Di Luca tests positive for EPO in OOC test.

[DirtyWorks]

Maybe things are GT podium level haven't changed but they may have changed elsewhere.

We agree the fact there are some positives in all ranks/ages is a better state of affairs.

But, the anti-doping rules are relatively easy to circumvent and the IOC and sports federations knew they were easy to circumvent from the beginning. If I can figure this out by just reading WADA's documentation, then many others can too.

Unfortunately, that means even well intentioned sports administrators will be exploited. The less well-meaning sport administrators simply work inside the gaping holes in the anti-doping process. That is why dopers caught or never-tested-positive are omnipresent in most ages and levels.

 

[Benotti69]

That is a bit like saying 'Can you prove that God doesn't exist'

Can you point to how it hasn't changed?? A few positive test's don't mean there hasn't been an improvement. Even in a country with low crime, there will still be crime.

where to start.

Grupetto fodder turning into TdF winners!
Sky and everything about them screams doping
Di Luca testing positive, Santambrogio positive
Mantova
Evans defending Ballan
Rogers clen
O'Grady's pathetic excuse for his 'only doped once'
BP not working
AICAR
TB 500
Gas6
skinny riders TTing and climbing better than specialists TTers and climbers
etc etc
blah blah

 

[Benotti69]

You don't know and neither do I. But everybody seems to agree that is not out in the open like it used to be. It is secretive. So it is hard to know anyway. Until we hit another big scandal it would be hard to know.

It does not bode well for Di Luca that everybody was suspicious of Santambrogio
and he was caught. That's a little stride. What about that other Turkish rider that was caught and that most riders were suspicious? He was caught too. That's another small stride.

The only one that leaves me confused is Froome but at least he has the money and people to do it. Not many riders have that. So that shows that it cannot be the majority like Di Luca is painting it to be.

I ask posters to point to where it has changed? That is has gone more secretive due to riders caught being more willing to talk, doesn't mean that riders wont talk to Di Luca in the back of the peleton

In 8 weeks that Walsh spent with Sky there was only 1 OOC.

Why is Kittel e.g. who was upset about the Turk not screaming blue murder about a guy who was hanging onto motorbikes a few years back now destroying the peloton?

They target those with no power to try and demonstrate an anti doping stance. Just look at Talanksy calling Di Luca a scumbag but riding with Leipheimer in his grand fondo? Does he call Hesjedal, Wegelius, Dekker, Danielson and Vaughters scumbags on the Garmin bus? I doubt it.

 

[Benotti69]

Your banging would be better if you didn't deny facts like public, sponsors and unions having changed attitude.

FACTS

Nobody in his right mind claims the problem is gone, but denying nothing changed is *** and absolutely false. Denial is just bizarre.

Can you point to the change before calling posters ***?

The culture is still to dope. No one is doubting that methods have changed. Look at how skinny Wiggins and Froome were for their TdF wins.

AICAR, Gas6, TB500 etc are the latest PEDs.

Where is the talk to retest samples for these? If the culture had changed their would be retesting of samples. Not going to happen.

Till someone points to a real culture change, I am sorry but not going to believe the sport has gotten any cleaner.

 

[gooner]

He has been around a long time, knows a lot of people in the sport. As a doper he was always going to be trying to keep himself knowledgable about the latest techniques. Also as a doper using dope and knowing his own ability he would be able to measure himself against others.

Di Luca is more right than wrong. The culture to dope has not changed. Look who runs the teams, the doctors they use, soigneurs making money dealing or as dope couriers etc etc. It takes something massive to change that culture. It has not happened.Anti doping is way behind the PEDs.

Wegelius said this



Can you point to the big strides?

Where has the culture of doping stopped.

So comments about a cleaner sport and "new generation" are OK to get ridiculed but when someone says 90% still dope without detail, it's taken as gospel even though none is proof of anything. All this on Di Luca's part is guess talk. Hey on your case 90% isn't enough, you have to make up stuff that's it even higher. Di Luca is the hypocrite, saying talking is more secretive but still comes out with a near sweeping comment regarding all riders. Talansky and Swift are right to have a go out at him, considering the strong possible fact he doesn't have one iota what riders like them are up. The same applies to guys like Quintana, Pinot, Phinney and D.Martin.

Since you more or less are saying it's nearer 100%, I look forward to you telling me why these guys are doping.

BTW, I do know the history of the sport. You can't be credible working from a default position.

 

[pmcg76]

where to start.

Grupetto fodder turning into TdF winners!
Sky and everything about them screams doping
Di Luca testing positive, Santambrogio positive
Mantova
Evans defending Ballan
Rogers clen
O'Grady's pathetic excuse for his 'only doped once'
BP not working
AICAR
TB 500
Gas6
skinny riders TTing and climbing better than specialists TTers and climbers
etc etc
blah blah

Most of those could be related to 10% of the peloton, you don't know. As I said there will be always be riders testing positive, anyone who believes there will be no doping is an idiot so saying guys testing positive means nothing. If that is the case then not testing positive means the opposite

Nice that you have to duplicate things like SKY, AICAR and skinny riders(all could be under one grouping) to make your point. Rogers clen is still debatable. O'Grady??? that's all you got. Your whole proof that nothing has changed includes about 30-50 people out of a peloton of 1000 plus, many which are unclear or unresolved. Yes undoubtable proof that nothing has changed.

 

[the sceptic]

where to start.

Grupetto fodder turning into TdF winners!
Sky and everything about them screams doping
Di Luca testing positive, Santambrogio positive
Mantova
Evans defending Ballan
Rogers clen
O'Grady's pathetic excuse for his 'only doped once'
BP not working
AICAR
TB 500
Gas6
skinny riders TTing and climbing better than specialists TTers and climbers
etc etc
blah blah

This is hardly 90% of the peloton though.

Is there any reason to say with confidence that teams like FDJ, garmin or belkin to name a few are running doping programs?

 

[ralphbert]

You have to do a line after and before 2011 (to put one date, becouse you can put it even in 2008) People cheating after 2011 or saying cycling is dirty deserve that words, and people cheating before that, deserve another words. For me is the same... For me Lance is far from Di Luca now, he cheated as most of the peloton, and he said now is clean.. Di Luca cheated when just few people did and he lie to save his image.

First, don't say "you have to do a line" in the clinic.

2nd, Di Luca broke the only rule of cycling: Don't get caught.

IMO these key dates in the time line are illusionary, nothing has changed in cycling.

 

[ralphbert]

Since you more or less are saying it's nearer 100%, I look forward to you telling me why these guys are doping.

If you look at the avg speed of GT's it has not dropped one bit since 99. Therefore the watts the peloton is putting out is very similar to what it has been over the last 15 years and it is undisputed what was required in the past to produce that power. Prior to blood vectoring the avg speed was 4-5k/hr slower.

 

[Benotti69]

Shane Stokes puts another take on it

ShaneStokes

here's a question: if the sport is as clean as so many say, why was a doped Di Luca not winning?

 

[Benotti69]

So comments about a cleaner sport and "new generation" are OK to get ridiculed but when someone says 90% still dope without detail, it's taken as gospel even though none is proof of anything. All this on Di Luca's part is guess talk. Hey on your case 90% isn't enough, you have to make up stuff that's it even higher. Di Luca is the hypocrite, saying talking is more secretive but still comes out with a near sweeping comment regarding all riders. Talansky and Swift are right to have a go out at him, considering the strong possible fact he doesn't have one iota what riders like them are up. The same applies to guys like Quintana, Pinot, Phinney and D.Martin.

Since you more or less are saying it's nearer 100%, I look forward to you telling me why these guys are doping.

BTW, I do know the history of the sport. You can't be credible working from a default position.

I had my opinion about the extent of the doping in the sport before Di Luca decided to voice his opinion.

So Talanksy can call Di Luca a scumbag but not Hesjedal et al? Not sure you understand the definition of hypocrite. Talanksy has no problem retweeting Leipheimers granfodno, another scumbag doper who disgraced the sport.

All those Garmin boys have done their fair share of disgracing the sport!

 

[Benotti69]

This is hardly 90% of the peloton though.

Is there any reason to say with confidence that teams like FDJ, garmin or belkin to name a few are running doping programs?

To compare French teams to others is a non runner. Doping in France is a crime.

 

[Benotti69]

Most of those could be related to 10% of the peloton, you don't know. As I said there will be always be riders testing positive, anyone who believes there will be no doping is an idiot so saying guys testing positive means nothing. If that is the case then not testing positive means the opposite

Nice that you have to duplicate things like SKY, AICAR and skinny riders(all could be under one grouping) to make your point. Rogers clen is still debatable. O'Grady??? that's all you got. Your whole proof that nothing has changed includes about 30-50 people out of a peloton of 1000 plus, many which are unclear or unresolved. Yes undoubtable proof that nothing has changed.

Well point to the real change in the sport, not the BS peddled by the likes of JV?

Kohl talked about in 2009 how the BP almost helped them dope, http://velonews.competitor.com/2009/06/news/kohl-comes-clean_93052

Think how hard teams have worked to beat anti doping and who ran anti doping till 2013 and tell me where was the will to catch dopers?

Think about who makes money from dopers and why would they stop selling dope?

I am glad you believe in miracles.

 

[Netserk]

To compare French teams to others is a non runner. Doping in France is a crime.

So CSC was a clean team?

 

[the sceptic]

So comments about a cleaner sport and "new generation" are OK to get ridiculed but when someone says 90% still dope without detail, it's taken as gospel even though none is proof of anything. All this on Di Luca's part is guess talk. Hey on your case 90% isn't enough, you have to make up stuff that's it even higher. Di Luca is the hypocrite, saying talking is more secretive but still comes out with a near sweeping comment regarding all riders. Talansky and Swift are right to have a go out at him, considering the strong possible fact he doesn't have one iota what riders like them are up. The same applies to guys like Quintana, Pinot, Phinney and D.Martin.

Since you more or less are saying it's nearer 100%, I look forward to you telling me why these guys are doping.

BTW, I do know the history of the sport. You can't be credible working from a default position.

Quintana climbing at 6.0w/kg+ in the last week of the tour throws up a huge red flag for me. I mostly agree with the rest of your post though.

 

[Benotti69]

So CSC was a clean team?

Where do i claim the French teams are clean? I think the French teams are extremely careful.

I doubt Riis ever had a clean rider!

 

[gooner]

I had my opinion about the extent of the doping in the sport before Di Luca decided to voice his opinion.

So Talanksy can call Di Luca a scumbag but not Hesjedal et al? Not sure you understand the definition of hypocrite. Talanksy has no problem retweeting Leipheimers granfodno, another scumbag doper who disgraced the sport.

All those Garmin boys have done their fair share of disgracing the sport!

I bet Hesjesdal, Danielson, CVV, Zabriskie and JV were upfront to the likes of Talansky and Dan Martin about their pasts. Did any of them ever accuse practically the whole peloton of doping including Talansky?

At least with the Garmin lads, they helped get rid of the bad apples in the sport. What did Di Luca ever do? Remember Marco Pinotti's interview in procycling a few years back and hitting out at Di Luca for reduced sentence while saying at the same time, he didn't spit in the soup. In other words he had no interest in the welfare of the sport, just getting back in it was his main interest.

 

[gooner]

But then he loves Armstrong and criticised USADA and said nothing about Leipheimer and all those known dopers on Garmin.

Talansky another hypocrite in the sport.

And JV had a go at him for it. How many other teams did that to their riders?

 

[Wallenquist]

here's a question: if the sport is as clean as so many say, why was a doped Di Luca not winning?

It's simple. Because he is not a rider he was once he was winning the Giro. He's old.

You can reverse the question: if sport is so doped as many say, why was dopers like Sayar, Grabovsky, Santambroggio winning easily?

 

[Benotti69]

I bet Hesjesdal, Danielson, CVV, Zabriskie and JV were upfront to the likes of Talansky and Dan Martin about their pasts. Did any of them ever accuse practically the whole peloton of doping including Talansky?

Why would they? Di Luca has little to lose.

At least with the Garmin lads, they helped get rid of the bad apples in the sport. What did Di Luca ever do? Remember Marco Pinotti's interview in procycling a few years back and hitting out at Di Luca for reduced sentence while saying at the same time, he didn't spit in the soup. In other words he had no interest in the welfare of the sport, just getting back in it was his main interest.

Who did the Garmin lads get rid off? Armstrong and Bruyneel and only after the Feds got involved. So many more bad apples still in the sport. Lance/Hog tip of the iceberg.

 

[pmcg76]

Well point to the real change in the sport, not the BS peddled by the likes of JV?

Kohl talked about in 2009 how the BP almost helped them dope, http://velonews.competitor.com/2009/06/news/kohl-comes-clean_93052

Think how hard teams have worked to beat anti doping and who ran anti doping till 2013 and tell me where was the will to catch dopers?

Think about who makes money from dopers and why would they stop selling dope?

I am glad you believe in miracles.

You cannot point to a change or you cannot say there is no change either, there is no real argument to support either case, hence the I don't know phrase I use.

If crime in an area was running at 90% but is now at 20%, then clearly things have changed. If you keeping using the 20% to show that nothing has changed in this area, you are distorting reality. That is what you are effectively trying to put forward in your argument by using positive tests etc, those cases are small in statistical terms of the overall peloton but you are then superimposing on the entire peloton.

The problem in cycling is there are no such figures to show how good or bad things are, thus there are no definitive way of knowing.

 

[roundabout]

It's simple. Because he is not a rider he was once he was winning the Giro. He's old.

You can reverse the question: if sport is so doped as many say, why was dopers like Sayar, Grabovsky, Santambroggio winning easily?

Santambrogio turning into one of the World's top riders over a winter was concerning.

Santambrogio getting caught gave me hope.

But the whole B-sample haggle made me think that he isn't a simple doper.

 

[Benotti69]

You cannot point to a change or you cannot say there is no change either, there is no real argument to support either case, hence the I don't know phrase I use.

If crime in an area was running at 90% but is now at 20%, then clearly things have changed. If you keeping using the 20% to show that nothing has changed in this area, you are distorting reality. That is what you are effectively trying to put forward in your argument by using positive tests etc, those cases are small in statistical terms of the overall peloton but you are then superimposing on the entire peloton.

The problem in cycling is there are no such figures to show how good or bad things are, thus there are no definitive way of knowing.

The problem in cycling is the culture is to dope. If that entrenched culture had changed for the majority we would know it.

We know that the culture was to dope using EPO and that those not using it couldn't compete at all. So that meant the majority needed to dope. So with new dope undetectable and not showing up on BP why would this culture say no to doping?

My opinion is based on sound thinking. Look at the history of the sport. Look at the recent history of the sport and then think that for the culture of doping to stop there would have to have been a monumental moment to make that change. Even when riders were dying from EPO riders were still doping. So what, when the death of riders didn't stop the doping, has made them stop now?

 

[The Hitch]

To you they are clean?

Taxus doesn't dissapoint.

 

[The Hitch]

You can reverse the question: if sport is so doped as many say, why was dopers like Sayar, Grabovsky, Santambroggio winning easily?

I don't think the sport is all doped, but that reverse question is wrong.

They weren't winning easily. Between those 3 riders how many wins do you have in the last few years. 5 or some such?

Santambroggio didn't win easily. The one win he got was gifted to him by Nibali.

Sayer and Grabovsky won the Tour of Turkey. Which is like the 56th most prestigious race in the sport, (outside the top 100 if we count gt stages) and they were the only guys targetting it.