Dekker's book.

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
I actually read this and found it quite interesting. Few things I don't think were mentioned in the thread.

There is no mention of any doping at the Rabo Development teams, whether that was the reality or just ignored by Dekker is up for debate.

Early enough in his senior career, Erik Dekker refuses to discuss doping with his namesake and Team DS Frans Maasen gives Dekker a bollocking for even mentioning the topic.

As I suggested earlier in the thread, doping became a much private affair in the 00s with riders not always knowing what their own team-mates were doing. It is clear that Rabobank management did not encourage doping, but simply put their heads in the sand. The team doctors did seem to help the riders with saline drips etc.

After the 2007 Rasmussen scandal, Rabo tighten things up regards doping. Even the introduction of the Bio-Passport doesn't worry Dekker though and he continues to blood dope. Rabobank do not like his reckleness and refuse to help Dekker with any doping or saline drips.

The UCI actually called Dekker to a meeting in Switzerland about his blood values in 2008, Zorzoli told him they were 99.9% sure he was blood doping. Dekker had a lawyer with him and because the UCI didn't have 100% proof of doping, he exploited the letter of the law to point out that they could not legally prove Dekker was doping and got Zorzoli to sign a letter to that effect.

Dekker had become so reckless regards doping, Rabobank were desperate to offload him and even paid out the final year of his contract just so he would leave.

Both JV and Skil-Shimano rejected signing Dekker in 2008 because of his blood values, JV because he recognised the doping was obvious and Skil because Dekker refused to show them his values.

Lotto signed Dekker, but Marc Sergeant told him they were a 'good' team and Dekker says doping was never even mentioned at Lotto, but the team doctors regulary created false TUEs to give cortisone injections.

Dekker never blood doped after 2008. He was busted midway through 2009.

He does mention Ten Dam as a true clean rider, people have suggested this is because they were friends, but Dekker was very good friends with Michael Elijzen taking him to Lotto, but does not mention whether he doped or not.

It is clear that because success came so easily to Dekker before he turned pro that he expected it to continue at Senior level and was too impatient to let himself develop naturally without resorting to doping. He talks about riding the Giro in his first season and doing crap, but he was actually mid-pack which is not bad for a 20 year old neo-pro in his first GT.

It is a sad case of a guy who was desperate for success at any cost.
 
Yeah he was so used to being the best, he didn't want to wait.

I remember when I interviewed him for his own website before the start of the, I tihnk 2007, season.
I asked what his goals were and he was talking about going for top 5 / win in the Ardennes Classics. And I asked him if he didn't think that would be too much (given as he was nowhere that close last year and he was still 21 or 22 at the time), and he was super confident it wasn't too much. Things like that struck me as odd. But at the time I was really young as well and in awe of that kind of confidence level.

Little did I know he probably already was planning a good 'preperation' to actually achieve such results (he was top 5 in all ardennes but LBL, were he was 6th). :lol:

Too bad though. Probably ruined what could have been a good career. Not the world beater level maybe, but some good 1-week stage races, time trials and a harder one day race. If he had given it time. Same type of rider as Dumoulin, great time trial, decent uphill, but no patience and careful planning like the latter one
 
pmcg76 said:
The UCI actually called Dekker to a meeting in Switzerland about his blood values in 2008, Zorzoli told him they were 99.9% sure he was blood doping. Dekker had a lawyer with him and because the UCI didn't have 100% proof of doping, he exploited the letter of the law to point out that they could not legally prove Dekker was doping and got Zorzoli to sign a letter to that effect.
Saying Dekker exploited the letter of the law seems very strange to me. The letter of the law requires proof and the UCI had no proof - not within their own overly cautious definition of proof - and so had bupkis. What do you expect Dekker to do in the circumstances, throw his arms up and go 'it's a fair cop, guv, you've got me, I'm guilty'? Does the spirit of the law allow enforcers of the law to warn suspects, which we know was official policy in the UCI and other IFs at the time?