Frank schleck

[PosterBill]

You think most of these guys were using Pee bottles? It would sure get frustrating running to the bathroom 30 times a day. Just saying

 

[TubularBills]

Not really. Its just a masking agent. If you work under the assumption, as I do, that most teams sporting a GC contender turn a blind eye and unofficially support - if not behind-the-scenes through some of their staff actually aid - doping within their teams, then this isn't much of a surprise at all. Its systemic, and a not unsignificant percentage of pro riders take something in order to remain at least relevant and among the top end, if only in conversation, since all of the rest of their competition on that level do as well.

Some people just get unlucky. Testing is a little like Russian Roulette, only your odds are way, way better, since testing is limited and random. If you know the system and have good medical advice, you can improve your odds greatly. Someone upthread said Frank probably scored a suspicious value and decided to take the risk to get it out of the system. Probably he was feeling the pressure to at least try and win a stage, or even if he thought he couldnt, he was getting the pressure to try.

Looking back on the Lance era makes it pretty obvious. Most of Postal were eventually caught doping, as were pretty much all of Lance's rivals of the time, as well as a few others winning mountains classifications etc. Not only does it become harder to say Lance trounced all of these guys day in, day out, year after year, and did it cleanly. It also becomes pretty hard when looking at the breadth across teams to say well, it was just these few riders. More likely it was simply any and all who wanted to try and win, get on the podium, simply try and compete, maybe win a stage, as well as a few key domestiques supporting each of these riders.

And it continues like that now. And occasionally some of these get unlucky and get caught on something and everyone around them denies knowledge and praises the current era of cleaner cycling, when really, its not changed all that much. New drugs, new methods. Try to stay ahead of testing knowledge and the testing curve. Take your risks that you are willing to take - some take more than others - and then roll the dice. It will probably stay that way too until testing is far more thorough and team management is included in the fall. Even then, testing fails to stay ahead of the speed of new methods and drugs, but at least retroactive testing can curb that a little.

I feel sorry for Frank. Not a good year for him. But he's just one of the unlucky ones caught in a random net. Some 30+ others probably simply dodged a bullet and continue riding. Just the way it is.

Having said that - I love the sport. I'm not a cynic. Just a realist. Call me a loon if you disagree, that's ok by me. I compartmentalize and that's how I continue enjoying this sport (and honestly any of them) as there is this other side to them too, which is fascinating in its own way.

Precisely why the sport is rotten to the core and needs to be eviscerated of corruption.

If one rider (LA, for instance) can simply have his name eliminated from the random pool i.e. not even participate in the roulette (conjecture), all we are left with are doping domestiques who unwittingly fall on their swords and the occasionally politically targeted riders. Competition? Honor? Victory?

(Full disclosure: Frank seems like a nice guy, but I wouldn't fall on a sword for him.)

Great post.

 

[Cimber]

like clenbuterol?

The CAS verdict actually stated that food supplement was the most likely source, and more or less ruled out doping. Still 2 year ban though. Same could end up applying in this case. But read somewhere that max ban for this substace is 1 year?

 

[the asian]

Fränk Schleck requests B sample test; if positive, he will file complaint alleging poisoning

http://road.cc/content/news/61998-u...ample-test-if-positive-he-will-file-complaint

So it's going to be a court room battle between Schleck & Shack.
Interesting to see how it will play out.
The shacks will try to prove that Schleck took the drug independently and justify suspending his due salaries. Schleck will try to argue that the team knowingly gave him the drug so that when he gets caught, they can justify their non payment of his due Salary.
Even if Frank may not get banned, it's nice to see him in some sort of trouble as payback for the Fuentes payment.

 

[TubularBills]

See Below.

 

[PosterBill]

Wow can you imagine that this is Radioshack's introduction to cycling as an advertiser/sponsor lol

Boy they stepped in a huge pile of stink.

 

[TubularBills]

So it's going to be a court room battle between Schleck & Shack.
Interesting to see how it will play out.
The shacks will try to prove that Schleck took the drug independently and justify suspending his due salaries. Schleck will try to argue that the team knowingly gave him the drug so that when he gets caught, they can justify their non payment of his due Salary.
Even if Frank may not get banned, it's nice to see him in some sort of trouble as payback for the Fuentes payment.

F. is most likely a doper working on a protected team, but maybe also a victim.

This reeks of disposable expatriation.

Political?

Seems like a sloppy job by the experts.

 

[131313]

The Perfect Fall Guy

I haven't looked through this thread yet, but while riding around tonight I had some time to think about this. Better than thinking about bike racing. Anyway, I think the dude was set up.

I'm neither a Frank Schleck apologist nor a tin-foil hat-wearing nutcase, but he seems like the perfect fall guy. He can't roll on the team, since he'll be implicating his twin brother. That'll never happen. He's not very popular, since he's kinda whiny and not the People's Choice like Cancellara. He's been riding like cr@p.

It seems like payback to me; payback for the Giro, for the Tour, for complaining about not getting paid. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if it's payback for NOT doping for this Tour, for not being "professional". There are a few reasons I think this is believable:

-I don't see him doping for a race he obviously doesn't care about, for a team he doesn't care about, when he's not getting paid. He seems like the quintessential "professional", and sporting concerns just don't seem to matter to him all that much.

-teams don't like it when you complain about not getting your paycheck, nor does the UCI. Just ask Horner. He was pretty much blackballed by 95% of the Euro teams when he tried to draw his Mercury salary from the UCI bank guarantee (which was never actually paid, which is why it was a big problem...).

I think they were trying to send a message: stay in line. And Frank is like the john who gets ripped off by a hooker. What's he gonna do, call the police? Good luck with that.

Don't get me wrong, after the Puerto thing he obviously has it coming. But, like Contador I'd rather he be sanctioned for offenses he actually committed.

 

[the asian]

I'm pretty sure Fuglsang will refuse to enter a WT race even if RSNT lists him.

 

[Cavalier]

131313's post pretty much sums up what I'd been thinking.

 

[TubularBills]

I haven't looked through this thread yet, but while riding around tonight I had some time to think about this. Better than thinking about bike racing. Anyway, I think the dude was set up.

I'm neither a Frank Schleck apologist nor a tin-foil hat-wearing nutcase, but he seems like the perfect fall guy. He can't roll on the team, since he'll be implicating his twin brother. That'll never happen. He's not very popular, since he's kinda whiny and not the People's Choice like Cancellara. He's been riding like cr@p.

It seems like payback to me; payback for the Giro, for the Tour, for complaining about not getting paid. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if it's payback for NOT doping for this Tour, for not being "professional". There are a few reasons I think this is believable:

-I don't see him doping for a race he obviously doesn't care about, for a team he doesn't care about, when he's not getting paid. He seems like the quintessential "professional", and sporting concerns just don't seem to matter to him all that much.

-teams don't like it when you complain about not getting your paycheck, nor does the UCI. Just ask Horner. He was pretty much blackballed by 95% of the Euro teams when he tried to draw his Mercury salary from the UCI bank guarantee (which was never actually paid, which is why it was a big problem...).

I think they were trying to send a message: stay in line. And Frank is like the john who gets ripped off by a hooker. What's he gonna do, call the police? Good luck with that.

Don't get me wrong, after the Puerto thing he obviously has it coming. But, like Contador I'd rather he be sanctioned for offenses he actually committed.

Sounds like a productive ride.

Wouldn't be surprised if we've seen the last of either Schleck.

They appear to be an honorable family and this will most likely take this as a 'spit in the face.'

Guilty or not.

Would you come back?

 

[ultimobici]

I haven't looked through this thread yet, but while riding around tonight I had some time to think about this. Better than thinking about bike racing. Anyway, I think the dude was set up.

I'm neither a Frank Schleck apologist nor a tin-foil hat-wearing nutcase, but he seems like the perfect fall guy. He can't roll on the team, since he'll be implicating his twin brother. That'll never happen. He's not very popular, since he's kinda whiny and not the People's Choice like Cancellara. He's been riding like cr@p.

It seems like payback to me; payback for the Giro, for the Tour, for complaining about not getting paid. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if it's payback for NOT doping for this Tour, for not being "professional". There are a few reasons I think this is believable:

-I don't see him doping for a race he obviously doesn't care about, for a team he doesn't care about, when he's not getting paid. He seems like the quintessential "professional", and sporting concerns just don't seem to matter to him all that much.

-teams don't like it when you complain about not getting your paycheck, nor does the UCI. Just ask Horner. He was pretty much blackballed by 95% of the Euro teams when he tried to draw his Mercury salary from the UCI bank guarantee (which was never actually paid, which is why it was a big problem...).

I think they were trying to send a message: stay in line. And Frank is like the john who gets ripped off by a hooker. What's he gonna do, call the police? Good luck with that.

Don't get me wrong, after the Puerto thing he obviously has it coming. But, like Contador I'd rather he be sanctioned for offenses he actually committed.

Or perhaps, due to all the RSNT crap that has been going on, he got sloppy. More likely than a conspiracy, IMO.

That said, after the revelations in OP it's about time Frankie boy got pinched.

 

[sittingbison]

131313 ditto for me too. I find it hilarious that this ludicrous "doping" incident occurs a day after the team is indicted for non payment of wages.

I like the theory that he flushed a testosterone patch to recover for tonights mountain stage, not so much the blood bag/saline bag theory. However given the state of affairs on the team, his disposition to the race, even the Hog vs USADA I just cannot see him bothering with doping at this Tour.

 

[BroDeal]

Sounds like a productive ride.

Wouldn't be surprised if we've seen the last of either Schleck.

They appear to be an honorable family and this will most likely be taken as a 'spit in the face.'

Would you come back?

Frank Schleck will find a supplement or something that contains the diuretic. He will claim no negligence on his part. He will get six months or less, maybe even no time at all.

If the two have half a brain between them, they will target races they have a chance of winning. Aiming for the TdF this year was delusional.

The Schleck Sisters' sad saga will continue.

 

[PosterBill]

I like your thoughts but I just don't see why Schleck is the fall guy under your scenerio. If some group (UCI/RS/OMERTA) was worried about someone rocking the boat then it wouldn't be Schleck but rather one of the poster boys that are testifying against Armstrong. You would have to be one vindictive SOB to wreck someone over a few missed payments, pretty minor/petty things in the grand scheme. It seems like every year some team gets in a minor feud with one of it's own riders.

But it will really be interesting to see how this plays out

 

[UlleGigo]

I love that he has announced that he will cry poison before the B sample is even tested.

Frank: I was poisoned!!!
UCI: The B sample is negative.
Frank: Huh?! Are you sure? I mean.. of course its negative. Pft. Never mind then.. um.. carry on, no poisoning here.

Due to Frank's pre-emtive claims of poisoning while also denying that he did it. He is saying he has no idea if he was poisoned, who poisoned him, how they did it, or why. He can't be so stupid as to think this will work.

2 years for you, you lying sod.

 

[BroDeal]

It was a bad batch of FRS. You heard it here first.

 

[BikeCentric]

Wow can you imagine that this is Radioshack's introduction to cycling as an advertiser/sponsor lol

Boy they stepped in a huge pile of stink.

This happens to a lot of sponsors that don't do their due diligence on cycling and what they are getting involved in.

The most notorious example of getting massively burned in recent memory was when iShares signed as co title sponsor with Phonak literally during the 2006 Tour. For a few moments they were ecstatic as just after they sponsor a team for the first time they have a TDF winner! Cha-Ching! Then the next day Floyd is positive and iShares immediately dropped the team and issued a statment that essentially said "F this sport, we're done with it permanently."

It really is interesting to me that companies keep sponsoring teams and keep getting burned in drug scandals. You'd think we'd see the well of sponsorship cash start to dry up more than it has to date.

 

[BikeCentric]

I love that he has announced that he will cry poison before the B sample is even tested.

Frank: I was poisoned!!!
UCI: The B sample is negative.
Frank: Huh?! Are you sure? I mean.. of course its negative. Pft. Never mind then.. um.. carry on, no poisoning here.

Due to Frank's pre-emtive claims of poisoning while also denying that he did it. He is saying he has no idea if he was poisoned, who poisoned him, how they did it, or why. He can't be so stupid as to think this will work.

2 years for you, you lying sod.

Good point. It's kind of like OJ Simpson's "If I did it..." book.

And NO trolls, I am not equating lying dopers to murderers.

 

[131313]

You would have to be one vindictive SOB to wreck someone over a few missed payments, pretty minor/petty things in the grand scheme.

On the surface, I'd agree--except that it's already happened. Horner was relegated to Prime Alliance, Floyd went to Postal. That was mainly because in the end Floyd was willing to play ball and Horner wasn't. Plus, he got all mouthy when Lance got involved. So, while he wasn't totally out of cycling, it was pretty close. No US national teams, no Euro contract. Petty? Sure, but sadly that's how cycling works.

The guys who right the checks for that team are beyond shady, and they're short of cash. First, they now have a large salary they won't have to pay, and it's a message for anyone else who wants to start complaining. Plus, I think they view him as completely expendable. At least with Cancellara, they can get a buyout from Riis.

 

[BikeCentric]

I haven't looked through this thread yet, but while riding around tonight I had some time to think about this. Better than thinking about bike racing. Anyway, I think the dude was set up.

I'm neither a Frank Schleck apologist nor a tin-foil hat-wearing nutcase, but he seems like the perfect fall guy. He can't roll on the team, since he'll be implicating his twin brother. That'll never happen. He's not very popular, since he's kinda whiny and not the People's Choice like Cancellara. He's been riding like cr@p.

It seems like payback to me; payback for the Giro, for the Tour, for complaining about not getting paid. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if it's payback for NOT doping for this Tour, for not being "professional". There are a few reasons I think this is believable:

-I don't see him doping for a race he obviously doesn't care about, for a team he doesn't care about, when he's not getting paid. He seems like the quintessential "professional", and sporting concerns just don't seem to matter to him all that much.

-teams don't like it when you complain about not getting your paycheck, nor does the UCI. Just ask Horner. He was pretty much blackballed by 95% of the Euro teams when he tried to draw his Mercury salary from the UCI bank guarantee (which was never actually paid, which is why it was a big problem...).

I think they were trying to send a message: stay in line. And Frank is like the john who gets ripped off by a hooker. What's he gonna do, call the police? Good luck with that.

Don't get me wrong, after the Puerto thing he obviously has it coming. But, like Contador I'd rather he be sanctioned for offenses he actually committed.

I think you have a fascinating thought process here but it begs the question - if he was set up, wouldn't it be more likely that he'd be hit with a "harder" drug that easily gets the full 2 year suspension, something well known and notorious like HGH, EPO, or T?

 

[TubularBills]

Frank Schleck will find a supplement or something that contains the diuretic. He will claim no negligence on his part. He will get six months or less, maybe even no time at all.

If the two have half a brain between them, they will target races they have a chance of winning. Aiming for the TdF this year was delusional.

The Schleck Sisters' sad saga will continue.

Good points.

Sad saga indeed.

But at least the sport they compete in is 'clean'.

 

[131313]

I think you have a fascinating thought process here but it begs the question - if he was set up, wouldn't it be more likely that he'd be hit with a "harder" drug that easily gets the full 2 year suspension, something well known and notorious like HGH, EPO, or T?

I thought of that too! it was a long night, and I was doped up on espresso...

My guess is that if they did something like that, they'd be too worried he'd go completely off the reservation. This way, he can plead plausible deniability.

Remember the thought process that went into Landis' decision to tell all. It wasn't a moral thing, in the end it just became his best/only option. A two year vacation for Frank would be pushing him to that edge. Maybe he'd start thinking of ways to bring down those around him without implicating his brother. This way, they just make his life hell for a year. Plus, he has the chance hanging over his head that he can beat it. With an EPO positive or fake T test, there would be no such chance and he may immediately switch over to "crisis alternative mode".

 

[rainman]

What a shame. Another high profile rider caught. No matter what the details are its cycling plc that takes the hit. Just when it seemed to be getting its act together.

 

[Normandy]

I bet this was Sky, they were playing up the rivalry between Froome and Wiggo to deflect attention, now they are doping a terrible rider to deflect even more.. This is Rupert Murdoch we're talking about here people!

+1

I am glad somebody else is thinking along these lines. With all the bad luck with injuries/sickness/doping charges etc other teams are having at the moment, everything seems to be falling into place for Sky at the tour and Olympics.