Gripper grasping at straws

Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/anne-gripper-describes-armstrong-as-a-pathological-liar
FFS, Anne.

Particularly troublesome bits:
I.
Gripper, who managed the UCI's Biological Passport programme until 2010, insisted there was nothing unusual with his blood profile at the time. She believes the Biological Passport has greatly cleaned up cycling.
Right, so the USADA file was erratic wrt Lance 2009/10?
Please be clear, Anne.
----------
II.
"The 2011 Tour de France was a bit of a landmark ... the fact that Cadel (Evans) won, that was the cherry on top of the cake,'' she said.
Inference: Contador is indeed considered dirty by the UCI. Great, but if Contador is a blooddoper, and if the passport is such a success, as Anne claims, why wasn't Contador ever caught for a passport violation? Why wasn't a passport case ever opened against him?
----------
III.
"But there were all sorts of other things that happened in that Tour ... to indicate a much more level playing field.''
Inference: the lack of a train in 2011 should apparently be taken as an indication of cleanliness. Great, so what does that tell us about 2012, Anne?

------------
A reminder to Anne from Michael:
“The reality is that one third of podium finishers since 2008 have been tainted by doping in one form or another. I just don’t get how anyone can see that as anything but a terrible indictment,” he said.

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/13112/Ashenden-states-the-UCIs-anti-doping-fight-doesnt-have-the-same-impetus-as-before.aspx#ixzz2IdJ3RSbf
----------
Jonathan, is Anne's way the way forward?
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
Mrs John Murphy said:
Gripper is a sell out and an omertist. Still spinning the party line.

Must have had a nice pay off from the UCI
You guys are getting tough. She probably figured she would have cover to say these things since she piled on LA. :rolleyes:

Just curious....what would it take for the clinic types to believe that performances are not doped?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
ChrisE said:
You guys are getting tough. She probably figured she would have cover to say these things since she piled on LA. :rolleyes:

Just curious....what would it take for the clinic types to believe that performances are not doped?
Are you on the 2009=clean bandwagon?
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
0
0
sniper said:
Gripper, who managed the UCI's Biological Passport programme until 2010, insisted there was nothing unusual with his blood profile at the time. She believes the Biological Passport has greatly cleaned up cycling.
So they are looking at the passports while knowing who the data belongs to? Does this happen before or after they decide to hand what should be anonymized data over to the passport committee?
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
sniper said:
Are you on the 2009=clean bandwagon?
Of course not. You know I have been skeptical of JV's BS with you in that other thread, at least until I get bored with it all.

I am asking a serious question. We pile on Gripper, but how do we know for sure when things are clean? We point at Sky this year, and applaud Cadel the previous one but look at who he has ridden for in the past, after AC gets busted a year before. Why would 2011 be the clean year, surrounded by 2010and 2012?

Extrapolate that on any year in the future. What are your parameters?
 
Jun 15, 2009
835
0
0
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
ChrisE said:
Of course not. You know I have been skeptical of JV's BS with you in that other thread, at least until I get bored with it all.

I am asking a serious question. We pile on Gripper, but how do we know for sure when things are clean? We point at Sky this year, and applaud Cadel the previous one but look at who he has ridden for in the past, after AC gets busted a year before. Why would 2011 be the clean year, surrounded by 2010and 2012?

Extrapolate that on any year in the future. What are your parameters?
Who thinks Cadel was clean, except Gripper?

Good points though.
Instead of Cadel, let's take Hesjedal/Garmin,. Posters like RaceRadio and Dr. Maserati (whom you'd expect to be more critical after the Lance experience) trust Garmin. Based on what parameters? Was the rest of the peloton clean? Or did a clean Hesjedal manage to beat geared up competitors?

hektoren said:
As to LA's bloodtests in 2009/2010 let's remind Anne Gripper of the statements from Chris Gore, head of physiology at the Australian Institute of Sport: Gore concluded that the approximate likelihood of Armstrong’s seven suppressed reticulocyte values during the 2009 and 2010 Tours de France occurring naturally was less than one in a million,” the file reads.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/10/news/gore-armstrongs-blood-showed-clear-signs-of-manipulation-in-2009_256658
cheers, I had been looking for that.
 
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
BroDeal said:
So they are looking at the passports while knowing who the data belongs to? Does this happen before or after they decide to hand what should be anonymized data over to the passport committee?

But surely she would had the anonymous data to hand and would have been party to the discussions about the anonymous data. Anonymous or not she should have recognised a suspicious biopassport with dubious values.

Why was it that when it was anonymous and in the hands of the UCI it was deemed to not be suspicious but USADA have looked at the same data and claimed that it does show evidence of doping? They must have both looked at the same data surely?
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
sniper said:
Who thinks Cadel was clean, except Gripper?

Good points though.
Instead of Cadel, let's take Hesjedal/Garmin,. Posters like RaceRadio and Dr. Maserati (whom you'd expect to be more critical after the Lance experience) trust Garmin. Based on what parameters? Was the rest of the peloton clean? Or did a clean Hesjedal manage to beat geared up competitors?
.
C'mon. You know Cadel gets a wide berth from some in here, more so than any other recent GT winner except perhaps Sastre. And Sastre was riding for Riis.

It's a cult of personality. JV comes in a tosses some stuff around the clinic, and the slurp line forms. Cadel and Sastre are nice guys. If JV hadn't come in the clinic, armed with nothing but his words while his rider is winning GT's in a doped field while JV writes 4 times as much testing is required, Garmin would be getting villified. If Sastre or Cadel were dicks they would be villified.

So, getting past that BS which deserves much less energy given to it than I used typing the above paragraph, what would a rational person base cleanliness upon?
 
May 19, 2012
537
0
0
ChrisE said:
C'mon. You know Cadel gets a wide berth from some in here, more so than any other recent GT winner except perhaps Sastre. And Sastre was riding for Riis.

It's a cult of personality. JV comes in a tosses some stuff around the clinic, and the slurp line forms. Cadel and Sastre are nice guys. If JV hadn't come in the clinic, armed with nothing but his words while his rider is winning GT's in a doped field while JV writes 4 times as much testing is required, Garmin would be getting villified. If Sastre or Cadel were dicks they would be villified.

So, getting past that BS which deserves much less energy given to it than I used typing the above paragraph, what would a rational person base cleanliness upon?
I especially enjoy how JV got a pass in the "Vaughter's spine" thread. ;)

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=11035
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
Jeremiah said:
I especially enjoy how JV got a pass in the "Vaughter's spine" thread. ;)

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=11035
Not sure what you are getting at and I'm not gonna read thru 10 pages of that thread to try to figure it out.

Fact is in the JV threads he was getting benefit of the doubt from some. Don't know if what sniper said above is true but if so that is an example. I was in those threads and eventually stopped because it was a stupid circle jerk argument. But, JV's posts are not the gist of my question.

We pile on people when they claim the peleton is clean, but IMO we probably wouldn't know a clean peleton if it bit us in the ****.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
ChrisE said:
Not sure what you are getting at and I'm not gonna read thru 10 pages of that thread to try to figure it out.

Fact is in the JV threads he was getting benefit of the doubt from some. Don't know if what sniper said above is true but if so that is an example. I was in those threads and eventually stopped because it was a stupid circle jerk argument. But, JV's posts are not the gist of my question.

We pile on people when they claim the peleton is clean, but IMO we probably wouldn't know a clean peleton if it bit us in the ****.
Well, trustworthy testing methods are not a utopia. They're just not being implemented. When they become implemented, that'd be a step forward towards a trustworthy peloton.

Then there's the money issue. Imagine a sport where the looser gains as much as the winner. Yes, this is utopia. But just imagine. It could be dopefree.
In other words: if the current big-buck climate doesn't change, I have little confidence in ever seeing a clean TdF winner.
 
May 19, 2012
537
0
0
ChrisE said:
C'mon. You know Cadel gets a wide berth from some in here, more so than any other recent GT winner except perhaps Sastre. And Sastre was riding for Riis.

It's a cult of personality. JV comes in a tosses some stuff around the clinic, and the slurp line forms.
Cadel and Sastre are nice guys. If JV hadn't come in the clinic, armed with nothing but his words while his rider is winning GT's in a doped field while JV writes 4 times as much testing is required, Garmin would be getting villified. If Sastre or Cadel were dicks they would be villified.

So, getting past that BS which deserves much less energy given to it than I used typing the above paragraph, what would a rational person base cleanliness upon?
ChrisE said:
Not sure what you are getting at and I'm not gonna read thru 10 pages of that thread to try to figure it out.

Fact is in the JV threads he was getting benefit of the doubt from some. Don't know if what sniper said above is true but if so that is an example. I was in those threads and eventually stopped because it was a stupid circle jerk argument. But, JV's posts are not the gist of my question.

We pile on people when they claim the peleton is clean, but IMO we probably wouldn't know a clean peleton if it bit us in the ****.
You were explicitly saying that JV was not being challenged on the forums. You were supporting your argument with a contention which isn't true..

Carry on.:)
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
sniper said:
Well, trustworthy testing methods are not a utopia. They're just not being implemented. When they become implemented, that'd be a step forward towards a trustworthy peloton.

Then there's the money issue. Imagine a sport where the looser gains as much as the winner. Yes, this is utopia. But just imagine. It could be dopefree.
In other words: if the current big-buck climate doesn't change, I have little confidence in ever seeing a clean TdF winner.
You are talking utopia. As long as there are rules, some will work to break them. This is human nature.

Money? The winner will always have more opportunity outside of winnings or salary in terms of advertisement opportunities.

Besides, I don't think that would do anything. Winning is incentive to dope.
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
Jeremiah said:
You were explicitly saying that JV was not being challenged on the forums. You were supporting your argument with a contention which isn't true..

Carry on.:)
No, I use words like "some". I say "slurp line", I did not say "everybody in the clinic lined up to blow JV". I say these things in response to snipers post about how some (there's that word again) believe JV.

JV was challenged by many, including sniper and dear wiggo. Please try to keep up; I don't like going Maseratti on people. :)

Carry on, or you can tell us what you need to see to think the peleton is clean. Care to join in the discussion?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
ChrisE said:
You are talking utopia. As long as there are rules, some will work to break them. This is human nature.

Money? The winner will always have more opportunity outside of winnings or salary in terms of advertisement opportunities.

Besides, I don't think that would do anything. Winning is incentive to dope.
I agree it's utopia.
I disagree that we wouldn't be able to recognize a clean peloton.
we would recognize it. it's just not gonna happen.
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,137
0
0
sniper said:
I agree it's utopia.
I disagree that we wouldn't be able to recognize a clean peloton.
we would recognize it. it's just not gonna happen.
and it's happening right in front of our eyes. lowest wattages since the 80s on all the climbs. boring racing, with riders afraid to launch any attack because they are stonedead after. it's repetitive calculated racing by mountain trains like sky. or sprinting trains that are short of energy and get blown to pieces in sprinting stages, or the classical races where all the favorites wait for trhe last climb, or worse like msr where the race is so hard not even on the final climb can anyone attack until the downhil starts and a few can get away (cancellara)
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
and it's happening right in front of our eyes. lowest wattages since the 80s on all the climbs. boring racing, with riders afraid to launch any attack because they are stonedead after. it's repetitive calculated racing by mountain trains like sky. or sprinting trains that are short of energy and get blown to pieces in sprinting stages, or the classical races where all the favorites wait for trhe last climb, or worse like msr where the race is so hard not even on the final climb can anyone attack until the downhil starts and a few can get away (cancellara)
clean racing, and still they need 4 docs or more per team?
I usually do sports to keep the doctor away.
:rolleyes:
seriously, tell me what Garmin and Sky need a whole peloton of docs for if they ride clean?
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
sniper said:
clean racing, and still they need 4 docs or more per team?
I usually do sports to keep the doctor away.
:rolleyes:
seriously, tell me what Garmin and Sky need a whole peloton of docs for if they ride clean?
Careful. Using words like the above will cause Jeremiah the hyperbole cop to swoop in and give you a demerit.
 
sniper said:
clean racing, and still they need 4 docs or more per team?
I usually do sports to keep the doctor away.
:rolleyes:
seriously, tell me what Garmin and Sky need a whole peloton of docs for if they ride clean?
Sometimes a team is doing two, even three races at the same time. One doctor per race. Not all of the doctors are full time.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
1
0
Parker said:
Sometimes a team is doing two, even three races at the same time. One doctor per race. Not all of the doctors are full time.
why do teams need doctors when the races all have a doctor?
 
Benotti69 said:
why do teams need doctors when the races all have a doctor?
The same reason people go to BUPA instead of the NHS- a better service and no waiting list.

If there's a big pile up how long do you think it is going to take the race doctor to attend to 40 riders? By week three of a Grand Tour there will be a hundred riders with something wrong with them.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
ChrisE said:
Careful. Using words like the above will cause Jeremiah the hyperbole cop to swoop in and give you a demerit.
:D
you're right, though. One shouldn't exaggerate when one's argument is already strong enough without exaggeration. :cool:

think about it: you have a hypothetical team where doping is widespread. You'll need some seriously qualified docs to keep that under control. I'm talking PED-masking, but also health risk issues.
People keep forgetting that doping is a risky business. You need docs to supervise and control those risks.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY