Geert Leinders

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

He left about 3 months ago, and it was widely commmented on in the Sky thread, linking it to the Leinders fiasco (well, by me anyway!)

http://www.teamsky.com/profile/0,27291,17543_8342932,00.html

SKY site needs an update then?

 

[cadelcrybaby]

Doesn´t prove anything definitive about Leinders on way or the other; but I would suggest there would be no way he´d be doping (at Sky or Rabbo) without it being directly ordered by the team managers

That is borne out by tale of Prentice Steffen at USPS, but of course who knows...

 

[D-Queued]

http://www.teamsky.com/profile/0,27291,17543_8342932,00.html

SKY site needs an update then?

Perhaps it is easier to leave a stale page on the site, than to provide a bunch of blank pages entitled "Dubious Medical Practitioner A, B, C...".

They could, of course, put up a 'Hiring' page and outline the qualifications.

Qualifications
- Previous experience with blood extraction and re-infusion
- Expert work with weight loss aids and hyper low fat % management for professional athletes
- Personal relationship with key UCI doping accommodators
- Intimate knowledge of Blood Vector boosting, microdosing
- Software programming background in Biopassport algorithms
- Working knowledge of obscure African diseases that provide extensive vacations from Whereabouts testing

Etc.

Dave.

 

[Benotti69]

There was a very interesting article on teh Guardian about the relation between doctors and sports organisations/clubs (not just cycling ones):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/feb/15/drug-cheat-dilemma

I took from it the position of doctor is very subservient to the manager/owner of team.....some doctors even do it for nothing so they can advertise their services as being associated with the team!
But if the boss says jump, the doctor either jumps or jumps ship.

Doesn´t prove anything definitive about Leinders on way or the other; but I would suggest there would be no way he´d be doping (at Sky or Rabbo) without it being directly ordered by the team managers

Are you sure? You dont think he did it on the side behind Brailsford back as a little extra earner

 

[Dear Wiggo]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/feb/15/drug-cheat-dilemma

I took from it the position of doctor is very subservient to the manager/owner of team.....some doctors even do it for nothing so they can advertise their services as being associated with the team!
But if the boss says jump, the doctor either jumps or jumps ship.

Interesting. Backed up by JV's recent admission of hiring a doctor and then expecting them to do motorpacing. And then denigrating said doctor's motor pacing ability. I mean. The Dr had just done a phlebotomy course prior to being employed by Garmin, wtf does motorpacing have to do with being a doctor!?

 

[DirtyWorks]

They could, of course, put up a 'Hiring' page and outline the qualifications.

Qualifications
- Previous experience with blood extraction and re-infusion
- Expert work with weight loss aids and hyper low fat % management for professional athletes
- Personal relationship with key UCI doping accommodators
- Intimate knowledge of Blood Vector boosting, microdosing
- Personal relationship with Saugy at the UCI's favorite lab
- Working knowledge of obscure African diseases that provide extensive vacations from Whereabouts testing

Etc.

Dave.

Fixed that for you. Don't need to know statistics, just Saugy. He'll explain everything.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

FGL, when I was speaking about 'impact' I meant the impact that charges against Leinders would have on Sky. If nothing on Sky comes out then it will be minimal. If something does then it will have a much bigger impact depending on the revelations.

To me Leinders being part of the Sky setup is a huge red flag as it is to most people. Add to that the super-human performances and, yes, we have seen this many times before and know where it will probably end.

That said I am going to wait and see what happens with these charges. Even if nothing comes out about Sky that still of course does not mean there was any wrong doing going on.

I have never said that Sky are not doping or am to foolish enough to think that there is not a reasonable chance of it. When I tend to defend Sky it is when posters come up with irrational arguments (Sky ordered the cremation of their previous doctor).

When riders are caught doping I am often disappointed but rarely surprised.

Sorry, missed this post.

It will be interesting to see what this Belgium proces will bring, even if the Belgium authorities HAVE authority over things that have happened in Holland.

And mind you, look at the positives Leinders has had, only Rory Sutherland, in 13 years time...

The man Geert knows something on saddlesores!

 

[sniper]

A bit off topic and nothing new.
oh well.

Mart Smeets in the "ochtendhumeur" column (Radio 1) drawing attention to the fact that in the past couple of turbulent months not one single Belgian cyclist has had the balls to come forward.
Notes that the Belgians are laughing at us Dutch social reformers and will continue to embrace cycling regardless of doping scandals.
I like him, but what a fool: as if Festina never happened. As if Puerto never happened. As if the latest revelations aren't merely an exponent of the stuff that's been happening in front of Mart's eyes for over two decades.

btw. Did I understand correctly that NOS will not broadcast any classics this year?

 

[sniper]

Sorry, missed this post.

It will be interesting to see what this Belgium proces will bring, even if the Belgium authorities HAVE authority over things that have happened in Holland.

And mind you, look at the positives Leinders has had, only Rory Sutherland, in 13 years time...

The man Geert knows something on saddlesores!

yeah, good ol' Rory.
What do you think: has he seen Jesus? His move to Saxo doesn't spell alot of good.

Here he is with Inigo in 2011.
More lactate testing.
http://www.bikeradar.com/fitness/article/aero-position-isnt-everything-31165/

 

[Tom375]

I´ll concede that last point: they had to sweep out everyone associated with the doping that went on. And he was in charge of it. Whether he took the hint to go, or fell on his own sword, I don´t know.

He might have been glad to be away from it: doesn´t sound like he was working freelance making megabucks from it like some others were.

But we have to welcome an investigation into whatever he was doing.
And I´m still waiting for an explanation from Sky about their review into his practices whilst in the team...saying he´s no longer there isn´t nearly good enough

Oh and by the way there are lots of doctors who have done terrible things in the past who have gone on to be perfectly normal doctors afterwards (Not that I´d want them treating me!)

You mean Harold Shipman?

 

[Tom375]

He's saying that those who doubt or have suspicions are conspiracy theorists.

Because they are conspiracy theorists, they are Betonköpfe, unlike the more rational believers.

Hitch noted - in a post critical of somebody who believes Sky are doping - that just because an investigation has begun into somebody with a doping past, this does not guarantee that all of the dirt will come out (how many times has Ferrari been mentioned? How long did Lance deflect? How well-handled was Operación Puerto? How far did that Freiburg investigation go before Klöden paid for it to go away? How many Humanplasma clients were there?). Nor does it guarantee that if the dirt comes out that Team Sky will be implicated (as we do not yet know the full extent of what the investigation entails). Therefore it is unreasonable to assume that Team Sky will be brought down by this investigation.

Hitch noted this and expressed it through the medium of sarcasm, which mastersracer interpreted as being directed at the investigation rather than the poster.

Mastersracer believes that Hitch, as a conspiracy theorist (after all, he doesn't believe in the Total Brilliance of Sky (or its abbreviation "Total BS")), is afraid that the investigation will not turn up evidence that Team Sky are doping. Hitch therefore is trying to smear the investigation by suggesting that it's no good, so that when it inevitably does not turn up evidence that Team Sky are doping (owing to their just being super duper awesome sexy clean power marginal gains~!) he can dismiss it by saying that Team Sky are doping, and it was only because the investigation was useless that this wasn't found.

That's how I interpreted it, anyhow.

Brilliant. I hate praising anyone but you are a gem. Cutting through the Sh*t.

 

[Tom375]

perhaps the thought of it turns you on, but really there are no anti-Sky diehards here. As far as I'm able to tell, there's just people who think they dope.

btw, why would anybody with a mind "consider the lack of evidence against Sky in this criminal case against Leinders as evidence that Sky is not doping"? I can't see anybody other than Phil agree with you here.

Nothing to see here, move along

 

[thehog]

You mean Harold Shipman?

Harold and Geert peas in a pod.

 

[Tom375]

Harold and Geert peas in a pod.

Aww you're funny glad you weren't banned! Bit of fookin levity never hurts!

 

[DirtyWorks]

there is no end to this without further proof

Again with the demands for proof. What constitutes sufficient proof? Ashenden's skirmish has ripped open the UCI's bio-passport scam. Is that enough? Do we have to wait 10 years for an ADA to make it official?

 

[Tom375]

Again with the demands for proof. What constitutes sufficient proof? Ashenden's skirmish has ripped open the UCI's bio-passport scam. Is that enough? Do we have to wait 10 years for an ADA to make it official?

Look mate, i know you trawl the net and supply links to whatever you say (You seem to have a lot of knowledge about how the IOC & other intstutions work) and i appreciate that, i've never said you're wrong and i appreciate your continuing quest as others. I'm just saying as a bystander (IMO however bias or not bias i might not be) WRT to Sky - I don't know - simple as and remain to be convinced. I also remain to be convinced that they are not doping i.e. there is a lot of work remaining to be done..
We all know that the sport has been inundateted with this since its inception so it shouldn't really suprise us when its uncovered whatever nationality or whatever the sportsmen. But this doesn't mean we shouldn't all do our best to uncover it (a la yourself and others). I just think that sometimes the forums however unbiased everyone wants to pretend are drawn along traditional nationalistic lines which have nothing to do with the sport or beliefs ,,, hence agro!
... Just at the moment i find it difficult to believe either side.. that's all!
I'm a fugee or a bull ****tin fugee that doesn't realise his own hypocrisy..

 

[sniper]

Because they are rational human beings and not david icke like conspiracy theorists who come up with totally ridiculous ideas like that cyclists may dope.

Or at least, if you want your posting exchanges with this poster to be anything more than pixels on a screen, thats the kind of intellectual level you will have to stoop down to.

Actually I do think hog and blackat at the very least would go down as anti sky diehards and a few others as well.

Not that there is anything shameful about being anti sky given some of the disgraceful behaviour Wiggins and Bailsford have demonstrated. Bailsford using Txemas death as an explanation for hiring Lienders. Wiggins tearing Floyd like a Piniata even though he knew Floyd was telling the truth Bailsford saying he is shocked to find out lance was doping and hadno idea Barry and the like were dopers Wiggins casting doubt on Sastres win and on anyone who won the TDF then saying that people who do that to him are ****ers totally beneath him. Bailsford saying not to worry he will soon explain the Lienders situation then playing PR for the next 6 months and doing jack ****.

Etc.

These are not unproven allegations either dreamt up by sky haters but a matter of record.

Just because one finds such behaviour repulsive though and as a result comes to dislike sky does not make one biased against them or incapable of rational thought and argument.

good post, especially the bolded parts.

 

[DirtyWorks]

...WRT to Sky - I don't know - simple as and remain to be convinced. I also remain to be convinced that they are not doping i.e. there is a lot of work remaining to be done...

The problem is, the sports federations control the testing and have, in the UCI's case, DEFINITELY suppressed samples and positives. People waiting for an official proclamation are being p!ssed on and told it's raining until then. I don't really understand how you don't see that, but okay.

Seriously, what would satisfy you as sufficient proof? I'm not going to tear it down. It is what it is.

Finally, there is some nationalistic insensitivity, (hey, how about those trustworthy "Russians") but, it's debunked pretty quickly. I've seen more of it in the racing forum rather than The Clinic.

 

[Tom375]

The problem is, the sports federations control the testing and have, in the UCI's case, DEFINITELY suppressed samples and positives. People waiting for an official proclamation are being p!ssed on and told it's raining until then. I don't really understand how you don't see that, but okay.

Yeah i do see this and its frustrating 7 months on after the reasoned decision, what's changed? Absolutely nothing as far as i can see.
All that pressure on the UCI seems to be dissipating, one minute they're having a so called "independent" commission audit them, the next the terms of reference are crap and it appears that just like usual they are trying to rig the whole thing a la Vrimjin (not sure on spelling) report. Now its not going ahead and strangely seemingly at the behest of Armstrong and because they know it will be easier to rig and suppress information they're talking about Truth & reconciliation committee (not that I'm against the idea per se just that i don't think it is the correct vehicle for a robust audit of what the hell the UCI have been doing with the sport for last god knows how many years). Certain matters need to be looked into in minute detail and all its paperwork and accounts need to scrutinised by an independent body and published. Only when this done can action be taken clean up the organisation and hopefully then present it as a cleansed organisation to cycling fans and the world with new faith. Obviously there will be a number of casualties but they should go and do what's best for the sport.

Depressingly this does not look like happening at the moment. Another white wash.
WRT supressed tests i'm sure its happened/happening however do we know of any for the leading current riders? - I don't know , obviously that would be positive evidence.
i think one of the problems here is that due to not wanting false positives the bar is set high this gives riders the opportunity to dope to a certain level (as before), the BP has placed a certain amount of control on this but doesn't look up to the task of dealing with microdosing which is evidently what goes on now. How do you catch that? god knows... testing in general shows to be generally floored in the last 20 years, not saying they shouldn't do it and keep working on it but they have to come up with other means aswell.

Seriously, what would satisfy you as sufficient proof? I'm not going to tear it down. It is what it is.

I'll try and answer this a bit later if i can. I suppose unlike you - I'm not looking for proof either way, i just read what's available and make my own mind up (or don't make my up as in this case) I accept that either they might be or might not be - given cycling history it should a probably more of a shock if they weren't.

 

[SundayRider]

We are about to enter the spring classics and not much change at the UCI. How many riders has the BP caught? Barredo?

 

[rickshaw]

Once again

We are about to enter the spring classics and not much change at the UCI. How many riders has the BP caught? Barredo?

The UCI has never been about catching dopers. They want simply to APPEAR to be catching dopers. They want to protect their sport from bad PR, from negative news, from anything that could cast cycling in a negative light, true or not. Occasionally an offering must be made on the alter of anti-doing, to show the world (and WADA and IOC) that they are for clean sport. Anti-doping has always been a show. And it costs so much money!

I live in a small town, and cycling reminds me of a small town. Frequently the Police see their roll as protecting the locals (ie cousin Bob) FROM the law.

BP = PR

 

[DirtyWorks]

the BP has placed a certain amount of control on this but doesn't look up to the task of dealing with microdosing which is evidently what goes on now.

No it hasn't. Ashenden's skirmish with the UCI has blown the bio-passport scheme wide open. Positive, negative, suspicious, just doesn't seem to matter.

We now know there are suspicious samples that are analyzed as clearly positive and not passed onto experts. Rickshaw understands it well. No doping controversy.

I would agree with you if you said an athlete had to be a little bit smarter doping than prior the bio-passport. But, other than that, doping is wide open as long as the UCI favors the cyclist.

To make matters a little worse, the UCI has taken over the process of routing samples to experts. Before it was Saugy's lab's job and we know that guy met with riders to explain it all to them at the UCI's request and we know they didn't route clearly positive samples.

 

[Tom375]

Getting it back on track

Thought i'd better get this thread back on track - its about Geert Leinders after all and i noticed that some of my posts didn't have any connection (not just i would hasten to point out!) anyway feel partly responsible and have moved anything current to different threads or deleted, below is the last post of any relevance i could find:

Quote:Originally Posted by Don't be late Pedro
FGL, when I was speaking about 'impact' I meant the impact that charges against Leinders would have on Sky. If nothing on Sky comes out then it will be minimal. If something does then it will have a much bigger impact depending on the revelations.

To me Leinders being part of the Sky setup is a huge red flag as it is to most people. Add to that the super-human performances and, yes, we have seen this many times before and know where it will probably end.

That said I am going to wait and see what happens with these charges. Even if nothing comes out about Sky that still of course does not mean there was any wrong doing going on.

I have never said that Sky are not doping or am to foolish enough to think that there is not a reasonable chance of it. When I tend to defend Sky it is when posters come up with irrational arguments (Sky ordered the cremation of their previous doctor).

When riders are caught doping I am often disappointed but rarely surprised.

Fearless Greg Lemond

Sorry, missed this post.

It will be interesting to see what this Belgium proces will bring, even if the Belgium authorities HAVE authority over things that have happened in Holland.

And mind you, look at the positives Leinders has had, only Rory Sutherland, in 13 years time...

The man Geert knows something on saddlesores!

__________________

 

[thehog]

We are about to enter the spring classics and not much change at the UCI. How many riders has the BP caught? Barredo?

Barredo was a big catch. He scored 586 on the suspicion index and they nabbed him on his 2010 data!

Useless.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Barredo was a big catch. He scored 586 on the suspicion index and they nabbed him on his 2010 data!

Useless.

Hein tweaked the software over xmas.