Gee I think it's awful that a DOPER won LBL

[craig1985]

In that case Jerry has another 5 years as a pro golfer before carking it.

 

[sportzchick]

I said "people love cycling,they love the sport. You don't love it any more than others"

I don't see where i said you love it less...
That was not a personal insult, unless thats how you take it.
Calling people an idiot is an insult.
Sportchick... didums.. cuddels i think you are up past your bedtime....

is that the best you can come up with

gee im so hurt!!!

PS - its 10.35 here so ive already had my bedtime, how about you?

 

[ergmonkey]

Oh, boy, the thread has resorted to cyber name calling. Can I claim "Mr. Black" or, in the alternative, "Mr. White" before all of the cool names are gone? I really don't want to be stuck going by "Mr. Brown" or, even worse, "Mr. Pink" for the rest of this enthralling virtual conversation among strangers.

 

[erader]

Jerry Rice was either 44 or 45 when he retired.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Rice

ed rader

 

[ludwig]

I don't see how that proves anything. The past is the past. I don't remember seeing Mauro Gianetti or Davide Rebellin racing today. Thanks to the bio passport (which has flaws, I admit), doping is not just a matter of keeping your crit under 50%. Clean riders can contend more now. It's not 1996 anymore.

So you believe every cyclist who wins a race is doped?

I see no evidence whatever for the statement "clean riders can contend now". How are clean riders supposed to compete with oxygen vector drugs and blood doping? If you consider all the evidence pointing to widespread doping....that the doping guard has returned to the front of the peloton (this time w/o any pretensions), the evidence of widespread omerta, the persistence of the pro-omerta UCI leadership, the ongoing leadership of DSes who doped throughout their career...sorry dude, the burden of proof is on those who claim there are clean riders. Absent that, the default reasonable position is "everyone is still doping".

If you can provide evidence that there are clean riders, then who are they, and how can we support them?

 

[joe_papp]

Marginal gains available from box of EPO...

Which team sucked more at LBL
1. Sky
2. Leaky Gas
3. Retirement Shack ( I know Horner finished well, but they were invisible all race)
4. Cervelo
5. Lampre

LOL!

At this point, I'd like to go on record encouraging the riders of team Sky to dope, and those on the Lampre squad to look for new doctors. Sheesh. I bet Brailsford is ruing the day he decided to hype that stupid location beacon on the bus as a marginal gain that would bring the team victory. Ed Hood does a great job skewering the entire PR-cloud surrounding Sky over at VeloResultsUK. Check it out. Excerpt:

"I'm not sure if this is an early April Fool; but the bus apparently has a telescopic mast with a strobe light on top, so the riders can spot it after the finish.
Frans Assez would have run his Flanders team for a year on the price of that."

{please note, the previous was sarcasm/humor and does not represent my actual feelings on doping, an act that I would never encourage anyone to engage in. ...}

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

-101
It's more like EPO a EPO on the road...

What a waste of a sunday to watch this. It's a farce. "War on doping being won"? Give me a break. It's just as dirty or dirtier than it ever was. I wonder how long this will be allowed to continue? The fans and the sponsors losing patience, I wonder what UCI's master plan really is?

and yes I do think it's awful that a doper won LBL.

-10001

I hope you never watched pro cycling, because then you would have wasted much more then just this sunday. May you watched 7 times Epo-Pharmstrong winning the TdF, followed by Contradoper?

But here is some news for you: Vino served his 2 year ban, while AC, Epo-Lance and Valv-Piti never were penalized.

Stop watching cycling or live with the truth, but don´t use that double standard like all the Fan-Boys/Girls around...

P.S.: Naive America (Radio$uck) sponsors now the biggest dope fraud in the history of sports. That should make you mad ...

 

[BroDeal]

I don't see how that proves anything. The past is the past. I don't remember seeing Mauro Gianetti or Davide Rebellin racing today. Thanks to the bio passport (which has flaws, I admit), doping is not just a matter of keeping your crit under 50%. Clean riders can contend more now. It's not 1996 anymore.

Completely unsupported statement. The only way you can believe this is if you take what Pat McQuaid says at face value. There is no evidence whatsoever that the bio passport has done jack to clean up the sport. Not a single GT contender has been thrown out of a race because his blood profile was suspicious. The only riders the passport appears to have found are a handful of riders who are at the end of their career looking for a team, semi-retired, or suspended because of a previous test. The UCI has repeatedly lied about the passport. They attribute every single positive to the passport these days. They said that Di Luca's positive was a result of the passport even though two weeks before his positive was revealed they denied that Di Luca had passport problems; Di Luca actually tested positive during a regular Giro control that would have been given before the passprot was created. As it standds now the passport has not proven to be anything more than a public relations device.

During last year's Tour we know that Astana was using infusions. Undoubtedly this was done to keep their blood profiles in check. THe UCI also gave Astana special treatment, allowing the riders time to use masking techniques before tests. We can assume that Saxo and the other big teams are getting the same special treatment.

Vino is no different than the other riders. He was just unlucky enough to test positive. At least he is not travelling around the world telling people lies to suck money out of cancer patients and their families.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Isn't the average age of an NFL player 52?

No, it´s actually higher then the Avg.-USA-Life-Expectancy. Studies of Ex-NFL-Players are made about once every decade. So the heavy anabolic use of the 70s and 80s had no impact (unless your name was Lyle Alzado of course)

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

At least he is not travelling around the world telling people lies to suck money out of cancer patients and their families.

... and that is by far the worst coming out of this guy. May it was you who posted it: that only 50% of the money coming in, go to cancer fighting. The rest in his own pocket. He isn´t only the biggest doper of all time, but also one of the biggest psychos since Charles Taylor. We should be all happy he´s only cycling (and sucking Fan-Boys) ...

 

[High Cotton]

I don't see how that proves anything. The past is the past. I don't remember seeing Mauro Gianetti or Davide Rebellin racing today. Thanks to the bio passport (which has flaws, I admit), doping is not just a matter of keeping your crit under 50%. Clean riders can contend more now. It's not 1996 anymore.

So you believe every cyclist who wins a race is doped?

...so the past is the past argument works when you're talking about the finishes of riders you like, but when it comes to Vino???

...and to extrapolate from the question asked at the end...

There are two logical ways to look at things at present.

1. The Passport program is working, and only those who are doping are caught.

2. The Passport program is failing and only those who can't figure out how to beat the tests are caught.

Either way, for now, Vino is as clean as Gilbert, Cancellara, Evans et al, and to single him while venerating riders like Gilbert, Evans and (insert your favorite rider who you're just certain has never doped's name here) is ridiculous.

 

[luckyboy]

....

....

BroDeal, I know that. Everything you said I know. I'm not new here.

I admit I probably went over the top in my post before, but do you both really think that every single professional cyclist active today is doping? I really don't buy that. And I have no proof that some riders are clean, but then there is no proof that all riders are doping. I know all the big teams (Saxo, Astana, Shack, Sky etc etc..) are gonna have organised doping, but I can't see that someone like Said Haddou doped to get his 143rd overall on last year's Tour. Is it worse then 98? At least Halgand, Bassons and Lefevre were clean then..

Also, you don't think that the passport has at least restricted the amount guys are able to dope? Riders aren't dying in their sleep anymore or collapsing at the Tour de Romandie (or at least none that I've heard of lately).

 

[elapid]

...so the past is the past argument works when you're talking about the finishes of riders you like, but when it comes to Vino???

...and to extrapolate from the question asked at the end...

There are two logical ways to look at things at present.

1. The Passport program is working, and only those who are doping are caught.

2. The Passport program is failing and only those who can't figure out how to beat the tests are caught.

Either way, for now, Vino is as clean as Gilbert, Cancellara, Evans et al, and to single him while venerating riders like Gilbert, Evans and (insert your favorite rider who you're just certain has never doped's name here) is ridiculous.

The bio-passport may work well in the future, but currently it is a political tool for the UCI. The only riders nabbed by the bio-passport are riders that have either retired or tested positive prior to the bio-passport. Riders can still beat the bio-passport. Lance's blood results in the last week of the 2009 TdF are a testament to the fallibility of the bio-passport, as are all the positive results to banned substances not identified by the bio-passport.

But I also have to agree with you on your last point. I think Vino is clean until proven otherwise. He has to be a targeted rider considering his past and the UCI had no problem suspending him after his homologous transfusion. So if he is positive this time around then I highly doubt he would be protected. While I have suspicions about many riders, I prefer to delude myself in a sense of semi-naviete and just enjoy the racing for the sake of racing. And it has been a fine season of classic racing!

 

[djconnel]

I agree the UCI is a problem. Anytime someone claims to have proven a negative, in this case that the sport is clean due to testing, then they are either lying or ignorant. I don't believe they are ignorant.

The best statement you can say is "in all of sport, as in all aspects of life, there will always be cheaters, and all we can do is to do our best to minimize the prevalence and potential benefit of that cheating."

 

[BroDeal]

I admit I probably went over the top in my post before, but do you both really think that every single professional cyclist active today is doping? I really don't buy that. And I have no proof that some riders are clean, but then there is no proof that all riders are doping. I know all the big teams (Saxo, Astana, Shack, Sky etc etc..) are gonna have organised doping, but I can't see that someone like Said Haddou doped to get his 143rd overall on last year's Tour. Is it worse then 98? At least Halgand, Bassons and Lefevre were clean then..

Also, you don't think that the passport has at least restricted the amount guys are able to dope? Riders aren't dying in their sleep anymore or collapsing at the Tour de Romandie (or at least none that I've heard of lately).

Who cares if the rider who places 143rd or 50th or 20th in a GT is clean? The race is made by those in the top ten. I don't think all riders are doping. I think all the important riders are doping. If 95% of the riders are clean but the 5% who are doping win everything is that really any different than all the riders being doped? The end result is the same.

Where is the evidence that the passport has restricted the ability to dope?

Riders stopped dying in their sleep when the Italian doctors got into the act.

 

[Hugh Januss]

BroDeal, I know that. Everything you said I know. I'm not new here.

I admit I probably went over the top in my post before, but do you both really think that every single professional cyclist active today is doping? I really don't buy that. And I have no proof that some riders are clean, but then there is no proof that all riders are doping. I know all the big teams (Saxo, Astana, Shack, Sky etc etc..) are gonna have organised doping, but I can't see that someone like Said Haddou doped to get his 143rd overall on last year's Tour. Is it worse then 98? At least Halgand, Bassons and Lefevre were clean then..

Also, you don't think that the passport has at least restricted the amount guys are able to dope? Riders aren't dying in their sleep anymore or collapsing at the Tour de Romandie (or at least none that I've heard of lately).

You know it, but you are sure fightin' it aren't you. You really really want to believe, and that's fine, but not supportable by any sort of evidence I'm afraid.

 

[luckyboy]

Who cares if the rider who places 143rd or 50th or 20th in a GT is clean? The race is made by those in the top ten. I don't think all riders are doping. I think all the important riders are doping. If 95% of the riders are clean but the 5% who are doping win everything is that really any different than all the riders being doped? The end result is the same.

If the rider finishing 143rd is doping, then there really isn't going to be much hope.

Where is the evidence that the passport has restricted the ability to dope?

I was thinking that riders have to keep their numbers within the 'normal' values? Maybe not then..

You know it, but you are sure fightin' it aren't you. You really really want to believe, and that's fine, but not supportable by any sort of evidence I'm afraid.

In your eyes there is not one clean pro cyclist?

 

[auscyclefan94]

LBL final* result is in.

1. Convicted doper, served his time.
2. Soon to be implicated in Italian drug ring.
3. Convicted doper out on parole?
4. Says he would win everything but he is the only one that doesn't dope.
5. Says he doesn't either, but a teammate just got pinched this week.
6. Brother paid a gynocologist for "training tips".
7. Couple teammates busted in the past year, besides he's Spanish
8. Consorts with known dopers.
9. The brother from above.
10. Implicated in the gynocologist's little legal problem, then "cleared", but he is Spanish as well.

And thats your top ten folks!
* for now

(With your edited part, isso)
Isso, funny how people are saying someone is guilty because of association with a team who has had positives. That makes almost every rider in the peleton guilty.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The bio-passport may work well in the future, but currently it is a political tool for the UCI. The only riders nabbed by the bio-passport are riders that have either retired or tested positive prior to the bio-passport. Riders can still beat the bio-passport. Lance's blood results in the last week of the 2009 TdF are a testament to the fallibility of the bio-passport, as are all the positive results to banned substances not identified by the bio-passport.

But I also have to agree with you on your last point. I think Vino is clean until proven otherwise. He has to be a targeted rider considering his past and the UCI had no problem suspending him after his homologous transfusion. So if he is positive this time around then I highly doubt he would be protected. While I have suspicions about many riders, I prefer to delude myself in a sense of semi-naviete and just enjoy the racing for the sake of racing. And it has been a fine season of classic racing!

+1.... As I said earlier, the Biological Passport is a 'drug test' run by a committee.

You have a group of Doctors and experts going through all the profiles. They will debate and differ on their interpretations, much like we do here.

After erring on the side of caution a few 'suspicious' profiles will be selected for closer scrutiny and those athletes asked to explain their suspicious values.(Here is a list of plausible excuses I wrote before.)

Then it comes time for the legal teams to have their say - again they will want 'more than reasonable proof' and will only accept a very high probability of guilt.

None of the 5 riders so far have been sanctioned by their federations - they are 'officially suspended'.
The Bio-Passport will not be used against anyone who has the money to fight the UCI.

Unfortunately it will take another Festina or Puerto (or worse) type incident before the bio Passport is recognized as a failure.

 

[luckyboy]

Unfortunately it will take another Festina or Puerto (or worse) type incident before the bio Passport is recognized as a failure.

I was hoping for a police raid or something during last year's Tour. It was that boring.

 

[Hugh Januss]

(With your edited part, isso)
Isso, funny how people are saying someone is guilty because of association with a team who has had positives. That makes almost every rider in the peleton guilty.

Well............yes! I think you are finally catching on, buttercup.

 

[richwagmn]

The CN article about Vino makes a point that he was recently training on Tenerife where Ferrari and Fuentes are known to work. I don't recall CN ever making that point in an article about Armstrong training on the island.

The relevant quote:

"More doping questions followed about why Vinokourov had recently been training in Tenerife, where disgraced sports doctors Eufemiano Fuentes and Michele Ferrari are alleged to work."

Now on to the Giro. Looks like Evans will be outclassed once again.

Good ole Cadel sort of dissed his team in a post race interview today, complaining no one was with him. Apparently, he just can't learn. By the TDF, I'm sure no one on his team will ride for him.

 

[karlboss]

Good ole Cadel sort of dissed his team in a post race interview today, complaining no one was with him. Apparently, he just can't learn. By the TDF, I'm sure no one on his team will ride for him.

"It was a pity not to have the numbers there in the end but we've had a bit of rough time with Karsten (Kroon, who crashed in Fléche Wallonne) and Santambrogio...There were a few things beyond our control. I'm happy with how the guys rode, though. There were a couple of young guys here and for them it was the first time they've ridden Liège. That was impressive."

Take that you BMC biatches. "it was a pity" stern words indeed.

 

[Ferminal]

Best thread so far out of the "This guy won a classic => he doped" series

Maybe it is a case that the peloton is "cleaner" than it was a few years ago.

I don't know that as a fact obviously, but hopefully that is not being dismissed altogether. I am surprised your boy Gilbert can compete with the 9 other dopers in the top ten, as summarized by HJ.

It's interesting that even when riders pay their penalties with suspensions, when they come back they are still villified. I think only lifetime bans would satisfy most in here, that way the pesky notion of redemption would not have to be considered.

I personally think lifetime bans result in more vigorous and innane defense, like the FL fiasco. You have the one-offers like Kohl who was tired of the shyt, I do admit that.

I think present ban lengths are ok, but would like to give the riders a chance of a reduction if they would bust open the omerta. Until there is incentive to bring down omerta, it will not happen. A lifetime ban, with no weight on admission and uncovering the "system", is not much of an incentive.

I completely agree, well said. ban lengths/extra punishments (financial disincentives) on the individual cyclists are NOT going to break the situation we are in now.

Sunday was an absolute dopefest, it couldn't be any more obvious than that. I'm sorry Gilbert, but no way you can lay down as much heat as those guys without being on something (alternatively, EVERYONE is clean). How bad are Sky, does this make them clean?

 

[BikeCentric]

How bad are Sky, does this make them clean?

Crappy doped riders < Talented doped riders