Unbelievable. Anyone who doesn't mimic a certain attitude is fair game for the fodder of accusation and innuendo.
Going after Jens Voigt is what is ridiculous. Honestly, don't people have better things to do that speculate about riders doping and insult them? And its friggin' Jens Voigt for Christ's sake!
Going after Jens Voigt is what is ridiculous. Honestly, don't people have better things to do that speculate about riders doping and insult them? And its friggin' Jens Voigt for Christ's sake!
- Sep 29, 2012
- 12,197
- 0
- 0
He offered to be restested. I asked on Twitter if he'd release his biological passport values instead - no need for retesting.
No response. Halloween is the focus of many tweets now.
Even so.
How about it Jens? Ready to man up?
No response. Halloween is the focus of many tweets now.
Even so.
How about it Jens? Ready to man up?
- Mar 17, 2009
- 8,414
- 947
- 19,680
Cycle Chic said:
I understand we are in a period where everybody is doubted since the whole pandora box has been wide unvailed to the public & is logic to start a thorought scrutiny on everyone in Pro cycling........ But we have to distinguish who is who in the peloton.... Jens might have his own program going on-but he ain't breaking records or suddenly dropping the climbers In a MTF stage...he has won what his skills allow him to do-not less, no more..
- Sep 26, 2009
- 2,848
- 1
- 11,485
What is your point Cycle Chic? That is all you could produce so far and that is grounds to call Jens ridiculous? We have one sentence, where he recalls, what another rider said.
And how do we know that it was even meant seriously? Voigt makes jokes all the time, like that 'astana getting eaten by bears' thing.
So he knew that doping was going on. He never said he didn't know. He said he didn't witness it, as in being present when someone injects.
So what was the point of that post?
And how do we know that it was even meant seriously? Voigt makes jokes all the time, like that 'astana getting eaten by bears' thing.
So he knew that doping was going on. He never said he didn't know. He said he didn't witness it, as in being present when someone injects.
So what was the point of that post?
Cycle Chic said:
Auch, I value Jaksche's opinion highly, this does make Jens look bad, surely if he supposedly "never seen" anything (which is far fetched anyway after 20y pro cycling). Good info
I don't expect one. The USADA report has made it abundently clear, how monumentally stupid you have to be to actually be caught.Benotti69 said:
See first post. And keep in mind that all those you explicitely named were at USPS at some time and those two specifically did not cross Armstrong after they left. Those that did miraculously popped quite shortly afterwards.Benotti69 said:
Never having returned a positive isn't saying much, now that we know the gory details of the USADA report.
There is a chance that he is. About the same chance that he isn't. In absence of any real indications it's 50:50 for me. Most in here insist that he's a doper based on no facts at all and I give him the benefit of doubt, equally based on no facts at all. We don't have any riders saying they know that he doped, he wasn't implicated in Operacion Puerto, the Festina Affair, the Freiburg Report and he never was part of USPS, Astana and only ended up at Radioshack due to them merging with Leopard. That's quite a lot of scandals to make it through without even being named, while just about any other German rider fell on his face in one of these scandals. Jaksche's mention of him does not constitute much of an implication, IMHO. Could he be the German Bassons? The one good apple in a box of rotten ones? Yes, but the chance of him being the German Hincapie, who denies until given no other option is just as big.Benotti69 said:
I'd think that his wife and kids have a permant claim on that position, but I do like the breakaway nutcase a lot, yes. Which is whyBenotti69 said:
a) I will be devastated should he be exposed as a liar
b) I'm still clutching at that little straw that he speaks the truth.
wannab said:
Jens turned pro in 1997. That's 15 years, not twenty. Doesn't make a damn difference, but it's funny that people think they can judge the truthfulness of his statements, while having a hard time to calculate something as easy as 2012-1997.
Lukenwolf said:
1. Your right, it doesn't make a difference.
2. If it doesn't matter, why is it funny. I'm off by 5 years (of his PRO cycling career) and thus I can't "judge" anything it seems .. yes that is funny
lets to a math test, only those who pass can speak/discuss "the truth"
I think you know very well when reading 20y that people imply on his long term cycling career in the most rotten periods of cycling.
All I said is that I value Jaksche's opinion, + Jens saying he's never seen anything in 15y (sorry) pro cycling is hard to believe.
To think this way doesn't seem that funny imo (rather logic), so yes, I have a hard time believing his statements, I'm not judging anyone.
- May 20, 2009
- 8,934
- 7
- 17,495
+1wannab said:1. Your right, it doesn't make a difference.
2. If it doesn't matter, why is it funny. I'm off by 5 years (of his PRO cycling career) and thus I can't "judge" anything it seems .. yes that is funny
lets to a math test, only those who pass can speak/discuss "the truth"
I think you know very well when reading 20y that people imply on his long term cycling career in the most rotten periods of cycling.
All I said is that I value Jaksche's opinion, + Jens saying he's never seen anything in 15y (sorry) pro cycling is hard to believe.
To think this way doesn't seem that funny imo (rather logic), so yes, I have a hard time believing his statements, I'm not judging anyone.
Lukenwolf is only selectively answering questions. He turns the blind eye or deflects the conversation when Voigt's naïvité is mentioned.
cineteq said:+1
Lukenwolf is only selectively answering questions. He turns the blind eye or deflects the conversation when Voigt's naïvité is mentioned.
I answered quite a lot of questions. My definition of selectively differs from yours obviously. I'm not turning a blind eye on anything. You obviously have been reading my posts selectively.
And to answer your implicit question. One doesn't have to be naive to not see any doping first-hand (interestingly that word is left out by most.)
Voigt claims he never doped. As hard as it is to believe that, using it as a working theory then it would make sense that he never witnessed the act. What do you expect? Riis knocking on Jens' door and go "Hey Jens, come on over Ivan [Basso] is going to top-up. Maybe you'll change your mind about trying it."
If (as unlikely as it sounds) Jens did indeed not dope, it would be believable that he never saw it as it usually was performed behind closed doors. That's my theory and I'm sticking to it.
- May 20, 2009
- 8,934
- 7
- 17,495
This post is a clear example of what I said. You refuse to comment on Voigt's selective memory. Let's see, a rider who has lived and hanged out, say 1/2 to 1/3 of the year, with other riders who were dopers for 15 years (not 20), never saw anything about doping.Lukenwolf said:
Maybe part of what he says is true, but by lying about 'not seeing anything' does not add up for your hero.
So funny how people get hung up on that one sentence (and spin it, so that it'll match their blanket suspicion). I'll post a few quotes that I personally found interesting:
I think he expresses things quite clear. Didn't we ask that from the riders?
A different spin on the age argument. One can take it this way or the other, but I think that his version sounds more believable, but then I'm clearly biased.
THat's the statement that everyone is getting so hung up about. The bold parts take on a wider meaning as was used in the two Threads that have been dedicated to him.
He knew there was doping in the pack, else he couldn't have suspected some riders of actually doing it. And then he says he never saw anything firsthand. and could therefore not call anyone out.
This is where it gets technical. First of all, Jens did not write this text himself, or he provided a draft that was heavily edited. If you look at Jens' tweets, you'll see that his English is rather simplistic with a lot of grammatical and spelling mistakes. And he speaks with an attrocious accent.
The reason for that is that English was very inadequately taught in East Germany. We had to learn Russian starting from 3rd or 5th grade (3rd for those who later wanted to apply for a university in another east-bloc country, so mainly people who wanted to become party-apparatchiks). English was a voluntary subject and not taught before the 7th grade. So most of us East Germans had 3 years of English lessons with 2 lessons a week and are generally crap at it.
Judging from how well phrased that article is, I'd hazard a guess that Jens provided a german draft that was translated and edited.
The most exact translation for "never saw anything firsthand" is "niemals was mit eigenen Augen gesehen" which means word for word literally "never saw anything with my own eyes". There are about 5 different German words/terms for 'firsthand', but only one that goes with the verb 'see'. So basically he's saying he never saw any doping with his own eyes. That implies he may well have been told about it by someone else, but since he did not see it himself, he couldn't accuse those that he suspected. That is a clear reference to the USADA report and the affidavits of Hamilton, Landis & Co. and the fact that USADA put much emphasis on the fact that they saw the actual EPO vials and the needle stuck in Armstrongs Arm.
The important part is the 'calling someone out' bit. If you omit that you're taking the whole statement out of context. He never saw anything that would have enabled him to put out accusations against another rider, because he never saw anyone holding, disposing of or using PED's with his own eyes.
That does by no means imply that he never saw hints of doping. He might have seen medical waste in a trashcan or something, but he couldn't say who's it was (perhaps the team, but not the rider)
Sorry for the longwindedness of the post, just wanted to explain why I think that this statement sounds plausible to me.
" said:
I think he expresses things quite clear. Didn't we ask that from the riders?
" said:
A different spin on the age argument. One can take it this way or the other, but I think that his version sounds more believable, but then I'm clearly biased.
Jens Voigt said:
THat's the statement that everyone is getting so hung up about. The bold parts take on a wider meaning as was used in the two Threads that have been dedicated to him.
He knew there was doping in the pack, else he couldn't have suspected some riders of actually doing it. And then he says he never saw anything firsthand. and could therefore not call anyone out.
This is where it gets technical. First of all, Jens did not write this text himself, or he provided a draft that was heavily edited. If you look at Jens' tweets, you'll see that his English is rather simplistic with a lot of grammatical and spelling mistakes. And he speaks with an attrocious accent.
The reason for that is that English was very inadequately taught in East Germany. We had to learn Russian starting from 3rd or 5th grade (3rd for those who later wanted to apply for a university in another east-bloc country, so mainly people who wanted to become party-apparatchiks). English was a voluntary subject and not taught before the 7th grade. So most of us East Germans had 3 years of English lessons with 2 lessons a week and are generally crap at it.
Judging from how well phrased that article is, I'd hazard a guess that Jens provided a german draft that was translated and edited.
The most exact translation for "never saw anything firsthand" is "niemals was mit eigenen Augen gesehen" which means word for word literally "never saw anything with my own eyes". There are about 5 different German words/terms for 'firsthand', but only one that goes with the verb 'see'. So basically he's saying he never saw any doping with his own eyes. That implies he may well have been told about it by someone else, but since he did not see it himself, he couldn't accuse those that he suspected. That is a clear reference to the USADA report and the affidavits of Hamilton, Landis & Co. and the fact that USADA put much emphasis on the fact that they saw the actual EPO vials and the needle stuck in Armstrongs Arm.
The important part is the 'calling someone out' bit. If you omit that you're taking the whole statement out of context. He never saw anything that would have enabled him to put out accusations against another rider, because he never saw anyone holding, disposing of or using PED's with his own eyes.
That does by no means imply that he never saw hints of doping. He might have seen medical waste in a trashcan or something, but he couldn't say who's it was (perhaps the team, but not the rider)
Sorry for the longwindedness of the post, just wanted to explain why I think that this statement sounds plausible to me.
Poor 'they made me do it' Jorg... Leaves his tormentor Manolo for a year but stays in touch with the doctor, and then runs back to Manolo again...
More opinions than pills popped... Could it just be more convenient for Jorg's precious ego to stick to the theme 'everybody doped'? Sounds a lot easier to chew than 'I wasn't good enough without the dope'... Victim is far more palatable to public opinion than 'I couldn't get enough'...
I don't doubt that there is truth embedded in what he says, but I don't doubt that he is very gifted at telling a tale either. Personally, I like to see a heavy dose of corroboration to what he has to say before it passes the credibility check, and even then I don't trust his given motives. The same goes for Landis, Hamilton, and Armstrong (if and when he sings).
Who knows, maybe if another ten or so rings similar to Padova and Puerto are uncovered, I might buy into the idea that everybody in every team was on a programme, and not just a far too numerous, but still select few teams an their ex-riders diserpated throughout the peloton.
As for Jens, I have no doubt he knew about the dark side, hard not to having ridden with Jorg... Did he dope? Who knows, however, his ADD like personality would seem to be more than enough explanation for his adventures up the road?
A lot of posters here contribute very reasoned and apreciated arguments that highlight the issues well, and as valued as those contributions are, I find it a little sad that the effort is diluted with what often seems like hijacked and misdirected effort and blame. Without focus on solutions and the future, I fear that the reform saught might just be grasped as the manifesto by the agents you partly blamed for the mess that was endured.
More opinions than pills popped... Could it just be more convenient for Jorg's precious ego to stick to the theme 'everybody doped'? Sounds a lot easier to chew than 'I wasn't good enough without the dope'... Victim is far more palatable to public opinion than 'I couldn't get enough'...
I don't doubt that there is truth embedded in what he says, but I don't doubt that he is very gifted at telling a tale either. Personally, I like to see a heavy dose of corroboration to what he has to say before it passes the credibility check, and even then I don't trust his given motives. The same goes for Landis, Hamilton, and Armstrong (if and when he sings).
Who knows, maybe if another ten or so rings similar to Padova and Puerto are uncovered, I might buy into the idea that everybody in every team was on a programme, and not just a far too numerous, but still select few teams an their ex-riders diserpated throughout the peloton.
As for Jens, I have no doubt he knew about the dark side, hard not to having ridden with Jorg... Did he dope? Who knows, however, his ADD like personality would seem to be more than enough explanation for his adventures up the road?
A lot of posters here contribute very reasoned and apreciated arguments that highlight the issues well, and as valued as those contributions are, I find it a little sad that the effort is diluted with what often seems like hijacked and misdirected effort and blame. Without focus on solutions and the future, I fear that the reform saught might just be grasped as the manifesto by the agents you partly blamed for the mess that was endured.
Benotti69 said:
No, I don´t think so. Just to explain, here, at us in Germany, the small cycling world just gets either single or even multiple orgasms just when hearing the name "Jens Voigt". That´s getting worse from year to year.
- Sep 26, 2009
- 2,848
- 1
- 11,485
RHRH19861986 said:
Explains a lot !
.. a song sung by rider David Zabriskie in the Postal Service van, to the tune of Jimi Hendrix’s “Purple Haze”:
EPO all in my veins
Lately things just don’t seem the same
Actin’ funny, but I don’t know why
'Scuse me while I pass this guy
Jens ??
- Sep 29, 2012
- 12,197
- 0
- 0
- Jul 5, 2012
- 2,878
- 1
- 11,485
apropos of not much, but I think the personality of Jens provides some of the missing pieces. He is a notorious joker, he is very light hearted, he is not stupid but takes delight in simple things. But as Brad McGee said in Ride today, he is a killer on the bike. Its this nature that people warm to.
Personally I don't take the Jaske quote seriously. It was made 9 years after the "conversation". Jens had only just turned pro (at an older than usual age) with a tiny Aussie team, then joined GAN shortly before starting his first TdF. Why would Jaske or any rational person single out this complete rookie of all people to make any serious comment about how the the team or the peloton operates? In the midst of the shenanigans of Festina Affair? Jaske is also the exact polar ('scuse the pun) opposite in personality to Jens.
He very clearly states in the article several times he did not dope. Period. This is the definitive statement we have always been seeking when everyone else prevaricates. Give him some credit for that.
I tend to agree with lukenwolfs interpretation of the article and its probable origin. I got the distinct impression he was well aware about the doping but says he was not confronted (saw) with it, so was not interested. He is not claiming to be Sgt Schultz which some are suggesting. I think looking at his nature possibly explains why he could just not be bothered or interested in being more inquisitive or observant (like I would be) - he lives in his own little world.
And although he is 41, he is not the powerhouse of yesteryear. He is quietly fading, unleashing his trademark attacks more judiciously.
Just some perspective. Doping? Who knows. "they all did it", or "performed against known dopers" etc is not enough rationale for me.
Personally I don't take the Jaske quote seriously. It was made 9 years after the "conversation". Jens had only just turned pro (at an older than usual age) with a tiny Aussie team, then joined GAN shortly before starting his first TdF. Why would Jaske or any rational person single out this complete rookie of all people to make any serious comment about how the the team or the peloton operates? In the midst of the shenanigans of Festina Affair? Jaske is also the exact polar ('scuse the pun) opposite in personality to Jens.
He very clearly states in the article several times he did not dope. Period. This is the definitive statement we have always been seeking when everyone else prevaricates. Give him some credit for that.
I tend to agree with lukenwolfs interpretation of the article and its probable origin. I got the distinct impression he was well aware about the doping but says he was not confronted (saw) with it, so was not interested. He is not claiming to be Sgt Schultz which some are suggesting. I think looking at his nature possibly explains why he could just not be bothered or interested in being more inquisitive or observant (like I would be) - he lives in his own little world.
And although he is 41, he is not the powerhouse of yesteryear. He is quietly fading, unleashing his trademark attacks more judiciously.
Just some perspective. Doping? Who knows. "they all did it", or "performed against known dopers" etc is not enough rationale for me.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025 stage 20: Verrès – Sestrière, 205 km- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 1K
-
Tour de Suisse 2025 - Men's (June 15- June 22)- Started by Tricycle Rider
- Replies: 157
-
Giro d'Italia Giro D'italia 2025 Stage 16: Piazzola sul Brenta – San Valentino- Started by YavorD
- Replies: 1K
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025 Stage 17: San Michele all’Adige – Bormio, 155 km- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 742
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia stage 19 Biella – Champoluc 166km- Started by YavorD
- Replies: 664
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 30K
Latest posts
-
-
-
Florian Lipowitz is the new German GC hope discussion thread- Latest: Hugo Koblet
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram