• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Jaksche says 2009 Tour winner will be a doper

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
jackhammer111 said:
It was important news in 2007.

No news today. Unless you think his opinion is news.

His opinion is news.

The nice thing about cyclingnews' new format is that you can choose not to click on individual stories. Those of you who want to keep your head buried in the sand do not have to read stories you do not want to. Those of us who want to stay informed about what is really going on can read the story so we do not end up as misinformed or delusional.
 
May 18, 2009
79
0
0
Visit site
I don't think his opinion is very valid. Hes been oput of the peleton for 2 years, and i would imagine hes sitll trying to justify his decision to go on the gear(and getting caught). Mind you if AC wins then he may well be right.
 
ambrose said:
I don't think his opinion is very valid. Hes been oput of the peleton for 2 years, and i would imagine hes sitll trying to justify his decision to go on the gear(and getting caught). Mind you if AC wins then he may well be right.

Why would it not be valid? His essential argument is that the effectivenees and the benefits of doping are large enough that doping will be used in endurance sports. He has first hand experience with how effective the drugs are. He also came out of a teamwide doping program that included riders who are still riding today, incuding one who is the favorite to win the TdF.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
jackhammer111 said:
Kohl just got a contract.

What's that say about the all powerful "omerta"?

No, you mean Simoni....er Simeoni......er............FLandis..............no, you meant Ricco.

You are so stupid you'd climb over a glass door to see what is on the other side.
 
jackhammer111 said:
Some around here say they are tired of talking about doping.

Appearently CN is not.

I know susan comes on here so I hope she's not to upset when I say I think that was lazy journalism and a cheap headline. It's almost tabloid.

It's no wonder he can't get hired if he has such an attitude. It's like he's admitting he can't ride clean because he still claims the field is dirty. It's almost an admission that he'd dope again.

If this guy actually knows something, like how they will do it and how to catch them he should say it. Otherwise STFU.

"Disgraced former pro says sport lends itself to doping"

Who cares?

So you're for censorship and omertà then?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The sad thing is that Jaksche is probably right on the money, only he most likely would have been right if he had said "2nd" "3rd" "4th" "5th" "6th"....well, you get the point.
 
rhubroma said:
So you're for censorship and omertà then?

Was it not just the other day that he was saying that it was a good thing that Armstrong punished Simeoni for speaking out about doping? His evidence was that the rest of the peloton agreed so it must have been a good thing. Or am I confusing with another apologist?
 
BroDeal said:
Was it not just the other day that he was saying that it was a good thing that Armstrong punished Simeoni for speaking out about doping? His evidence was that the rest of the peloton agreed so it must have been a good thing. Or am I confusing with another apologist?

I didn't read that, so can't confirm. What I can confirm, though, is that Simeoni's countryman, Daniele Nardello, insulted Simeoni at that Tour after the "Armstrong Show" by telling him: "Tu sputi sul piato da cui mangi....testa di cazzo!" ("You spit on the plate from which you eat...d!ckhead!")

Now that spoke volumes about the perverse sense of justice and the pecking order then prevelant in the peleton. With Lance's return, obviously things havn't changed one iota and the omertà is still as strong as ever.

PS: I used to like Nardello, but after that comment I couldn't stand him.
 
BroDeal said:
Was it not just the other day that he was saying that it was a good thing that Armstrong punished Simeoni for speaking out about doping? His evidence was that the rest of the peloton agreed so it must have been a good thing. Or am I confusing with another apologist?
Nope, you've got it, pretty much correct.

Astounding, isn't it, that someone would think the omerta was a good thing, and whistleblowers should be silenced.

rhubroma said:
I didn't read that, so can't confirm. What I can confirm, though, is that Simeoni's countryman, Daniele Nardello, insulted Simeoni at that Tour..by telling him: "Tu sputi sul piato da cui mangi....testa di cazzo!"
Nardello comes directly from the "old school" years of super doping. What do you expect?
 
Jun 26, 2009
276
1
0
Visit site
Alpe d'Huez said:
whistleblowers

These guys aren't "whistleblowers". Generally, a whistleblower is an innocent insider with altruistic motives who divulges wrongdoing within an organization. These guys are more like dope dealers that got caught by the law and begin squealing on anyone and everyone, guilty or not, with the hope that somehow it will save their own skin (I've seen it first hand and its often full of BS). What? . . . we excoriate their deception when they were doping, then they get caught and begin the self serving squealing (truthful or not) on others and all of a sudden their word is reliable concrete proof of what they allege??

Its pathetic those here that quote Kohl and Jascke as some sort of experts on doping in cycling. These cheaters made self serving statements after they were caught and then you take their word as gospel with respect to what anyone else is doing re doping. Once they are caught they have a lot to gain by casting aspersions on everyone else . . . "wa wa waaaa they are all doping too! It's not just me! I'm not uniquely bad. I'm just like everyone else . . . . I got mud on my face let me sling mud on everyone else (guilty or not) so I am not the only one standing here looking like and a$$". If you quote Kohl or Jascke and use that as some sort of proof of doping YOU ARE AN IDIOT duped by fallacious logic.

But I still admire your athletic accomplishments.
 
Mar 18, 2009
981
0
0
Visit site
I imagine when caught most riders would say, but all the others are doing it. It's a standard defence for being caught doing the wrong thing. Kids say it all the time.
 
Jun 26, 2009
276
1
0
Visit site
msjett said:
I imagine when caught most riders would say, but all the others are doing it. It's a standard defence for being caught doing the wrong thing. Kids say it all the time.

Amen to that! Well said. LMAO. I have seen such phenomena at times in my kids. For those who haven't raised kids. Here's a book that makes the same points (good and/or bad) "All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten." http://www.amazon.com/Really-Need-Know-Learned-Kindergarten/dp/034546639X
 
msjett said:
I imagine when caught most riders would say, but all the others are doing it. It's a standard defence for being caught doing the wrong thing. Kids say it all the time.
Yes, but, what I find very revealing is the lack of outrage expressed about the ones who are proven guilty by the ones who are supposedly clean.

In particular, Lance Armstrong, the patron, who is not one to avoid harsh words when he feels they are appropriate, expresses no outrage about all the doping going on all around him, his key team members and his key opponents, and, instead, attacks those who expose it.

The list of doping cases in cycling compiled at Wikipedia is sobering to look at.

Doping cases in cycling

Where is the outrage? Why is there no outrage?

Also, when the ones who are caught say everyone is doing it, it's rarely expressed as an excuse. To the contrary, it's very matter-of-fact.
 
Mar 18, 2009
981
0
0
Visit site
Ninety5rpm said:
Yes, but, what I find very revealing is the lack of outrage expressed about the ones who are proven guilty by the ones who are supposedly clean.

In particular, Lance Armstrong, the patron, who is not one to avoid harsh words when he feels they are appropriate, expresses no outrage about all the doping going on all around him, his key team members and his key opponents, and, instead, attacks those who expose it.

The list of doping cases in cycling compiled at Wikipedia is sobering to look at.

Doping cases in cycling

Where is the outrage? Why is there no outrage?

I guess, that it's not worth being excommunicated from the cycling fraternity to express outrage about the subject of doping. It would seem those who are caught express outrage that they are the only one who got caught.

Jumping off a bridge with your mates is different to being pushed off that bridge by your mates.
 
Jun 27, 2009
284
0
0
Visit site
byu123 said:
Its pathetic those here that quote Kohl and Jascke as some sort of experts on doping in cycling. These cheaters made self serving statements after they were caught and then you take their word as gospel with respect to what anyone else is doing re doping. Once they are caught they have a lot to gain by casting aspersions on everyone else . . . "wa wa waaaa they are all doping too! It's not just me! I'm not uniquely bad. I'm just like everyone else . . . . I got mud on my face let me sling mud on everyone else (guilty or not) so I am not the only one standing here looking like and a$$". If you quote Kohl or Jascke and use that as some sort of proof of doping YOU ARE AN IDIOT duped by fallacious logic.

Above=Omerta propaganda 101.

This kind of thing might be remotely convincing if whistleblowers like Manzano and Jaksche hadn't been proven correct by facts and subsequent evidence that came to light. Manzano was castigated by absolutely everyone in cycling, yet it was his information that led to Operation Puerto, which in turn proved every claim he had made (vehemently denied by McLame, Verdruggen, and all the usual omerta apologists) was correct.

Kohl and Jaksche are former pros with credible backstories who have no reason to lie, and indeed have lost their careers because they chose to tell the truth and stop living a lie (both could have easily come back had they kept on lying). Omerta stooges lie for a living.
 
Jun 26, 2009
276
1
0
Visit site
Alpe d'Huez said:
I suppose you feel this applies to Joe Papp as well then?

.

“When you join a team with an organized doping program in place, you are simply given the drugs and a choice: take them to keep up or don’t take them and there is a good chance you will not have a career in cycling.”

Joe Papp http://www.makingtherules.com/THE-DOPING-SAGA

Didn't Matt Decanio pretty much say the same thing about some of the dopers he raced with???

So I moved to Europe in the spring of 2000. I was still determined to race clean in Europe. I found the racing scene to be different now because the drugs were a big secret, but they were still there. Now nobody talked about it, and it was kind of like, “Drugs are illegal and this is a drug free team, but you need to be professional and do what it takes to win.”

Matt Decanio http://www.dailypeloton.com/displayarticle.asp?pk=6472

Waduya Think "Alpe d'Huez"?

Matthew 7:3 http://scriptures.lds.org/en/matt/7
 
jackhammer111 said:
kohl bannished himself.
Yes, not because he's speaking. or spoke really. he has nothing new to say.

Another day and still no news of Kohl's new contract.:rolleyes:

You really are nothing more than an Omerta idoliser.
You are the one with nothing new to say.
It's attitudes like yours that have put us in the mess we are in, today.

Realise this. Jaksche never failed a dope test. They guy who is criticising him, has; both officially and unofficially.
So if you want to talk about self serving expert on doping, look no further.
 

whiteboytrash

BANNED
Mar 17, 2009
525
0
0
Visit site
TRDean said:
WBT? You have been a complete jerk to me over the past month or so, then come on here and give "I know stuff I can't tell you" posts that are seem very sincere and informative. For the record, I hope you are right about Jorg. But please forgive me if I have a real hard time "trusting" your input here.

You should trust my input. Some more context around Jorg's comments. He didn't actually contact the UCI but McQuaid called him in as he did with all Puerto riders. Pat told Jorg to keep zip until Puerto blew over. He said if he wanted to ride again he could but he had to shut it. McQuaid had the evidence in the form of about 500 pages from the Spanish Police. He kept telling the media it was delayed, then it needed to be translated then he said pieces were missing etc. etc. etc. Jorg agreed to shut it as he thought it would go away and he had assurances from the UCI that it would.

However some bright spark was making a killing selling the Purerto documents to the press and also back to sporting authorties - to shut down the story.

As dribs & drabs of the story was printed daily in European papers Jorgs name came up and his doping program. He was still denying under the guidance of the UCI but eventually enough was enough. He was lying to his family, laying to his friends and lying to the media. He decided to confess and has never felt better. He kept training in the hope that cycling would change. It didn't and McQuaid cut him loose telling any team that hired him would be banned from races. It should be noted that JJ didn't confess because he was caught but because he didn't want to love the lie anymore. By not confessing he would have gained so much more.

I would listen to what JJ has to say more over an idiot like Hamilton.

Lance knows by telling the world that this guy
 
This argument is so freaking stupid it is not even worth having. This is the sort of crap that apologists were giving us four and five years ago when they would come up with the most laughable and convoluted logic to convince themselves that doping is not rampant in the pro ranks. After the revelations, busts, lies, police raids, confessions, and trials, the people making these sorts of arguments largely disappeared. They were laughed off the boards. Many just slunk off, embarrassed at having their long held and vociferously expressed lines of reasoning exposed as utterly bogus and made into the punch lines of jokes.

*facepalm*

I am gobsmacked that there are actually still supposed fans of cycling that can think that doping is not prevalent at the top. Just go grab a list of the top ten riders in the TdF from 1995 - 2005 and mark off all the ones that have been shown to be doping. More than 80% are known to be dopers. Factor in the performance gains that come from drugs like EPO or techniques like blood transfusions, and it is hard to make a case for any of the top ten being clean.
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
Visit site
BroDeal said:
This argument is so freaking stupid it is not even worth having. This is the sort of crap that apologists were giving us four and five years ago when they would come up with the most laughable and convoluted logic to convince themselves that doping is not rampant in the pro ranks. After the revelations, busts, lies, police raids, confessions, and trials, the people making these sorts of arguments largely disappeared. They were laughed off the boards. Many just slunk off, embarrassed at having their long held and vociferously expressed lines of reasoning exposed as utterly bogus and made into the punch lines of jokes.

*facepalm*

I am gobsmacked that there are actually still supposed fans of cycling that can think that doping is not prevalent at the top. Just go grab a list of the top ten riders in the TdF from 1995 - 2005 and mark off all the ones that have been shown to be doping. More than 80% are known to be dopers. Factor in the performance gains that come from drugs like EPO or techniques like blood transfusions, and it is hard to make a case for any of the top ten being clean.

In 2015 these people will be telling us how obvious it was in 2009 that most riders were on something, but that "now (2015) they're all clean". And so on.

It's a neverending cycle. We must live with it.
 
Mar 10, 2009
350
0
0
www.rolfraehansen.com
issoisso said:
It's a neverending cycle. We must live with it.

Must we? If the fans (i.e. the consumers of the team sponsors' products complain enough then the sport would be forced to change. For as long as we turn a blind eye, and wish that CN would only print 'positive' stories and Armstrong Twitter comments, the cycle will continue. We have to speak out if we want the sport to change, if we want it to be a sport and not a doped charade.
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
Visit site
rolfrae said:
Must we? If the fans (i.e. the consumers of the team sponsors' products complain enough then the sport would be forced to change. For as long as we turn a blind eye, and wish that CN would only print 'positive' stories and Armstrong Twitter comments, the cycle will continue. We have to speak out if we want the sport to change, if we want it to be a sport and not a doped charade.

I agree we have to speak out, but you're being idealistic if you think that's going to accomplish anything.
 
byu123 said:
Waduya Think "Alpe d'Huez"?

I think you didn't answer my question. Yes, or no. Do you believe what Papp said about doping in cycling as being true? OR is he just a cheater who made "self-serving statements after they were caught"? And that Papp falls into "Once they are caught they have a lot to gain by casting aspersions on everyone else . . ."

Which is it? Is Papp a self-serving liar casting aspersions on everyone else, or do you believe what he said is true about doping in the sport?

BroDeal said:
Just go grab a list of the top ten riders in the TdF from 1995 - 2005 and mark off all the ones that have been shown to be doping. More than 80% are known to be dopers. Factor in the performance gains that come from drugs like EPO or techniques like blood transfusions, and it is hard to make a case for any of the top ten being clean.

Did deeper, Bro. Look at all the GT's, and the top 25 in each of them.

I'd like to think we can change things, a little. Making the sport entirely clean? No. I'm not naive.
 
Mar 10, 2009
350
0
0
www.rolfraehansen.com
issoisso said:
I agree we have to speak out, but you're being idealistic if you think that's going to accomplish anything.

I agree, but I'd rather be an idealist than a sychophant, conned by a bunch of liars. I love the sport of cycling, that's why I care, that's whyI would choose to speak out.
 

TRENDING THREADS