Di Luca tests positive for EPO in OOC test.

[Big Doopie]

So there we have it, it's OK to dope as long as you're an exciting rider as a result of it.

This is the same nonsense and argument that was used by some to give Vino a free pass and easier ride than others.

Agree with this sooooo much. The logic of defending a doping rider because they attack completely escapes me. That rider only can attack precisely because they are doped. Otherwise they would be pack fodder and - more importantly - someone else would be the attacking hero. It's so ridiculously unfair to laud the doped rider because they attack.

I mean - jeez - freakin' chiappucci became a helluvalot more exciting when he discovered epo. Instead of being pack fodder he was winning Milan San remo and at sestrieres after long attacks. Had he not been on epo someone else would have won.

 

[Eshnar]

I mean - jeez - freakin' chiappucci became a helluvalot more exciting when he discovered epo. Instead of being pack fodder he was winning Milan San remo and at sestrieres after long attacks. Had he not been on epo someone else would have won.

Problem is that he beat a bunch of doped riders that - unlike him - were a lot more hesitant to attack, despite being full of epo.
The whole concept of "riders can attack because they dope" is just laughable.

 

[zapata]

Problem is that he beat a bunch of doped riders that - unlike him - were a lot more hesitant to attack, despite being full of epo.
The whole concept of "riders can attack because they dope" is just laughable.

Fully agree. There's entertaining, attacking dopers (di luca, vino), and there's boring, wheelsucking dopers (leipheimer, evans). No reason to assume the attacking ones are "more dirty".

 

[Big Doopie]

Problem is that he beat a bunch of doped riders that - unlike him - were a lot more hesitant to attack, despite being full of epo.
The whole concept of "riders can attack because they dope" is just laughable.

You completely misunderstood my point.

Some riders would not be even near the front of the race - let alone attacking - without doping with the likes of dr Ferrari, for instance. To laud them for exciting wins is beyond ridiculous and only encourages doping.

Ullrich spent much of the spring being dropped on the first hills of the classics. I guess we should all draw a freakin' great sigh of relief that he doped in time for the Tour.

I mean, thank god santambrogio doped so he could spice up the giro, and di luca, cuz without them no one would have attacked ever.

In fact before blood doping and epo, Cycling was a bore-fest because no one attacked.

That is so f$&ked up.

And in the spring of 1991 not everyone was on epo btw. nor even in the summer of 1992. Chiappucci became known and revered for his wild attacks. Attacks that didn't happen before he doped, nor later when everyone caught up to him. Chiappucci's entire career and fame is due to epo. We have no idea who else is in the same category.

Instead it might have been Delion or later Moncoutie or Dan Martin who would have been famous for their exciting racing, but we will never know.

Cheers.

 

[Eshnar]

You completely misunderstood my point.

Some riders would not be even near the front of the race - let alone attacking - without doping with the likes of dr Ferrari, for instance. To laud them for exciting wins is beyond ridiculous and only encourages doping.

I did understand your point, but you did not understand mine I do agree that lauding doped riders - whatever the reason is - is stupid. But I was just pointing out that the belief that one has to be doped in order to attack is just as equally stupid.

And in the spring of 1991 not everyone was on epo btw.

Cheers.

oh c'mon...

 

[Big Doopie]

But I was just pointing out that the belief that one has to be doped in order to attack is just as equally stupid.

So you clearly didn't understand my point. Because that wasn't it.

oh c'mon...

Does that mean you believe that the entire peloton was on epo for Milan San remo in 1991?

Since that is factually 100% incorrect, I guess I won't waste any more time on this one.

Ciao.

 

[gooner]

I did understand your point, but you did not understand mine I do agree that lauding doped riders - whatever the reason is - is stupid. But I was just pointing out that the belief that one has to be doped in order to attack is just as equally stupid.


oh c'mon...

The point I think is being made was in reference to a post saying that what Sky were doing with power meters is worse than what Di Luca did with doping now. And because Di Luca offers more excitement than Sky with this and their own possible doping, it is more OK for Di Luca and he should be judged lightly.

This is a ridiculous argument and this is what we are taking issue with here.

I agree with your point in the bolded. It's not like Houanard was smashing it left right and centre in race after race. It's a separate point from the one we are discussing with Di Luca and why I added Vino into it because I feel he's judged similiarly.

 

[Big Doopie]

Thank you gooner. Precisely.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Fully agree. There's entertaining, attacking dopers (di luca, vino), and there's boring, wheelsucking dopers (leipheimer, evans). No reason to assume the attacking ones are "more dirty".

I will second your Leipheimer reference, but Evans didn't win the road world championships in third place. When it comes to grand tours, it's accurate to describe Evans as a patient, fast follower. Which, as a grand tour strategy, has worked for many podium places.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Oh, and by the way,to all those posters defending Di Luca's business interests and bike company I'd say....how many decent businesses are being put of business, how many teams are going to loose sponsership because of his selfish actions? Its just like Lance and other cyclists.

Given noone here probably ever heard of the company before this thread, and noone hear owns one, the boycott suggestion is a petty rant at best.

As FGL points out, the B sample has not been tested.

We have no idea what % of the company Di Luca owns.

 

[UlleGigo]

The B sample has not been tested.

Mystery of mysteries, what will it tell us?

 

[BroDeal]

The point I think is being made was in reference to a post saying that what Sky were doing with power meters is worse than what Di Luca did with doping now. And because Di Luca offers more excitement than Sky with this and their own possible doping, it is more OK for Di Luca and he should be judged lightly.

This is a ridiculous argument and this is what we are taking issue with here.

Sky's doping is just as blatant as DiLuca's. The difference is that DiLuca is fun to watch. The bottom line is why the hell should anyone watch some doped up mutant stare at his power meter? If you are going to dope then the least you can do is put on a good show.

 

[gooner]

From your post earlier.

That damages the sport, and the ultimate damage will be far more than a guy with a little enhancement flinging himself into breaks every other stage.

So Sky have done more damage than Di Luca even though they haven't had a doping scandal themselves. I am sure this is the wider popular world view.

Until they do, your argument is down the toilet and if it does happen they will be judged accordingly and similiarly and not differently because they were less exciting than another doped to the gills rider.

 

[BroDeal]

So Sky have done more damage than Di Luca even though they haven't had a doping scandal themselves. I am sure this is the wider popular world view.

Until they do, your argument is down the toilet and if it does happen they will be judged accordingly and similiarly and not differently because they were less exciting than another doped to the gills rider.

Test results are soon forgotten. Memories of the racing live forever. No one is going to be sitting with their mates, tossing back a few warm ones, and reminiscing about the time they watched Wiggums.

"Hey, remember Wiggo on Alpe D'Huez?"

"Yes. He cocked his head and I almost though he was about to look away from his SRM."

"Me too, but he went right back to staring at it."

"What concentration. What focus."

"Yup. It's all about the numbers."

 

[IndianCyclist]

Test results are soon forgotten. Memories of the racing live forever. No one is going to be sitting with their mates, tossing back a few warm ones, and reminiscing about the time they watched Wiggums.

"Hey, remember Wiggo on Alpe D'Huez?"

"Yes. He cocked his head and I almost though he was about to look away from his SRM."

"Me too, but he went right back to staring at it."

"What concentration. What focus."

"Yup. It's all about the numbers."

Floyd Landis' stage 17 ride in TDF 2006 was perhaps the greatest single ride in stage history after 2000. Ricco was pretty exciting as well. I donot think many people would prefer watching them. I would prefer Wiggins over Landis & LA & Di Luca, Rebellin, Schumacher, Sella, Ricco et. al..
Agreed it is not inspiring but at least it is possibly clean. Memories wise
Undoped riders>suspicious riders>Doped riders

 

[ianfra]

Sky's doping is just as blatant as DiLuca's. The difference is that DiLuca is fun to watch. The bottom line is why the hell should anyone watch some doped up mutant stare at his power meter? If you are going to dope then the least you can do is put on a good show.

There is no evidence that Sky is doping. Your statement that it is just as blatant as DiLuca's is libelous, incorrect and absolutely not true. It is a result that you would like because you do not like Sky because "they are not fun to watch". Be that as it may, you have no right to say that they are doping.

 

[ianfra]

Fully agree. There's entertaining, attacking dopers (di luca, vino), and there's boring, wheelsucking dopers (leipheimer, evans). No reason to assume the attacking ones are "more dirty".

There is no evidence to suggest that Evans is a doper or has doped. To link him to Leipheimer is scandalous. You have no evidence so why do you make this statement as if it were fact?

 

[S2Sturges]

Sky's doping is just as blatant as DiLuca's. The difference is that DiLuca is fun to watch. The bottom line is why the hell should anyone watch some doped up mutant stare at his power meter? If you are going to dope then the least you can do is put on a good show.

Agreed.. besides I have zero intention of watching another 23 days of the Tour staring at Sky at the front riding tempo.. Last year was the most dull Tour on record.. they let a few mugs have a go, then just reeled them in, if that's exciting racing, I bet you have a Burberry hat still listen to Toploader...

 

[Franklin]

There is no evidence that Sky is doping. Your statement that it is just as blatant as DiLuca's is libelous, incorrect and absolutely not true. It is a result that you would like because you do not like Sky because "they are not fun to watch". Be that as it may, you have no right to say that they are doping.

Ianfra... the high and mighty paladin who can't even wait for due process and wants to hurt people who have nothing to do with this scandal in his own mideval kind of justice.

The mask has fallen off...

 

[Race Radio]

There is no evidence to suggest that Evans is a doper or has doped.

Yup, he only went to Ferrari for training schedules and testing. Just like Frank Schleck and Fuentes. Nothing to see here

 

[Miburo]

There is no evidence that Sky is doping. Your statement that it is just as blatant as DiLuca's is libelous, incorrect and absolutely not true. It is a result that you would like because you do not like Sky because "they are not fun to watch". Be that as it may, you have no right to say that they are doping.

Do you know the guy named Leinders?

 

[IndianCyclist]

There is no evidence to suggest that Evans is a doper or has doped. To link him to Leipheimer is scandalous. You have no evidence so why do you make this statement as if it were fact?

Unfortunately for Evans, he is linked to Ferrari(for training apparently) and Ferrari is synonymous with doping. Ergo Evans is associated with doping. Sorry but anybody linked with dodgy doctors especially Ferrari comes under highly suspicious category.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

There is no evidence to suggest that Evans is a doper or has doped. To link him to Leipheimer is scandalous. You have no evidence so why do you make this statement as if it were fact?

Are you for real?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Does that mean you believe that the entire peloton was on epo for Milan San remo in 1991?

Since that is factually 100% incorrect.

Do you have evidence to support this fact? Not that I dont agree.

So there we have it, it's OK to dope as long as you're an exciting rider as a result of it.

This is the same nonsense and argument that was used by some to give Vino a free pass and easier ride than others.

No, guys like Vino are just funny to watch because they are so friggin ridicoulous. Just like di Luca in the 2009 Giro.

Just like di Luca now, a 37 year old who comes out of nowhere to ride the Giro.

There is no evidence that Sky is doping. Your statement that it is just as blatant as DiLuca's is libelous, incorrect and absolutely not true. It is a result that you would like because you do not like Sky because "they are not fun to watch". Be that as it may, you have no right to say that they are doping.

Alexandre Vroom Froome:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5GxKr1XLtk&NR=1&feature=fvwp

 

[Eshnar]

Does that mean you believe that the entire peloton was on epo for Milan San remo in 1991?

No, I believe the entire top field was doping at the time. Not all the peloton, but certainly the direct opponents of Chiappucci were.