Interesting Pinotti Interview

[Chuffy]

Why should i or fans provide the solution to what is essentially their problem?

Because you and others are in here b*tching 24/7 about dopers. If you whinge then at least offer a reasonable solution.

Again - what would be adequate evidence of cleanliness to you? How does a clean rider prove himself? Screaming like a harpy on social media is not proof and frankly I'd be surprised if anyone could maintain enough anger for long enough to make themselves heard.

 

[Mambo95]

by spitting in the soup for a start at every opportunity, via the internet, twitter, facebook, t-shirts etc...




Whats wrong with a rider calling out a doper when caught? No one mentioned Contador yet loads of the Peloton put down Riccó without knowing anything apart from what they read in the papers!

How about calling for a riders only union/organisation, no DSs, no former pros but a current pro only union/organistation to resolve the doping?

How about actually taking the initiative instead of waiting for the inevitable softball doping question which is followed by the response of "no i did not see anyone doping".

Why should i or fans provide the solution to what is essentially their problem? They are the ones taking the risk? They risk the bans, suspensions, fines and shame. I could be a vegetable and watch it not caring or i can bet passionate and give vent to my passsion.

They expect me to watch and believe their performances, buy the endorsements, ride the same bikes, jersey, shorts, gloves, shades, helmet etc...


ps i have been to and posted in the 'professional road racing' section, but it is full of idiot posters lots on the level of football fans on the terraces of stadiums. i find the clinic much more intelligent, intuitive, insightful, perceptive and knowledgable.

And none of this provides any evidence that any rider is clean.

You want, as evidence, riders to call out other riders whether they have done drugs (regardless of proof)

*** edited by mod ***

Really. Find some way of proving that a cyclist is clean, or start believing in riders who have been on the anti-doping message before you.

 

[skippythepinhead]

What would you do at work if the rumors you heard suggested that a great many of your fellow workers were engaging in illegal activities which caused as a direct result their paychecks to increase while yours decreased? Would you quietly go along with it for years and just shrug your shoulders (maybe quietly grumble about it a little) and just take it? Or would you look into it more, instead of just pretending that nothing was going on?
It almost defies my imagination that if there are clean riders in the pro peloton they are such sheep to just take it in the backside like that. Where is the righteous indignation?

All I know is, if I suspected that a group of my fellow employees were stealing from my employer, I'd tell security/management in a hot second.

And if I was riding clean in a tour won by a doper, I'd darn sure want the doping exposed and my place elevated. But I guess that's just the kind of competitor I am.

 

[Nick777]

Pinotti's Flèche power data is available via his twitter. Very interesting - lower than I would have thought for the < 30 min figures. The 2&3 hour figures look pretty tough for your average cyclist though....!
I didn't mind his interview-he certainly said more than cyclists would have 20, 10, even 2-3 years ago. The bar has been raised-a good thing.

 

[Altitude]

that myth and thinking was dispelled a long long time ago.

How? So you take the victory away from one doper and give it to another? That solves things

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Could the journalist have asked him about Aldag and Holm? Sure, but the question wouldn't have been very relevant. Aldag and Holm doped as riders at a time where that's what people did, and before Pinotti turned pro. Note he said that's when things started to change or at least when change became possible, so his answer would have been something along the lines of "Those were different times, what matters to me is what they do as DS's". And I'd be inclined to agree, actually. I don't understand why everyone attacks Riis the DS for doping as a rider in the 90s, when what people should be bringing up is Jaksche.

Still, Saunier Duval is very recent, and that team had so many superchargers it's hard to imagine it was all either individual doping or a top secret program for those in the know. It's possible - even in the worst years of US Postal, not everyone was deemed worthy of knowing -, but I wish the journalist would have insisted on this point.

Aldag was riding for T-Mob until 2005 and Pinotti began his career in 99. So they are hardly a generation apart.

The questions about the likes of Riis, Aldag, Holm, Hog, Vaughters etc, is how can you accept that people who spent their whole careers cheating to suddenly once they get off the bike to become paragons of virtue.

It is also the hypocrisy - Ricco, DDL etc shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the peloton according to some riders, and yet they have no problems with other dopers being in charge of teams.

Here's the rub - a cheat like Riis/Aldag has far more control and influence over riders by virtue of the power that being a team manager, DS gives you than he ever did as a rider. If Aldag tells Pinotti to dope do you really think Pinotti has the power to refuse?

We saw from Trent Lowe/Matt White, how much influence a DS with doping connections can have. Matt White's knowledge of Del Moral didn't come out of thin air. Riis/Aldag/Holm etc are far more dangerous to the peloton than Ricco or DDL.

Dopers aren't allowed to ride their bikes but they are allowed to be in charge of people riding their bikes.

####

As for accusations of being unfairly critical of riders - why should we take the word of a group of people who have lied to us time after time after time? Why should we trust people who have abused our support by claiming to be clean while being doped up to the gills? The riders have to re-earn the trust of fans - stop throwing the likes of Ricco under the bus after the event and start blowing whistles before the event, start supporting and protecting whistleblowers not shafting them. We all saw the collective reaction to Landis's allegations - David Millar calling him an alcoholic etc etc.

We all know that there are dirty teams and riders out there, we all know that there is corruption in the sport, the riders know that, we know that. Riders need to stop taking us for fools.

The ball is in the riders court - if they don't like being accused of doping at every turn then start doing something to get rid of the dopers from all levels of the sport and start protecting whistleblowers rather than spitting on them.

 

[Mambo95]

Pinotti, to me, seems to be a device to divide the Clinic crew.

He's clearly a clean rider, to anyone's sensible standards.

To my mind, those who support him genuinely want a clearer sport.

Those who attack him are fans of doping, not cycling.

But that's just my opinion.

 

[blackcat]

Reasonable. Why should they be reasonable? Their doping actions are not reasonable.

you know if the riders cared about proving to the fans that the sport is clean they would do whatever it takes, especially after what is has gone through, is going through and is about to go through. I mean when it was mentioned about nighttime surprise tests they were up in arms, why? how many nighttime tests that catch no dopers before its gets dropped, 1 season 2 max, if they are not doping? I didn't hear a furore over x-raying winners bikes at the end of a race?

You see it is not difficult. If you truly want something you will do almost anything to get it and it works both ways. Dope yourself to the gills to win, cheat, hide the blood bags. stope the bus in the middle of nowhere to transfuse, attach your heart to a monitor so you wake up in the middle of the night if your heart rates drops really low and ride your bike in the room for an hour.

So it works both ways. They made such an effort to dope. Now they should make such an effort to prove they are clean. Why not? they want us to watch the sport get the latest bike, buy the sponsors jersey, products, tune in etc...

I have one question. How can a rider convince you he is clean?I'll tone that down if you want. Who can a rider persuade you that they are clean?

If you can't think of an answer then you're just a fanatic - stuck in your ways.

The insinuations against long term anti-doping advocates such as Gilbert, Pinotti and Moncoutie, suggests to me that that the Clinic is a place has no interest in anti-doping. It's only interested in slander.

see the extent to which keirin cycling in Japan go to, to ensure betting integrity and no mafioso or yakuza can distort the competition, basically, for gambling integrity.

I mentioned this as a starting point b4, and JV et al thought I was a kook.

 

[hfer07]

Here’s the thing [long hesitation]. As long as you don’t have proof, you always hope. I hoped. But there I thought, blimey, everything people said, the rumours…it was all confirmed, albeit not from a legal point of view. Now all I know, I read in the newspapers, and when I read about this investigation in the United States, I just think there’s no point now – the time to act was years ago.

I agree partially with Pinotti, when he says LA should have been prosecuted back in the day-so his guilt would have been a bold statement against doping-and also considering that his(LA) current case might take years to uncover all the dirt, hes right to see it sort of bittersweet.(personally I don't care how long the case takes, as long as that LA pr!ck gets behind bars) but at the same time he's kind of fool to imply that LA himself with all the support from the UCI, the access to the best Dottore in Doping & the cash cow he became while dominating the Tour-was simply going to be put down that easily.

 

[hrotha]

Aldag was riding for T-Mob until 2005 and Pinotti began his career in 99. So they are hardly a generation apart.

Yes, but Aldag didn't admit to doping in the 00s. He said he did EPO until 1999. *If* we accept that the sport can get cleaner (big if, I know, and it depends largely on how cynical you have become or on how much you need to believe), then we must allow for the possibility of former dopers changing their ways in concordance with the cultural shift. That's why I say the responsibility of a doped rider is not the same as the responsibility of a doping DS.

As for why former cheaters would later decide doping is something that must be fought, I don't know - maybe we could ask Kimmage?

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Yes, but Aldag didn't admit to doping in the 00s. He said he did EPO until 1999. *If* we accept that the sport can get cleaner (big if, I know, and it depends largely on how cynical you have become or on how much you need to believe), then we must allow for the possibility of former dopers changing their ways in concordance with the cultural shift. That's why I say the responsibility of a doped rider is not the same as the responsibility of a doping DS.

As for why former cheaters would later decide doping is something that must be fought, I don't know - maybe we could ask Kimmage?

IMO there has to be lustration when it comes to doping and dopers. If you are saying no to dopers riding as Pinotti is, then you have to say no to dopers being DS's.

The T-Mob confessions were as I've said nothing more than Ketman. And I certainly don't trust the likes of Aldag, Holm, Riis etc to have had a Pauline conversion, especially judging from the way their teams ride.

 

[Von Mises]

Again - he never said (he wasn't asked) that "he did no know anything" - this is what he was asked and his reply:

+ 1

Also, question "And you hadn’t seen team-mates or opponents doping with your own eyes?" came in the context of his amateur years and turning pro years, at least intepreted that Pinotti was talking about this.

 

[L'arriviste]

I would agree with MJM's general complaint about weak journalism but maybe it's just that MJM and others of us form a 'strong' audience.

This interview was supposed to be with Pinotti about Pinotti, rather than with Pinotti about doping. So the scope of that would include something of Pinotti's views on doping but to increase the granularity of this aspect - in other words, to ask the right questions - would have meant a totally different sort of interview.

Almost every Kimmage interview is based on the specific issue of doping and driven by a man who actually wants answers. Friebe's interview with Pinotti only touches on the subject. So muzak it might be, but I'm not sure we can argue we were sold less than was advertised.

Anyway, Pinotti posts on here very occasionally, so at least you know he'll probably be reading this thread.

 

[Benotti69]

Because you and others are in here b*tching 24/7 about dopers. If you whinge then at least offer a reasonable solution.

Again - what would be adequate evidence of cleanliness to you? How does a clean rider prove himself? Screaming like a harpy on social media is not proof and frankly I'd be surprised if anyone could maintain enough anger for long enough to make themselves heard.

I rather regarded to be *****ing about doping then screaming like a harpy about how great the performances are for certain riders.

As for offering solutions. You might like to re read some of my recent posts.

I suppose lots like to expect others to fix their problems and not do it themselves.

I want to see and hear riders do and say more about doping. Why dont we? Blood passport. Frei dismissed that.

One of the possible solutions for those testing positive for Clen is to test a hair sample. Guess who tested positive for Clen and we have not heard about a hair test.

We keep hearing about the 'New cleaner cycling' I haven't seen it. Have you?

Biggest rider in the sport is up before CAS this year. Clean, pull the other leg it has 1 ball on it.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I would agree with MJM's general complaint about weak journalism but maybe it's just that MJM and others of us form a 'strong' audience.

This interview was supposed to be with Pinotti about Pinotti, rather than with Pinotti about doping. So the scope of that would include something of Pinotti's views on doping but to increase the granularity of this aspect - in other words, to ask the right questions - would have meant a totally different sort of interview.

Almost every Kimmage interview is based on the specific issue of doping and driven by a man who actually wants answers. Friebe's interview with Pinotti only touches on the subject. So muzak it might be, but I'm not sure we can argue we were sold less than was advertised.

Anyway, Pinotti posts on here very occasionally, so at least you know he'll probably be reading this thread.

Maybe Marco can come online and answer some of our questions.

When the peloton is full of hypocrites who say one thing about doping and do another in practice - ie Millar, Vaughters, Wiggins, Frodo, Baden Cooke, etc, it's hard to believe that Pinotti is the one 'different' rider.

Friebe would be better off re-hashing press releases at Heat magazine than passing himself off as an interviewer.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Bzzt! Wrong

A doper who beats other dopers is still the rightful winner.

Disagree.

The old saying "Two wrongs don't make a right" applies.

There are very real consequences and legal complications you must ignore in order to maintain that position.

 

[DirtyWorks]

But that's just my opinion.

You need to work on presenting your opinions. You present them with such strong language as a cover for their substantial rhetorical failures.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Somewhere in your bluster there may be some valid points. It's impossible to detect them between your repeated personal attacks.

 

[luckyboy]

Omerta is not saying anything about anything
That is far from what Pinotti has done. Again he is the only current rider I know who has publicly said he believes LA doped.

Yeah this is what I got out of it. There's a difference between what he said and what most other do - i.e. the sort of thing like "he's a great champion and he should be innocent until something is proven". I don't think I remember another active cyclist talking in that way about the 99 samples.

It's pretty much impossible to find a rider who hasn't ridden with a doper or had a former rider as a DS + there is such a thing as clean riders on dirty teams. Anyway, who is going to be a DS that we can trust? Pretty much all of them are going to come from the previous era of cycling.

As for accusations of being unfairly critical of riders - why should we take the word of a group of people who have lied to us time after time after time? Why should we trust people who have abused our support by claiming to be clean while being doped up to the gills?

Gee it's a wonder more cyclists don't speak out and talk about doping with responses like this.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

And its no wonder that people don't believe riders when they keep on lying to the fans.

I am pretty sure that being spat on, harrassed, losing your job, not being invited to important races and being abused in the press by workmates is a far greater disincentive to speaking out than someone on a discussion board pointing out that riders don't have a very good track record on telling the truth and being trustworthy.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

IMO there has to be lustration when it comes to doping and dopers. If you are saying no to dopers riding as Pinotti is, then you have to say no to dopers being DS's.

The T-Mob confessions were as I've said nothing more than Ketman. And I certainly don't trust the likes of Aldag, Holm, Riis etc to have had a Pauline conversion, especially judging from the way their teams ride.

Again you have attributed to Pinotti something he has never said.

 

[Granville57]

And its no wonder that people don't believe riders when they keep on lying to the fans.

I could probably drop this link into nearly any thread in the clinic, especially given the specific target of the article, but I'd remembered reading this piece and have been looking for this quote for awhile.

A few truisms have become abundantly clear since then, not just in cycling but throughout elite sport.
(1) The number of tests an athlete "passes" may have no correlation to his or her guilt.
(2) Athletes have an amazing capacity to lie and deny about the subject of doping for years on end.
(3) A charismatic personality is not an accurate indicator of integrity.
http://espn.go.com/olympics/tdf2010/crunchtime

Funny how the passage of time just seems to strengthen all those points.

 

[function]

I have one question. How can a rider convince you he is clean?

I'll tone that down if you want. Who can a rider persuade you that they are clean?

If you can't think of an answer then you're just a fanatic - stuck in your ways.

The insinuations against long term anti-doping advocates such as Gilbert, Pinotti and Moncoutie, suggests to me that that the Clinic is a place has no interest in anti-doping. It's only interested in slander.

+1

It really just appears to be a cycling equivalent of checkout counter newsrags.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I could probably drop this link into nearly any thread in the clinic, especially given the specific target of the article, but I'd remembered reading this piece and have been looking for this quote for awhile.

Quote:
A few truisms have become abundantly clear since then, not just in cycling but throughout elite sport.
(1) The number of tests an athlete "passes" may have no correlation to his or her guilt.
(2) Athletes have an amazing capacity to lie and deny about the subject of doping for years on end.
(3) A charismatic personality is not an accurate indicator of integrity.
http://espn.go.com/olympics/tdf2010/crunchtime

Funny how the passage of time just seems to strengthen all those points.

It ought to be framed and run in a permanent ticker on CN.

I'd love to believe that rider X is clean along with the rest of the peloton, but we've had the emperor's new clothes when it comes to 'new clean cycling' so many times it will take more than the right platitudes spouted in the media.

Festina was supposed to result in the sport turning the corner,
1999 was supposed to mark the sport turning another corner,
Puerto was supposed to mark the sport turning the corner,
Biopassports were supposed to mark the sport turning the corner

For all of these new dawns, all of which have been accompanied with claims of 'new era's of clean racing' riders saying that it's not like the old days.

To claim that its not like the days while old dopers like Vino hack up, as super-charged teams like HGH, BMC-Phonak charge around like they are on motorbikes, while old dopers like Riis, Aldag, Zabel, Stephens, White, Vaughters etc are welcomed back into the sport, while the Spanish authorities continue to protect and cover up their riders and doctors, while McQuaid lines his pockets and continues to run the sport into the ground.

And yet, apparently, the real bad guys in all of this are the fans who question whether riders are telling the truth when they tell us that they are clean.

 

[Benotti69]

+1

It really just appears to be a cycling equivalent of checkout counter newsrags.

it may appear to be that but if you actually read it you will discover, ex pros, ex team mechanics, former pro's wives, ex dopers, ex clean pros, ex dope dealers and even current pro team owners posting in here, but as you say it appears to be slander and the equivalent of tabloidism.

If there is nothing to see in here why post or bother with it? Posters like MarkieVW are not really interested in contributing to the discussion of doping in professional cycling. He is only interested in trolling.

What are you interested in?

 

[function]

If there is nothing to see in here why post or bother with it? Posters like MarkieVW are not really interested in contributing to the discussion of doping in professional cycling. He is only interested in trolling.

What are you interested in?

I'm interested in sensible intelligent discussion, not wild speculation. There is certainly a lot to discuss regarding drug usage in professional sports, both from a physiological and sociological point of view, without having to make up random accusations based on podium placings and what team someone rode on when they were neo-pro. I post on here because there is the occasional post or thread that is interesting, but unfortunately those are frequently drowned out.