Join the dots? How dirty is Lotto?

[pmcg76]

No, it isn't hypocrisy to suggest that the list is flagging up some riders while missing the majority.

It isn't hypocrisy to ask questions about the riders and their teams who scored highly.

Lotto are having a strong Giro which goes alongside a strong spring with Gilbert - if it were a team with a 'dirty' reputation like Cack, Astana or Katusha there would be a lot more eyebrows being raised in their direction but because its Lotto there are far fewer questions being asked (imo that is hypocrisy).

You are conflating issues when you compare a rider who came 42nd in last years TDF on one team and who is now a potential top 5 finisher while riding on for a different team. Performance changes when you get on a better programme.

Needless to say we will have to agree to disagree.

Hold on a second, you go around here shouting this guy is doping and that team is doping and when someone challenges you on it, you close up shop and claim 'we agree to disagree'. You are incedibly aggressive in your posturing and anyone who even suggests a rider or team you dont believe is clean, you immediately shout them down or dismiss them as naive or stupid. Most of the time peolpe are asked to provide some proof to back their claims.

I am neither naive or stupid, I have followed this sport long enough to not be foolish enough to believe in anything with too much faith. However, I take issue with people who just throw out stuff based on very little or whom seem to apply random logic or double standards when judging who dopes.

I asked a direct question about your opinion on the riders with a 0-1 score on the UCI index and you simply ignored it!
I also challenged your '98% are doped to the gills' claim as based on the UCI list this is far from the case. Again you ignored it.


Some of your evidence for OPL doping is that they have two riders high on the UCI list, you then apply the team doping ploy to OPL but at the same time suggest Le mevel was cleaner last year becasue he was at Lfdj yet they also have a rider high on the UCI list. If you apply this approach to one team, then you should do it for them all.

Ok, lets look at Lotto's 'strong' Giro.

Yes, they done very well in the TTT but aside from the prologue there have been 3 tough days. The first one was the stage over the strade bianche to Oriveto, first finisher for OPL was Gert Dockx in 40th.

The next one was the MTF to Montevergine which De Clercq won and the peloton doddled but still almost caught him, the first 29 riders finished together and the first 50 finished within a minute of the winner. That hardly represents a MTF ridden at full pelt. Oh yeah the next OPL finisher after De Clercq was Bakelants in 30th at 17seconds.

Finally, the stage to Etna where Bakelants got in the break which was caught and brought back and Bakelants eventually finished 22nd, the next OPL finisher was De Greef in 33rd and De Clercq in 47th.

So apart from De Clercq winning at Montevergine, OPL havent placed a rider in the Top 20 in any of the difficult days, clearly they are doping
I dont see anyone pointing fingers at Astana in this Giro but on each of these days they placed 3-4 riders in front of the first OPL rider other than Montevergine. At Etna they had 4 guys in the first 25. The current highest placed OPL rider on GC is Bakelants in 27th, Astana have 3 guys above that.

So the new proof of doping seems to be riders attacking, yes OPL have been visible in the Giro but appearences can be deceptive as shown by their actual results. Actually check the results and you will see AG2R have been doing better than OPL in the results page but have been less visible. That would be AG2R who finished at the top of the UCI index of suspicion.

Ironically, it is yourself and a few others who would be first in line shouting if RadioShack, Katusha or Astana were perfroming. Surely if OPL are doping based on their performances at the Giro, then that standard would hold RadioShack are riding clean at the Giro as they have been rubbish apart from Popo getting in breaks and then blowing up.

As I said, double standards seem to be the norm, you can say I am conflating issues all you want but until you provide some consistent logic and reasoning, and answer some questions I will call BS on your claims.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I've told you my opinion. You haven't accepted my opinion and you aren't really interested in the points I've made - instead choosing to keep on repeating the same questions I've already answered. Therefore, we have to agree to disagree. You can think and say whatever you like but it isn't going to stop me i) having opinions or ii) starting threads.

On the subject of ignoring things - you ignored 18-Valve.

The 98% dirty claim stands up as I don't believe the biopassport is very effective at catching people. Like all methods of dope testing it catches a very small minority. Thus there is no contradiction in fact that riders scored 0-1 but could still be dirty. I certainly don't think Uncle Hein's 1-2% dirty claim is remotely plausible and in my opinion it is the other way round.

This is a thread about Lotto, not about the other teams you've mentioned - if you want to discuss them then fine. I was interested in looking at Lotto.

You don't think Lotto are as dirty as other teams, you've said why and that is fine by me. If you want to get angry about it then that is not my problem.

 

[Scatto]

Rumours on JVDB reached me too, last year, with three or four degrees of separation.

We should continue being suspicious about anything that moves. It is not damaging the sport, and neither is this useless test schedule the UCI leaked.

I also don't believe in testing anymore. Anyone who's ever had a bloodtest knows it all depends on the substances tested for. You cannot simply say that the blood or urine is ok or in line with any trend if there are so many variables to follow and I don't believe they do that. One day, a rider will be caught and say: someone put something in my drinks (as did Merckx, but now legitimately).

We need to know who's that someone, why he did it, who gave the substance to him. Only detectives can find out. A positive test should only be one starting point. If proven guilty after thorough research (i.e. proving the intention to dope), the sentences should be much fiercer. The testing road only costs money and doesn't keep us from thinking everyone is still taking PEDs.

 

[pmcg76]

I've told you my opinion. You haven't accepted my opinion and you aren't really interested in the points I've made - instead choosing to keep on repeating the same questions I've already answered. Therefore, we have to agree to disagree. You can think and say whatever you like but it isn't going to stop me i) having opinions or ii) starting threads.

On the subject of ignoring things - you ignored 18-Valve.

The 98% dirty claim stands up as I don't believe the biopassport is very effective at catching people. Like all methods of dope testing it catches a very small minority. Thus there is no contradiction in fact that riders scored 0-1 but could still be dirty. I certainly don't think Uncle Hein's 1-2% dirty claim is remotely plausible and in my opinion it is the other way round.

This is a thread about Lotto, not about the other teams you've mentioned - if you want to discuss them then fine. I was interested in looking at Lotto.

You don't think Lotto are as dirty as other teams, you've said why and that is fine by me. If you want to get angry about it then that is not my problem.

Ah, I see you are only interested in debating other peoples opinion's, not your own. Got it.

I also addressed your points, perhaps you can highlight the points I missed. I posted OPL results at the Giro which shows they are not performing amazingly as you seem to think.

It was you who mentioned people questioning Astana, Katusha and Cack, I merely highlighted the fact that Astana are performing well yet nobody is questioning their performances this Giro and Cack are doing well Cack so if a team is doing well they are doping but if they are not then surely the opposite applies.

I didnt realise 18-Valv had asked me a question, he made a statement which is not entirely accurate but sure I will address it.

So keeping with the consistency and standards you claim you set, I am sure I can expect a new thread. Join the dot, How dirty is AG2R? any time soon.

Why? Well AG2R are doing well at the Giro as I had already highlighted before Gadret won today. Better than OPL in fact.

They have a rider Nocentini who is an 8 on the UCI chart like the OPL riders.

They have already had a rider suspended Valjavec for blood anomalies.

Oh I forgot they have a rider Nicolas Roche who is clearly protected by the UCI

Surely this points to team wide doping. I wait with baited breath.

 

[pmcg76]

Only the riders that fall into the 0-1 category have no suspicious anomalies in their blood profiles. The majority of riders do not fit into those two categories.

But what would happen if these riders were tested more often? It's anyone's guess, really. Blood tests are relatively few and far between. A "4" - a stable passport MOST of the time - could have just as easily been a "0" with a bit of luck.

You are right, it doesnt make a majority but approximately 45% is more than 2% as has been claimed several times on here. Thats if you any faith in the list. BTW I am not saying these guys are 100% clean but it would seem the chances of them blood doping are low and according to most on here, blood doping is what makes the big difference performance wise.

I see your point about the less frequent testing but there is a flip side. Surely people dont believe Sulzberger, Mayoz, Oss, Reda, Thomas, Isasi, Morabito, hell even Lloyd are tested far more frequently than the likes of Voeckler, Zabriskie, Roche, Renshaw, Chavanel, Casar, Gesink. Surely there are anomalies high up as well as low down like Cancellara, Horner being 0.

Why would some guys who are rarely tested show up on 5 or above whilst other guys who are rarely tested show 0-1. You really believe that is down to pure luck or is it a case of all the guys at 0-1 being better at manipulating their profile than the likes of Armstrong, Contador, Schleck, Evans, Vino who are all in the mid range 2-5. I really cannot see the likes of Turgot, Arashiro, Oroz, Auge having a better blood manipulation system than the big stars

I think there are anomalies all over the UCI list but in general, I wouldnt dismiss it out of hand. TBH I am not too bothered about the list but I find the idea of people using one or two individuals scores alongside a few decent performances as some proof of team wide doping as gross misrepresentation.

 

[Willy_Voet]

So keeping with the consistency and standards you claim you set, I am sure I can expect a new thread. Join the dot, How dirty is AG2R? any time soon.

Why? Well AG2R are doing well at the Giro as I had already highlighted before Gadret won today. Better than OPL in fact.

They have a rider Nocentini who is an 8 on the UCI chart like the OPL riders.

They have already had a rider suspended Valjavec for blood anomalies.

Oh I forgot they have a rider Nicolas Roche who is clearly protected by the UCI

Surely this points to team wide doping. I wait with baited breath.

Oh, oh, oh and don't forget about their long history of hiring dopers: Tadej Valjavec, Mancebo.

 

[L'arriviste]

Oh, oh, oh and don't forget about their long history of hiring dopers: Tadej Valjavec, Mancebo.

+= Nocentini's narrow escape from prosecution for possession of caffeine tablets in the 2001 Giro blitz.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

AG2R do have teh worst reputation in France. I'm on a french forum as well and they complain about it all the time. Gadret and Dupont also have the worst reputation in france of being (former) "chargers"

 

[Willy_Voet]

AG2R do have teh worst reputation in France. I'm on a french forum as well and they complain about it all the time. Gadret and Dupont also have the worst reputation in france of being (former) "chargers"

Really? I thought Cofidis would have that distinction, or is that sooo 5 years ago?

Certainly the recent success of Europcar/Voeckler must place them on the "Top 3 Most Dirty French Teams" list.

 

[pmcg76]

AG2R do have teh worst reputation in France. I'm on a french forum as well and they complain about it all the time. Gadret and Dupont also have the worst reputation in france of being (former) "chargers"

I dont doubt that, they would be the most suspicious of the French teams to me also based on some previous riders, not so much now. Cofidis was definitely like so long ago its not real.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Ah, I see you are only interested in debating other peoples opinion's, not your own. Got it.

I also addressed your points, perhaps you can highlight the points I missed. I posted OPL results at the Giro which shows they are not performing amazingly as you seem to think.

It was you who mentioned people questioning Astana, Katusha and Cack, I merely highlighted the fact that Astana are performing well yet nobody is questioning their performances this Giro and Cack are doing well Cack so if a team is doing well they are doping but if they are not then surely the opposite applies.

I didnt realise 18-Valv had asked me a question, he made a statement which is not entirely accurate but sure I will address it.

So keeping with the consistency and standards you claim you set, I am sure I can expect a new thread. Join the dot, How dirty is AG2R? any time soon.

Why? Well AG2R are doing well at the Giro as I had already highlighted before Gadret won today. Better than OPL in fact.

They have a rider Nocentini who is an 8 on the UCI chart like the OPL riders.

They have already had a rider suspended Valjavec for blood anomalies.

Oh I forgot they have a rider Nicolas Roche who is clearly protected by the UCI

Surely this points to team wide doping. I wait with baited breath.

If you want to discuss AG2R then please feel free to knock yourself out and start a thread discussing them. IMO they are just as worthy of question as any other team. I don't see it as an either or.

I am quite happy for this to broaden out into discussing other 'under the radar' teams like AG2R, FDJ, QS rather than the usual suspects - personally, I find all the Uniballer/Cack topics f-ing boring.

I answered your points, you repeated the same questions, nothing new is being added to the discussion short of going around in circles and unless you want it to degenerate into you calling me a **** and vice versa there is not much more to add, so we have to agree to disagree.

 

[laziali]

Not asking questions and being critical of riders, teams and the authorities is what has got this sport into the mess it is currently in.

If people had asked more questions then maybe the EPO era could have been dealt with instead of being swept under the carpet.

If people had asked more questions earlier then maybe Armstrong would have been busted in 1999 instead of 12 years later.

Maybe if more questions had been asked about doping in Spain then Puerto etc might not have spiralled out of control.

Burying your head in the sand and saying 'don't question the riders' is not going to clean up the sport. Unless of course you are so naive that you think that because it's not discussed then it can't be happening.

Yeah, right, because the essentially unobserved postings of a like-minded bunch of forum warriors has SO much influence on the UCI.

And you're calling other people naive ...

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Having a more critical attitude and asking questions is a much better position to take than to roll over and blindly accept everything that the UCI says to us.

Remember how whenever anyone questioned Armstrong pre-Landis people were accused of anything from being anti-american to loving cancer, that there was no evidence other than the words of bitter haters. Which was very effective in shutting a lot of people up, and getting people to not ask questions and to accept the party line.

If people want to believe in the UCI, riders and fairy tales when they tell is that doping is a thing of the past then go for it. I'm afraid I can't help them - only to tell them that neither Santa Claus nor a clean peloton exist.

To paraphrase George Orwell 'Nothing short of dynamite will convince some people which century they are living in.'

Just out of interest for people who think this thread is a great slur on Lotto - what exactly would they have to do to be worthy of a thread questioning how clean they are?

 

[pmcg76]

Having a more critical attitude and asking questions is a much better position to take than to roll over and blindly accept everything that the UCI says to us.

Remember how whenever anyone questioned Armstrong pre-Landis people were accused of anything from being anti-american to loving cancer, that there was no evidence other than the words of bitter haters. Which was very effective in shutting a lot of people up, and getting people to not ask questions and to accept the party line.

If people want to believe in the UCI, riders and fairy tales when they tell is that doping is a thing of the past then go for it. I'm afraid I can't help them - only to tell them that neither Santa Claus nor a clean peloton exist.

To paraphrase George Orwell 'Nothing short of dynamite will convince some people which century they are living in.'

Just out of interest for people who think this thread is a great slur on Lotto - what exactly would they have to do to be worthy of a thread questioning how clean they are?

In general I dont have a problem with people questioning performances and I also agree more questions should be asked. I understand when people open a thread questioning Lance, Cancellara, Di Luca, Contador whoever. When a performance looks too good to be true thats fine. I get that. But its when they jump the gun and go of at the deep end which is annoying.

To implicate a whole team based on one or two riders who are suspicious is just clutching at straws. Yes Gilbert had a storming Ardennes but he has been getting stronger each year, its not like he rode everyone of his wheel 30km from the finish and soloed to victory in each race.

The blood passport might not have eroded doping but surely it has narrowed the gap between the big dopers/responders and the lesser maybe cleanish riders. Yes it looks bad when the last person to do the triple was Rebellin who was of course busted but that was 7-8 years. Do you believe the doping landscape has not altered at all since then and that the gap might have narrowed making it possible for cleaner riders to have a chance.

JVDB and Matt Lloyd were high on the UCI suspicion chart, fair enough. I would be suspicious of VDB myself considering he was so well up in the 08 Giro. Lloyd I dont know, could be an anomaly as much as Sulzberger is or Horner being 0. But the thing is you see three riders under suspicion and the next thing you are labelling the entire team, that is what is unjustified.

Your charge was OPL were kicking **** at the Giro which as I demonstrated by the results is not the case, of couse you chose to ignore those stats. Yes they were very visible the first week and regularly on the attack but fact is they had very little results except De Clercq winning when the bunch soft pedalled behind. Where was De Clercq when the **** went down on Mt Etna? Nowhere. Bakelants was aggressive the first week but dropped 15minutes yesterday. In fact most of the OPL guys were well down yesteday. At the end of yesterday, the top OPL rider was De Greef in 41st@19min followed by Bakelants in 45th@21min. Dropping away after riding aggresssively for one week is hardly evidence of doping.

If OPL performance at the Giro is your evidence of team doping, we would need to start a thread about every single team at the Giro, so we then get to a situation where if every team is doping why are OPL being singled out. In a race where everyone is clean, someone will still stand out the same way in a race where everyone is dirty, someone will still stand out. Whats the difference, there still has to be a winner.

If OPL had a load victories besides Gilbert this year and then came in won the TTT, two/three mountain stages and had three guys sitting in the Top10-15 at the Giro right now, then I would be getting worked up. The problem is too many people jump the gun and see evidence of doping where there is no real evidence. Each individual case needs to be taken on its own merit, no general sweeping all of team X are doping because 2 guys are dodgy.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

No my dear you didn't demonstrate anything other than an inability to read and an over-inflated sense of self-importance. Which is why it is pointless to try to discuss anything with you as you seem to have mistaken this for a **** waving competition.

I said in my first post 'Very strong Giro ride so far, stage win and lots of attacks from different Lotto riders' (alongside Gilbert, Lloyd and JVDB) you over-reacted to the Giro being included and went off on one. Which you are still doing.

If we followed your guidelines then no team would ever be accused of being dirty. Which is probably what you want.

 

[pmcg76]

No my dear you didn't demonstrate anything other than an inability to read and an over-inflated sense of self-importance. Which is why it is pointless to try to discuss anything with you as you seem to have mistaken this for a **** waving competition.

I said in my first post 'Very strong Giro ride so far, stage win and lots of attacks from different Lotto riders' (alongside Gilbert, Lloyd and JVDB) you over-reacted to the Giro being included and went off on one. Which you are still doing.

If we followed your guidelines then no team would ever be accused of being dirty. Which is probably what you want.

I really have seen it all now "an over inflated sense of self-importance"

From a guy who believes 98% of pro cyclists doped yet feels the need to open another 'X rider/team doped' because some guys attacked at the Giro.

Then calls people 'naive' and with their 'hands in the sand' because they dont agree.

Finally states that he doesnt care what other people think and will A)continue to post his opinion and B)start threads about his opinion.

How many threads has John Murphy started in the clinic?

You are right, I am the one with an over inflated sense of self-importance. Why is it pointless to discuss with me? Because I and quite a few other consider some of what you count as evidence lack credibility. Is that it.

It is clear that this is the way you want this to go with personal attacks, as then the mods will step in and close the thread or whatever. Sorry, I dont do personal attacks, I actually agree with you a lot of the time but there is a point when you stretch it too far.

You included OPL perfroming 'very strong at the Giro' as part of your evidence of 'joining the dots' and now you are whining because someone is contesting that point. If you dont want it debated or discussed, dont post it, simple really. You were quick to call other people naive when they voiced their opinion.

I clearly listed what I would consider suspicious OPL perfromances at the Giro in my previous post. Fact is I dont know what the deal is with doping in the peloton, I am open minded but if there is a lot of evidence(including performance) stacked against a rider, then I will accept that but it takes a lot more than some guys attacking as evidence. For example Chris Horner I find hard to believe in.

As I said if you believe that 98% of the peloton is doped and you consider riders attacking as evidence of doping, then why single out individual teams as we can already figure out that is what you feel about every team and guy who attacks. It seems pointless.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

That is a lot of effort for not much reward. You also seem to be struggling to accept that different people have different opinions to you. Sorry, but I don't find your arguments (and they are just opinions and arguments - nothing more) at all convincing and no matter how many times you repeat them and no matter how many things you accuse me of, that isn't going to make me anymore likely to take them seriously.

Have you ever thought of applying your own standards to yourself? You were the one who started down the personal line. You get upset about accusations of naivety but have no problem accusing me of hypocrisy. Pots and kettles etc. You were the one who couldn't accept that I don't agree with your opinion of Lotto in the Giro. When I said we will have to agree to disagree you couldn't even manage that.

As I said before, we have to agree to disagree because you don't accept my opinion and I don't accept yours.

 

[Frosty]

Been some good performances on individual stages so far but leading overall contender for OPL in the Giro after stage 13 - De Greef 40th at 25.31. Think they might have been showing a lot early on because they havent got a sprinter or anyone for the GC. Probably look to get people in breakaways over the remainder of the race.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

'I told you so?'

 

[Cimacoppi49]

No. On that basis anytime anyone does well, they most be on drugs.

BINGO!!! We have a winner! Ding, ding, ding!!!

 

[roundabout]

It seems Vanendert was pretty close to Armstrong times of the glory years today.

He wouldn't have made the top-10 in 1998 but was faster than Heras in 2002 and Totschnig in 2004.

 

[classicomano]

Theres obviously some sort of new wonderdrug being passed around in the peleton, but not everyone has caught up yet.

 

[Lanark]

I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for the longest time, but this was just a joke. I have no doubt VDB would have won this Tour without a crash. It's like Saunier Duval revisited.

 

[yourwelcome]

Theres obviously some sort of new wonderdrug being passed around in the peleton, but not everyone has caught up yet.

One of the perks of riding for a pharma sponsor

 

[roundabout]

Btw, 14th stage out of 14 with OPL in the top-10 on the stage. 3 wins, 4 second places and one of the star riders out on stage 9.