How The Pro's Defeat The Anti Doping System

[Oldman]

i am completely aware of that fact. however, none of those guys are posting in here with links back to their for-profit website and blog.

Then don't go there. The information passed on here has been factual and helpful.

 

[Anonymous]

my original post was meant to shed light on the fact that i'll never be a joe papp fanboy. you're entitled to your own opinion of him. don't be afraid to entertain a different view about joe than the one you've previously accepted. you don't have to hate him, but let's not make him the anti-omerta superhero.

See, (and sorry joe) but i didnt have a clue who Joe Papp was prior to this forum. But, hes probably the only person I have read etc that has genuinly not just stood up against doping, and admitted what he did, but also offered sensible and well thought out ideas that could benefit cycling going forward (lemond sometimes does, but lets face it, Greg is marginally nuts, hes like cyclings Al Gore). As a result hes one of the few people I fully respect in the sport..

Who do you respect?

i am completely aware of that fact. however, none of those guys are posting in here with links back to their for-profit website and blog.

I think also, you need to figure out wether something is for-profit, or expense covering.. Im sure google ads isnt raking in much more than server costs for him. Id be very surprised if hes making a decent living from it. If he is, then maybe its something i need to look at

 

[red_flanders]

I hate to say this but from 2 sources I heard Greg LeMond enhanced.

Be specific and provide the sources and what dope he used.

 

[Anonymous]

how is it that i appear to be an apologist for landis? i really can't even follow that logic enough to make a rebuttal.

the web page i linked to explained joe's positive. if it is a pro-landis site i wouldn't know b/c i only googled it last night and never previously visited it.

i think i've said all i need to say on this matter. i'm perfectly ok with joe posting his thoughts in here anonymously.

just some friendly advice, name calling is the fastest route to destroying credibility.

Um, if I cared about my "credibility" with people like you, I would lose credibility with myself.

 

[Anonymous]

i'm perfectly ok with joe posting his thoughts in here anonymously. .

Why anonymously, are they any more relevant then? I dont see the problem with someone who is willing to put their name to what they say. Thats part of what verifies what they say. If he posted anonymously he could just be another troll.

So who are you then...? Are you posting anonymously?

 

[pedaling squares]

lets face it, Greg is marginally nuts, hes like cyclings Al Gore

Thanks Dim, about bloody time we got a laugh around here!

 

[Escarabajo]

i am completely aware of that fact. however, none of those guys are posting in here with links back to their for-profit website and blog.

What is the problem with that? Do you think he is becoming rich because of that? I am starting to wonder, with the comments that you made about Landis, that you want to enforce the OMERTA. Either that or you are very naive. And if you have been related to racing you should know about doping in the Peloton. In that case you are enforcing the OMERTA.

We can not praise silence. That can not be good. We can not praise the criminals. We can not support the Bassos, the Armstrongs, the Landis, The Riis, etc, etc, etc. They are the ones getting rich on silence or the OMERTA. Look at the way that the whistleblowers have ended up:

- Jörg Jaksche: Doomed for life. Can not get a contract with nobody
- Khol: Doomed for life.
- Manzano: Doomed for life. Gardener. And now Valverde, Piti the Cynical, wants to take him to trial for blasphemy.
- Joe Papp: Apart from this side of the Forum, He is doomed also. I have never read so many insults thrown at him and it continues, even though his stories are true.

What is t become of cycling when we don't support the people that want to reduce the doping but to praise the OMERTA enforcers.

Sorry, but you are praising the criminals and going after the wrong people.

 

[lean mean &green]

Why anonymously, are they any more relevant then? I dont see the problem with someone who is willing to put their name to what they say. Thats part of what verifies what they say. If he posted anonymously he could just be another troll.

So who are you then...? Are you posting anonymously?

i'm anonymous to protect against harrassment. if i weren't anonymous my resume/background would only increase my credibility.

the problem is that of gaining notariety based upon a career mostly successful as a result of cheating and then gaining even more notariety and a following based upon confessing. it's all a result of dishonesty.

you are a perfect example. unlike me, you never knew who he was until he started posting. you visit his site/blog to learn more. you seem to understand how e-commerce works but for eveyone else's sake i'll explain. embedded adverts kickback small amts to author of blog for page-views and click-thru's. as a following grows so does traffic and revenue. early on it is cost covering, over time potentially much more. at the point it becomes profitable, i've got a problem and it sounds like maybe you do to.

if that notariety continues to grow the individual can become sought after by larger news media for comment. that could lead to other lucrative opportunites as an author/journalist or maybe even tv commentary. this is probably more than joe could ever hope for but i'm already amazed with the support he's generated in these forums so who knows?

you could run the blog as a cost covering and divert profits to charity but i'm not real comfortable with that either. it's hard to assign a dollar value to non-monetary profits gained like esteem, status, increased name recognition, etc.

the essential question is...do you have a right to profit from deceit? i don't think this has ever been addressed in the clinic. it's a new and unique problem which is the result of PED use and rapidly evolving technologies. it only occurred to me recently but you already know what my answer is.

i recognize the limited credibility any anonymous poster has, both mine and potentially someone like joe, but i think it's the most we can hope for.

 

[ravens]

(lemond sometimes does, but lets face it, Greg is marginally nuts, hes like cyclings Al Gore).

If only Al Gore would have taken up cycling instead of attempting the swindle the western world with the climate hoax....
I deleted my retort to TFF. I do not want any part of lean mean and green. that guy is REALLY mad.

I can empathize with him. But the anger seems somewhat out of proportion. But maybe there is something else that drives it.

Many of the harder core cyclists I know seem to be a more bitter lot. I don't know if that explains his level of anger towards Joe papp.

I think cycling is better off with confessors than Omerta, but I can appreciate that he doesn't see i that way.

 

[lean mean &green]

What is the problem with that? Do you think he is becoming rich because of that? I am starting to wonder, with the comments that you made about Landis, that you want to enforce the OMERTA. Either that or you are very naive. And if you have been related to racing you should know about doping in the Peloton. In that case you are enforcing the OMERTA.

We can not praise silence. That can not be good. We can not praise the criminals. We can not support the Bassos, the Armstrongs, the Landis, The Riis, etc, etc, etc. They are the ones getting rich on silence or the OMERTA. Look at the way that the whistleblowers have ended up:

- Jörg Jaksche: Doomed for life. Can not get a contract with nobody
- Khol: Doomed for life.
- Manzano: Doomed for life. Gardener. And now Valverde, Piti the Cynical, wants to take him to trial for blasphemy.
- Joe Papp: Apart from this side of the Forum, He is doomed also. I have never read so many insults thrown at him and it continues, even though his stories are true.

What is t become of cycling when we don't support the people that want to reduce the doping but to praise the OMERTA enforcers.

Sorry, but you are praising the criminals and going after the wrong people.

i do not support the omerta either.

the only incentive to confess should be to clear your own conscience which equals real credibility. that has to be enough. a former cheat can not be rewarded with successful long term career in cycling. if so, why not cheat, protect the omerta if early in your career, and plan on confessing only if you're caught as your career is nearing an end. a catch 22 i fully realise.

i'll admit it ain't perfect but neither is what we got.

 

[python]

the essential question is...do you have a right to profit from deceit? i don't think this has ever been addressed in the clinic. it's a new and unique problem which is the result of PED use and rapidly evolving technologies. it

boy oh boy. i tried to stay away from addressing you as there are plenty of joe defenders. but your lack of sense (im struggling not to use stronger words) is just amazing.

racing as a fraud never was addressed in the clinic?

either you're very confused or your personal issues against joe are blinding you...

armstrong . com funds...floydfairness funds, tylerhamilton funds...what planet have you lived on bro? poooleeeze just go away. your credibility has been blown to pieces with me though i was initially inclined to take you seriously. your goal is to badmouth not to discuss issues and by the response you got you better figure it out -- you failed. miserably i might add.

ps.
dim you have become my favourite poster! cheers.

 

[lean mean &green]

armstrong . com funds...floydfairness funds, tylerhamilton fundsQUOTE]

...and if the people behind these sites confess you'll be alright with them making a killing off of them the very next day? i won't be.

 

[red_flanders]

fair enough, let me clarify. it hasn't been talked about in this way. ie riders who are gaining more notariety from blogging/journalism than from racing exploits and especially when the public interest in them is mostly due to PED use.

It's definitely easier to whine about Joe Papp's blog and kill the messenger than it is to tell all the pro racers and the organizing body to stop the doping. I get it.

Have fun with that.

 

[lean mean &green]

armstrong . com funds...floydfairness funds, tylerhamilton funds.

...and if the people behind these sites confess you'll be alright with them making a killing off of them the very next day? i won't be.

 

[Ripper]

i do not support the omerta either.

the only incentive to confess should be to clear your own conscience which equals real credibility. that has to be enough. a former cheat can not be rewarded with successful long term career in cycling. if so, why not cheat, protect the omerta if early in your career, and plan on confessing only if you're caught as your career is nearing an end. a catch 22 i fully realise.

i'll admit it ain't perfect but neither is what we got.

I be a wee bit confused here. You believe in second chances. You don't agree with doping. Nothing wrong with either of those. Joe is certainly not pro-doping; does he not get a second chance ... or is it only conditional second chances when you do not like the guy? Such as a 'second chance but nothing to do with cycling', 'cause that ain't a second chance.

Would you prefer Basso, who won't talk about it and only "intended to dope" (LOL)

 

[lean mean &green]

It's definitely easier to whine about Joe Papp's blog and kill the messenger than it is to tell all the pro racers and the organizing body to stop the doping. I get it.

Have fun with that.

the problem needs to be tackled from both sides, feel free to lobby the governing bodies too. i'm right behind you, except it's not what the thread was about heretofore.

 

[fatandfast]

Python is spot on. Papp was in the game he knows the rules of how things are done. Registering for low level races in Belgium in a cafe or bar where everybody involved was smoking or fat was an eye opener. I have never seen a guy light up a cigarette after racing a bike in the US, but I saw in in Europe. Bike racing in the US has all kinds of healthy lifestyle things attached that do not exist in Europe. It's about racing not health. Lots of parallels to horse racing. The health of the animal is important but not paramount to everybody involved. Had the melding of pro/amateur not happened for Olympic purposes the way cycling looks today would be way different. All the people thinking they have been betrayed by a drug scandal just don't know the grassroots of 80% of the riders. Papp got popped puts him in funny minority,very few US racers and even fewer that have a forum to tell about their experience after being dirtied . And as we have here feel the wrath of people who speed on the freeway to get to work. It has been the same level of infraction inside cycling for 75 years. Boonen wasn't at the discos alone,but the tall tales make it look like the problem of just a few rouges. The internet is pretty basic,make a site, populate it with things you think people want to look at, sell ad space. Papp, Hamilton live by the law of optimism" if we build it they will come" people are interested so they visit the site. It's like TV or radio,if you don't like it change the channel. I read it because even with carbon fiber,cross training,wind tunnels,SRM the core is still the same as yesteryear. . I will look around for a bullfighting site for purists their comments have to run along these lines. Pro racing= suffering

 

[lean mean &green]

I be a wee bit confused here. You believe in second chances. You don't agree with doping. Nothing wrong with either of those. Joe is certainly not pro-doping; does he not get a second chance ... or is it only conditional second chances when you do not like the guy? Such as a 'second chance but nothing to do with cycling', 'cause that ain't a second chance.

what constitutes a second chance is a matter of opinion. i'll admit that in my mind joe might already be on his 3rd or 4th chance. either way my message is very clear...

we need to be careful about the ways in which we support those who have used PEDs, confessed or not. i'll call it conditional acceptance. that may be different for you than it is for me.

 

[joe_papp]

Python is spot on. Papp was in the game he knows the rules of how things are done. Registering for low level races in Belgium in a cafe or bar where everybody involved was smoking or fat was an eye opener. I have never seen a guy light up a cigarette after racing a bike in the US, but I saw in in Europe. Bike racing in the US has all kinds of healthy lifestyle things attached that do not exist in Europe. It's about racing not health. Lots of parallels to horse racing. The health of the animal is important but not paramount to everybody involved. Had the melding of pro/amateur not happened for Olympic purposes the way cycling looks today would be way different. All the people thinking they have been betrayed by a drug scandal just don't know the grassroots of 80% of the riders. Papp got popped puts him in funny minority,very few US racers and even fewer that have a forum to tell about their experience after being dirtied . And as we have here feel the wrath of people who speed on the freeway to get to work. It has been the same level of infraction inside cycling for 75 years. Boonen wasn't at the discos alone,but the tall tales make it look like the problem of just a few rouges. The internet is pretty basic,make a site, populate it with things you think people want to look at, sell ad space. Papp, Hamilton live by the law of optimism" if we build it they will come" people are interested so they visit the site. It's like TV or radio,if you don't like it change the channel. I read it because even with carbon fiber,cross training,wind tunnels,SRM the core is still the same as yesteryear. . I will look around for a bullfighting site for purists their comments have to run along these lines. Pro racing= suffering

+1

And to stop the spread of what's-his-face's lies/distortions/fantasy: I in no way benefited or have benefited monetarily from doping, coming clean about doping, cooperating, etc. Add up all of the $ and hidden costs, and it's a massive net negative, and to insinuate that my writing a blog is some how profitable or lucrative...?! yeahhh, right. fool. You're not Mike Fraysse by any chance, are you?

I don't know who that guy is (Mike? Mike Friedman? Danny? Danny Boy?), why he hates me so much, but I appreciate everyone's stepping in and trying to separate skewed opinion from fact and reality.

 

[pedaling squares]

...the essential question is...do you have a right to profit from deceit?...

I had this topic on ignore for a while, but this question intrigued me. I don't think this is the essential question of your posts. For me, the essential question is what event(s) in your life have caused you to hate this guy to the point that you dog him in this forum? My guess is that JP knows you or knew you at one time and you have an axe to grind. If I am right, the honourable thing would be to grind it in person instead of attacking him here. Just so you know, I have never met JP and don't know him outside of his palmares and his CN forum posts. As you can probably tell from my self-deprecating username, I'm no pro cyclist.

There was a time when JP made some poor decisions vis a vis ethics and fair competition. No doubt he won races while clean cyclists did not. He was caught, punished, and now discusses his acts openly. I fail to see the big deal. I also fail to see the big profit, but others have covered that element. So are we to force him out of any cycling related activity for life? That destroys any incentive for others to come forward about PED use. In a society where violent criminals get paroled, surely we can cut this guy some slack for confessing his sins and enlightening us about the use of PED's in cycling.

 

[lean mean &green]

My guess is that JP knows you or knew you at one time and you have an axe to grind.[/B]

nope, hardly know him.

his name was immediately recongnizable and synonymous with PEDs but probably because he raced so successfully in our region. it might burn me a little more because he cheated in races so familiar to me but it's really about principle.

also, he's welcome to participate in cycling, just not for profit. is that so bad? isn't that what most of us do? work a real job everyday and goof around on our bikes just for fun when we can make the time. Oooooo, what harsh punishment

 

[Hugh Januss]

nope, hardly know him.

his name was immediately recongnizable and synonymous with PEDs but probably because he raced so successfully in our region. it might burn me a little more because he cheated in races so familiar to me but it's really about principle.

also, he's welcome to participate in cycling, just not for profit. is that so bad? isn't that what most of us do? work a real job everyday and goof around on our bikes just for fun when we can make the time. Oooooo, what harsh punishment

So why should he participate only in a not for profit capacity when Basso, Vino, FLandis etc., etc., etc., are welcomed back to the pro ranks and to pro teams that pay them much much more than whatever few bucks JP is getting from his website. Are you saying it's OK to do your time and come back and sign a contract and race as long as you keep your mouth shut, but if you want to talk about the rampant evil of doping in pro cycling then you had better get a job at Mickey D's first? It's already a given that if you talk you won't ever race again.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

..
just some friendly advice, name calling is the fastest route to destroying credibility.

I agree that 'name calling' is (imo) unnecessary and does little to further one's point - however, so does claiming 'victory' over another poster, in particular as I have been nothing but civil in my posts to you.

...
you lost every part of this argument. embarrassingly i might add.

you got reemed in the above post.....

I judge forum members on their posts and ability to back up a claim.

You have made numerous claims that Joe is 'profiting' from his doping confessions - I will ask again please show me where?
On his blog there are ad's - which iirc once had an ad from a certain Texan for a recovery drink! Do you really believe Joe is making a living from that?
............
You have posted before - and often contributed excellent and unbiased information, so I will give my opinion on a question you asked earlier..

..
i think we're missing the point and it's where this discussion should be headed. so I'll ask a rhetorical question...what incentive is there not to dope if all you have to do is confess and you'll be accepted unconditionally by the general public again?

"Unconditionally"??
Do you think highly trained athletes push themselves to the limit, dope - because their real goal in life was to write blogs?

Basso, Ulrich, Pantani, Landis, Hamilton, Ricco, Di Luca.... If it is such a lucrative or self serving practice why have none of these top rated riders done this?

 

[Anonymous]

i'm anonymous to protect against harassment. if i weren't anonymous my resume/background would only increase my credibility.

So why should you be able to hide behind the veil of anonymity and therefore avoid any harassment, when Joe has had the courage to make himself known and take that criticism and harassment full in the face. I'm sure for Joe having a quiet life away from cycling would at times be preferable to the public lambasting he suffers as a result of choosing to speak out.

But as with you, his lack of anonymity only increases his credibility.

Besides, If you're going to call a guy out, its only fair, he knows who's doing the calling.

do you have a right to profit from deceit?

No, you don't, nobody does.

He won races through deceit.
One could argue that he profits, if indeed he does profit, through honesty.

you visit his site/blog to learn more. .

And no, I am not that naive. If you want to learn about anyone the last place you go initially is somewhere of their own production or editorship. I visit it now, as his opinions interest me. I realise last place, initially is somewhat of a contradiction, but you understand my meaning.

On his blog there are ad's - which iirc once had an ad from a certain Texan for a recovery drink!

The best one was google detecting an article on PED's and adverts for EPO appearing on his page.


Damn, my writing, and punctuation is improving recently.

 

[lean mean &green]

You have made numerous claims that Joe is 'profiting' from his doping confessions - I will ask again please show me where?
On his blog there are ad's - which iirc once had an ad from a certain Texan for a recovery drink! Do you really believe Joe is making a living from that?

fair enough, i never claimed joe has profited. i said there is a potential to and i tried to explain how that might become a reality.

Basso, Ulrich, Pantani, Landis, Hamilton, Ricco, Di Luca.... If it is such a lucrative or self serving practice why have none of these top rated riders done this?

we have to be careful when comparing continental pro's and the pro-tour. my guess is that some of the guys you mentioned are financially secure so the revenue from a blog does not keep them from having to "paint houses". blogging is also just now emerging as a real way to make money/gain notariety and there is the prerequisite skill of writing articulately which each of them may or may not posess.

lastly, i apologize for my choice of words earlier, "reemed" was an especially poor choice.