Low Octane said:
I think you meant it's not conclusive evidence that Sky is clean.
I meant it isn’t any evidence. I haven’t read the book, and maybe he says things that would change my mind, but nothing that has been quoted in this thread does.
Again, what strikes me most forcefully is how much of an adoring fanboy Walsh is. Nothing wrong with that, but fanboys are not the ones you want investigating doping. I’m not saying he would look the other way, cover up, lie, etc. I’m not going there. I’m just saying he won’t make much of an effort to look. It’s very hard to maintain amicable relationships with people you’re investigating for possible fraud. Walsh gives every indication that maintaining those relationships is very important to him. I have difficulty imagining his putting himself in an awkward situation—e.g., spying on some rider against the latter’s wishes, or grilling some relatively lowly staff member with embarrassing questions.
He doesn’t want to be the bad guy. And this is not all on him. If he plays the bad guy, the team will resent it—the quote about Kimmage makes that abundantly clear—and maybe rescind their offer. He’s only allowed to be with the team if he respects certain limits. But this is not the way you catch dopers. You don’t catch dopers by playing nice. That’s why most of the major busts in recent years have involved police actions.
If Walsh had actually approached the situation that way, I would expect he would emphasize it very early in the book. He would recount—and it would make an excellent story, by the way, probably a lot more entertaining than the one he has actually written—all of the ways he snuck around trying to catch someone out. Peering through windows, knocking on doors, interrupting meetings, going through garbage, and on and on. But—anyone who has read the book, correct me if I’m wrong—this isn’t what he does. He just says when he talks to them, they act innocent, like they have nothing to hide. They say all the right things. Come on.
To repeat, maybe they do have nothing to hide. I just can’t conclude that from this book.
Low Octane said:
It's easy to make a quip about detective Walsh, but yes, it would be bloody difficult to conceal this type of huge doping conspiracy with an investigative anti doping journalist on the team bus every day. That's why the likes of Walsh were blacklisted by teams. We now know just how much team staff have to be involved to pull this off every day - running around hiding rubbish, making courier trips across borders, pulling over the bus on mountain bends, using makeup to hide injections, hiding drugs in the bus drivers underpants etc. We also know how difficult it is for many of these people to not let slip in body language or impression that something is up when you're working with them every day.
After all the talk about how Sky is pioneering new approaches to training, it doesn't even cross your mind that they could be applying the same mindset to doping as well? Yes, I agree with you that the Sky bus probably doesn’t pull over in some lonely spot so all the riders can get their transfusion. I doubt any team today would be dumb enough to do that. There are many other times and places where that can be done.
If there is anything we have learned again and again and again throughout the history of doping is that dopers adapt their approaches to stay ahead of those trying to catch them. The Reasoned Decision was a treasure trove of things not to do, of advice for anyone who wants to dope without getting caught. What Postal did and didn’t do in their heyday worked then, but everyone understands that in today’s atmosphere, a different approach is needed—just as everyone understands that you can’t raise your HT by 5 points, even if it stays under 50, and even if there is no test for blood transfusions.
If Sky really wants to convince us skeptics, the solution is very simple. Put a bunch of journalists on Froome, Porte and a few others 24/7. I mean, they forfeit every single minute of their privacy over a period of time. Then we can at least conclude that they weren’t doping during that period. Since, according to Walsh, these guys are so dedicated they can't even drink a beer occasionally, i assume they have no distracting social life that would be a problem. All they do is eat, sleep, and train, right?
How about at least doing that during the TDF, particularly on rest days? Just to be able to conclude that Froome did not dope at any time during that period would be a major breakthrough. It wouldn't answer all questions, but it would be a very good start.