on David the "anti-doping hero", without reading the book.
Ask Contador or Riis if Kimmage lost his touch.

 

[luckyboy]

Any chance you could fill us in on 'the episode at Flanders'? edit: Oh, never mind, I hadn't read the whole of the PodiumCafe article

I'll be getting the book along with Slaying the Badger for my birthday in two months probably.
Best cycling book I've read is Le Metier by Michael Barry.

I was surprised reading that PodiumCafe article that his neo-pro contract was €80k

 

[Race Radio]

Millar did name his supplier, Dr. Jesus Losa. IIRC Spain did not laws against doping in 2004 so they could do nothing.

Based on Millar's info the GC continued to watch Losa. They thought they had him in 2008 when Moisés Dueñas and Maribel Moreno tested positive but somehow Losa was tipped off and the search of his office was compromised.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

Moncoutié was the only hero at Cofidis.

Nah uh! Blackcat will tell you that Moncoutié is and always has been, "balancing hormones". Surely he wouldn't just pull that out of his ***?

 

[ianfra]

The responses here are quite an interesting read. They say a lot about the psychology of the posters! Firstly it shows to me that most people posting on this particular forum are the rottweilers who jump to conclusions and are totally 'anti' without ever finding evidence to back that up. Secondly some of you are so anxious to jump down my throat that you even misread and misquote my posts (ie the expression to 'rubbish' someone means to say bad things about them; get it?). Thirdly, no matter how clean the riders are you somehow need to always be on the attack. Whether this is to display how politically correct you are, or what good jolly cyclists you are, I have no idea. But 90% of the replies above are nonsensical. Read Millar's book with an open mind and then comment. The 'peasant' reference was also (deliberately?) misunderstood.
(Strangely enough the one guy locally who sounds like you lot must have two strong coffees in the cafe before the daily ride and every evening his addiction is a load of beers otherwise he can't survive. I use neither.)
I also think it is appalling and vile that you bring people who have fought to clean up the sport into this discussion. What has got into you folks?