Kimmage on Contador

Page 8 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 10, 2009
4,638
1
0
andy1234 said:
Kelly's 88 test was common knowledge. It doesn't get much of a mention subsequently because he didn't receive a ban.

Roche fell out with Kimmage from the moment Rough Ride was published. Its more a testament to Roche's mentality than anything said specifically about him by Kimmage.

I dont recall a criticism of either Roches or Kellys doping history in any version of Rough Ride.
Or anywhere else for that matter, but I would be interested to see it, if its out there.
It's clear from Chapter One of the revised edition where he spells ir out very clearly - also Kimmage very explicitly called out Stephen on Irish TV a few years back whereby he said that Stephen's excuses for the Conconi files were farcical. What more do you want?
 
Oct 29, 2009
2,578
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
I only learnt of Kellys 88 positive last year (and the link it is on is from 2000) -it was not reported in the media at the time.

Kimmage has critized them both - it is in the revison of his book.
If Kimmage did not critise Roch why is there such anomisty between Roche and Kimmage?
The question was: "why not at the time?". Because he had no keen desire to rock the boat whilst he was in it either?

I think that isn't the whole answer, but it certainly will be part of it.

The real confusing thing in this discussion here is that dope at the time was pretty common place as well, and breaking news of yet another high-flyer testing positive after the event was not that uncommon either.

But "positives" were seen and dealt with very differently then. Slap on the wrists, a fine, a few weeks or months in the sin-bin, maybe a rider would not be welcome the year after for the same race. But that was pretty much it. It wasn't nearly as dramatic as this, except when folk died from it, then it stirred the discussion for a while.

But we honoured them with monuments, and those riders are still seen as heroes we salute with respect, legends who paid the ultimate price in the pursuit of their sport. We don't treat them as dirty little "good riddance" cheats that we now have embraced as the appropriate response.

Partly, of-course, because dope wasn't so all-powerful as it is now. Some of it wasn't even illegal. I think the public got that what was used and around at the time, at most helped getting a result, not ruled the results table.

The big thing about Festina was the sheer scale, organisation, and race-altering influence it had. That drugs had become that good was the eye-opener for many. Not that there were drugs, or how wide-spread they were.

The reason Kimmage wasn't making a big stink is probably because most folk riding AND on the sidelines didn't see it as that big a problem. Not knowing where we would end up now. Still, he didn't take responsibility for his environment whilst riding. Kids in the peleton now pay the price. [*]

If there is one lesson for the current riders, that is it. "Good riddance" is a sideshow. And in my eyes, a distraction. I think it prologues the notion that these guys are on the outside and should remain there. It is the wrong fight. It helps the UCI to keep its image clean and maintain the myth that it is a rider problem. It also hurts some riders who are quite rightly asking why them, and not others? How is that for campaigning? :)


[*] The real problem might well be, from a rider pov, that some probably don't really mind as long as the chance of getting away with it is stacked in your favour, especially if it is that common place as we think it is - 3000k over an insane amount of mountains as well, something we demand as fans, is a lot easier to swallow after swallowing.
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
Berzin said:
I would rather see Contador get a slap on the wrist than see him go down for this. If it was a clear case of doping (EPO, testosterone, blood transfusion, HgH) then I would have no problem seeing him sanctioned. But I believe there are so many people hell-bent on seeing him go for whatever reason they are willing to suspend due process just to see Contador hang.
nowhereman said:
Given the venom that is being directed at AC for what has been found in his system.

For me there is too much grey area to condemn him as absolutely as many...have done.
This is a topic that I've wanted to address for some time. No need for another thread since it has become part of this one on several posts.

There has been a tremendous amount of venom cast toward Contador, and long before the "positive" test came to light. Not on this thread specifically, but on other threads here, and most certainly on other sites altogether. I would submit that there is one primary reason for the deep-seated hatred towards Contador: That is the narrative that was established by one particular, vindictive and sociopathic Texan before the 2009 TdF had even began.

Why is Contador seen as "the bad guy"? Not because of doping related issues. The vitriol was flowing quite easily long before that. The daggers had already, perhaps even skillfully, been sharpened and sheathed, by that master bladesmith himself, with the hope of such an excuse to withdraw them.

We had LA, very publicly (his interview with Paul Sherwen prior to the 2009 TDU comes to mind) state that he was fully prepared to be "the world's best domestique" if Contador proved to be "the stronger rider." "I mean, talk about tarnishing your legacy!" he so transparently offered. Suggesting that to do anything other than support the most likely winner would violate some deeply held "code" among the ranks.

And yet he did everything in his power to disrupt and subvert Contador's own ambitions for victory. How dare he attempt to win a second TdF when StrongArm was trying to win his eighth! Contador rode a better prologue, but that wasn't enough. As soon as LA had to chance to get the best of Contador in the crosswinds, he did. Was that a sign of "looking out for your teammates"? Because, ya' know, there's no "I" in team. Funny, there's no "I" in "Lance" either, and yet...

The narrative was set: Contador was there only to spoil the party for StrongArm. How dare he?! We all know how cordial StrongArm would've been if Indurain had somehow come barging into the USPS team for another run at the podium in 2000. :rolleyes:

What a joke. Contador (cheater or not, this is not my point) had won the Tour in 2007 under less than ideal circumstances (Rasmussen's late-race withdrawal). He then suffered the indignity of not being invited in 2008, only to return in 2009 to finally secure a win under his owner ability (enhanced or not). But then along comes StrongArm.

Most of the team, and--disgustingly so--the director as well, all turned on Contador. Much of the public blindly and obediently grabbed the torches. Contador was a bad man! :mad:

AC was put into impossible situations. Regardless of what contaminants may have been flowing through his veins in 2009 (maybe none, how would I know?) I couldn't but respect the guy for dealing with all that stress, and the difficulties of the situation, and still achieving his goal. He was turned on, by his own team! It was repulsive to watch and none the less to remember, even now.

StrongArm gave us this half-baked, low-budget-video return to the sport. The man who had previously and oh-so-proudly proclaimed to be "the first American, on and American sponsored team, on an American made bike" to win the TdF. He was now making his epic return to...team Borat? (No national disparaging is meant by that. Rather, it reflects the very sad fact that I had encountered more than one person who, prior to "2.0" believed Kazakhstan to be nothing more than an imagined and make-believe country for the purposes of that movie only. :()

StrongArm's return was bewildering to most at the time. How was Contador supposed to have taken the news? It was a horribly orchestrated resurrection that left no room for the practical details to be sorted out. "Here I come! Get out of my way!"

This is what seems to have been lost in the turmoil. Contador was painted as "bad" by the LA mafia, and the narrative only magnified every single thing that Contador has done, on or off the bike. LA also took full advantage of the fact that Contador is unable to properly defend himself to the English speaking press/public. How "worldly" of LA.

If anyone need look any further to get a glimpse of StrongArm's true character, then I can't help you (to coin a phrase). He was set on taking down Contador in any way he could. Funny as to how little StrongArm has had to say about the "positive" test, besides the occasional snide remark. Are we to believe that yet another rider who was at the peak of their abilities would be once again sharing the podium with a clean StrongArm, this time fresh off retirement?

(I fully realize that this is not an LA thread, but the above topic was raised by others, and the connections are self-evident.)
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Digger said:
What's their agenda tell me?

You seem happy to let them all dope up to their eyeballs? They are not - who's wrong here?
Clean up amateur sport first. Olympics, school sports. Whatever hatred they have for Roche senior, Lance, get over it.

If the drug enforcers in Colombia get hung up on individuals, do you think it will make anyone get out of the Cocaine business. Did it stop with Escobar?

Hey if the anti-doping authors ex cyclists, athletes whatever use their soapbox for the positive, more power to them.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
andy1234 said:
Kelly's 88 test was common knowledge. It doesn't get much of a mention subsequently because he didn't receive a ban.

Roche fell out with Kimmage from the moment Rough Ride was published. Its more a testament to Roche's mentality than anything said specifically about him by Kimmage.

I dont recall a criticism of either Roches or Kellys doping history in any version of Rough Ride.
Or anywhere else for that matter, but I would be interested to see it, if its out there.
what would you be interested to see in cleaning up the sport?

if not the media's spotlight shining on doping and cheats then who?
 
Mar 8, 2010
3,263
0
0
Granville57 said:
This is a topic that I've wanted to address for some time. No need for another thread since it has become part of this one on several posts.

There has been a tremendous amount of venom cast toward Contador, and long before the "positive" test came to light. Not on this thread specifically, but on other threads here, and most certainly on other sites altogether. I would submit that there is one primary reason for the deep-seated hatred towards Contador: That is the narrative that was established by one particular, vindictive and sociopathic Texan before the 2009 TdF had even began.

Why is Contador seen as "the bad guy"? Not because of doping related issues. The vitriol was flowing quite easily long before that. The daggers had already, perhaps even skillfully, been sharpened and sheathed, by that master bladesmith himself, with the hope of such an excuse to withdraw them.

We had LA, very publicly (his interview with Paul Sherwen prior to the 2009 TDU comes to mind) state that he was fully prepared to be "the world's best domestique" if Contador proved to be "the stronger rider." "I mean, talk about tarnishing your legacy!" he so transparently offered. Suggesting that to do anything other than support the most likely winner would violate some deeply held "code" among the ranks.

And yet he did everything in his power to disrupt and subvert Contador's own ambitions for victory. How dare he attempt to win a second TdF when StrongArm was trying to win his eighth! Contador rode a better prologue, but that wasn't enough. As soon as LA had to chance to get the best of Contador in the crosswinds, he did. Was that a sign of "looking out for your teammates"? Because, ya' know, there's no "I" in team. Funny, there's no "I" in "Lance" either, and yet...

The narrative was set: Contador was there only to spoil the party for StrongArm. How dare he?! We all know how cordial StrongArm would've been if Indurain had somehow come barging into the USPS team for another run at the podium in 2000. :rolleyes:

What a joke. Contador (cheater or not, this is not my point) had won the Tour in 2007 under less than ideal circumstances (Rasmussen's late-race withdrawal). He then suffered the indignity of not being invited in 2008, only to return in 2009 to finally secure a win under his owner ability (enhanced or not). But then along comes StrongArm.

Most of the team, and--disgustingly so--the director as well, all turned on Contador. Much of the public blindly and obediently grabbed the torches. Contador was a bad man! :mad:

AC was put into impossible situations. Regardless of what contaminants may have been flowing through his veins in 2009 (maybe none, how would I know?) I couldn't but respect the guy for dealing with all that stress, and the difficulties of the situation, and still achieving his goal. He was turned on, by his own team! It was repulsive to watch and none the less to remember, even now.

StrongArm gave us this half-baked, low-budget-video return to the sport. The man who had previously and oh-so-proudly proclaimed to be "the first American, on and American sponsored team, on an American made bike" to win the TdF. He was now making his epic return to...team Borat? (No national disparaging is meant by that. Rather, it reflects the very sad fact that I had encountered more than one person who, prior to "2.0" believed Kazakhstan to be nothing more than an imagined and make-believe country for the purposes of that movie only. :()

StrongArm's return was bewildering to most at the time. How was Contador supposed to have taken the news? It was a horribly orchestrated resurrection that left no room for the practical details to be sorted out. "Here I come! Get out of my way!"

This is what seems to have been lost in the turmoil. Contador was painted as "bad" by the LA mafia, and the narrative only magnified every single thing that Contador has done, on or off the bike. LA also took full advantage of the fact that Contador is unable to properly defend himself to the English speaking press/public. How "worldly" of LA.

If anyone need look any further to get a glimpse of StrongArm's true character, then I can't help you (to coin a phrase). He was set on taking down Contador in any way he could. Funny as to how little StrongArm has had to say about the "positive" test, besides the occasional snide remark. Are we to believe that yet another rider who was at the peak of their abilities would be once again sharing the podium with a clean StrongArm, this time fresh off retirement?

(I fully realize that this is not an LA thread, but the above topic was raised by others, and the connections are self-evident.)
Nice story.
I can tell you that many people see him as a Puerto rider, who was never sanctioned and won nearly every race he entered - together with piti.
Don't forget that. He had luck and was protected.

You are talking about hate. Where is that hate you mean ?
If you put that into relation to Lance then Alberto is actually loved.

Personally I never really lost a bad word Contador or hate him and have great respect for what he achieved. He was the best. Point.
That there was some fight and trashtalk going on between Lance and Alberto was not bad. This is sports and sport, fans and journalist live from things like that (I could also use survive), not even mentioning internet forums and posters.
Cycling and all other sports had these things earlier and no one ever complained about that.

How many hearts were pumping heavily in whatever way, while waiting for Saxo Bank's time at the TTT or when Armstrong was alert of crosswinds, and others not or when Contador attacked and Armstrong couldn't follow ? :D

I would say 99%. That 1% fell asleep before or doesn't understand anything.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Granville57 said:
This is a topic that I've wanted to address for some time. No need for another thread since it has become part of this one on several posts.

(...)

(I fully realize that this is not an LA thread, but the above topic was raised by others, and the connections are self-evident.)
Couldn't disagree more.
My (and many's) disliking AC has to do with one thing mainly: he symbolizes the OP cover up. Protected from above, though an obvious juicer he is.
And really, there's not a whole lot more to it. (Well, admittedly, I don't like his style off the bike either.)

Your linking AC's bad reputation with LA is off.
For instance, look at what Kimmage has to say about the bad joke AC is. Now, Kimmage is not the typical LA fanboy is he?

EDIT: I just see Cobblestoned made a similar point about OP. Also, I agree with cobblestoned that your post was a nice one.
 
May 10, 2009
4,638
1
0
flicker said:
Clean up amateur sport first. Olympics, school sports. Whatever hatred they have for Roche senior, Lance, get over it.

If the drug enforcers in Colombia get hung up on individuals, do you think it will make anyone get out of the Cocaine business. Did it stop with Escobar?

Hey if the anti-doping authors ex cyclists, athletes whatever use their soapbox for the positive, more power to them.
Firstly he is a journalist - what power does he have to clean up these sports? All he can do is report it. Where we live there isn't a doping problem in school sports.
He is a former pro cyclist with first hand knowledge of doping - of course that is going to be his main area, it's the sport he was raised on.
And he did report Michelle Smith's doping long before she tampered with her sample - he was ostracised but was yet again vindicated.
So Flicker which personality are you today? The one that thinks Lemond is the greatest person ever, and was clean, or the one where you heard he doped...:rolleyes:
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Francois the Postman said:
The question was: "why not at the time?". Because he had no keen desire to rock the boat whilst he was in it either?

I think that isn't the whole answer, but it certainly will be part of it.

The real confusing thing in this discussion here is that dope at the time was pretty common place as well, and breaking news of yet another high-flyer testing positive after the event was not that uncommon either.

But "positives" were seen and dealt with very differently then. Slap on the wrists, a fine, a few weeks or months in the sin-bin, maybe a rider would not be welcome the year after for the same race. But that was pretty much it. It wasn't nearly as dramatic as this, except when folk died from it, then it stirred the discussion for a while.

But we honoured them with monuments, and those riders are still seen as heroes we salute with respect, legends who paid the ultimate price in the pursuit of their sport. We don't treat them as dirty little "good riddance" cheats that we now have embraced as the appropriate response.

Partly, of-course, because dope wasn't so all-powerful as it is now. Some of it wasn't even illegal. I think the public got that what was used and around at the time, at most helped getting a result, not ruled the results table.

The big thing about Festina was the sheer scale, organisation, and race-altering influence it had. That drugs had become that good was the eye-opener for many. Not that there were drugs, or how wide-spread they were.

The reason Kimmage wasn't making a big stink is probably because most folk riding AND on the sidelines didn't see it as that big a problem. Not knowing where we would end up now. Still, he didn't take responsibility for his environment whilst riding. Kids in the peleton now pay the price. [*]

If there is one lesson for the current riders, that is it. "Good riddance" is a sideshow. And in my eyes, a distraction. I think it prologues the notion that these guys are on the outside and should remain there. It is the wrong fight. It helps the UCI to keep its image clean and maintain the myth that it is a rider problem. It also hurts some riders who are quite rightly asking why them, and not others? How is that for campaigning? :)


[*] The real problem might well be, from a rider pov, that some probably don't really mind as long as the chance of getting away with it is stacked in your favour, especially if it is that common place as we think it is - 3000k over an insane amount of mountains as well, something we demand as fans, is a lot easier to swallow after swallowing.
i think Kimmage made what was considered at the time a huge stink. If you look at Wiggins in 2007 and what he was saying, no rider was saying such things in Kimmage's time, not that i know off. look at what happened to bassons when said these things. Wiggins was not forced out of cycling.

Kimmage wrote a personal story of his experience in the pro peloton, it came from TdF diaries he was writing in conjuction with David Walsh for the Irish paer The Sunday Tribune. Kimmage made it very clear that he was only telling his own personal story and not accusing any other rider in particular. At the time Kimmage wrote the book he was a cyclist. Now he is writing as a journalist.
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
sniper said:
Couldn't disagree more.
My (and many's) disliking AC has to do with one thing mainly: he symbolizes the OP cover up. Protected from above, though an obvious juicer he is.
And really, there's not a whole lot more to it. (Well, admittedly, I don't like his style off the bike either.)

Your linking AC's bad reputation with LA is off.
For instance, look at what Kimmage has to say about the bad joke AC is. Now, Kimmage is not the typical LA fanboy is he?

EDIT: I just see Cobblestoned made a similar point about OP. Also, I agree with cobblestoned that your post was a nice one.
I wasn't pointing to you, or even this forum specifically, as much as referring to the public opinion that seems to have formed. We are in complete agreement when it comes to Kimmage. He is taking his own stand, for his own reasons, to be sure. I suppose the relevancy of my perspective to Kimmage's anger is that it easily fans the flames for those who hate Contador without any rational perspective. I think many people just find it convenient to cast the anti-hero status without recognizing how a great deal of the negative sentiments towards AC originally found their footing.

Personally, I was suspicious when he was trading shots with Rasmussen in 2007. But that's another story ;)
 
Granville57 said:
This is a topic that I've wanted to address for some time. No need for another thread since it has become part of this one on several posts.

There has been a tremendous amount of venom cast toward Contador, and long before the "positive" test came to light. Not on this thread specifically, but on other threads here, and most certainly on other sites altogether. I would submit that there is one primary reason for the deep-seated hatred towards Contador: That is the narrative that was established by one particular, vindictive and sociopathic Texan before the 2009 TdF had even began.

Why is Contador seen as "the bad guy"? Not because of doping related issues. The vitriol was flowing quite easily long before that. The daggers had already, perhaps even skillfully, been sharpened and sheathed, by that master bladesmith himself, with the hope of such an excuse to withdraw them.

We had LA, very publicly (his interview with Paul Sherwen prior to the 2009 TDU comes to mind) state that he was fully prepared to be "the world's best domestique" if Contador proved to be "the stronger rider." "I mean, talk about tarnishing your legacy!" he so transparently offered. Suggesting that to do anything other than support the most likely winner would violate some deeply held "code" among the ranks.

And yet he did everything in his power to disrupt and subvert Contador's own ambitions for victory. How dare he attempt to win a second TdF when StrongArm was trying to win his eighth! Contador rode a better prologue, but that wasn't enough. As soon as LA had to chance to get the best of Contador in the crosswinds, he did. Was that a sign of "looking out for your teammates"? Because, ya' know, there's no "I" in team. Funny, there's no "I" in "Lance" either, and yet...

The narrative was set: Contador was there only to spoil the party for StrongArm. How dare he?! We all know how cordial StrongArm would've been if Indurain had somehow come barging into the USPS team for another run at the podium in 2000. :rolleyes:

What a joke. Contador (cheater or not, this is not my point) had won the Tour in 2007 under less than ideal circumstances (Rasmussen's late-race withdrawal). He then suffered the indignity of not being invited in 2008, only to return in 2009 to finally secure a win under his owner ability (enhanced or not). But then along comes StrongArm.

Most of the team, and--disgustingly so--the director as well, all turned on Contador. Much of the public blindly and obediently grabbed the torches. Contador was a bad man! :mad:

AC was put into impossible situations. Regardless of what contaminants may have been flowing through his veins in 2009 (maybe none, how would I know?) I couldn't but respect the guy for dealing with all that stress, and the difficulties of the situation, and still achieving his goal. He was turned on, by his own team! It was repulsive to watch and none the less to remember, even now.

StrongArm gave us this half-baked, low-budget-video return to the sport. The man who had previously and oh-so-proudly proclaimed to be "the first American, on and American sponsored team, on an American made bike" to win the TdF. He was now making his epic return to...team Borat? (No national disparaging is meant by that. Rather, it reflects the very sad fact that I had encountered more than one person who, prior to "2.0" believed Kazakhstan to be nothing more than an imagined and make-believe country for the purposes of that movie only. :()

StrongArm's return was bewildering to most at the time. How was Contador supposed to have taken the news? It was a horribly orchestrated resurrection that left no room for the practical details to be sorted out. "Here I come! Get out of my way!"

This is what seems to have been lost in the turmoil. Contador was painted as "bad" by the LA mafia, and the narrative only magnified every single thing that Contador has done, on or off the bike. LA also took full advantage of the fact that Contador is unable to properly defend himself to the English speaking press/public. How "worldly" of LA.

If anyone need look any further to get a glimpse of StrongArm's true character, then I can't help you (to coin a phrase). He was set on taking down Contador in any way he could. Funny as to how little StrongArm has had to say about the "positive" test, besides the occasional snide remark. Are we to believe that yet another rider who was at the peak of their abilities would be once again sharing the podium with a clean StrongArm, this time fresh off retirement?

(I fully realize that this is not an LA thread, but the above topic was raised by others, and the connections are self-evident.)
The Truth is that there two diferent measures for the same weight.

The US market and investments had a particularly heavy weight.

All the rest is wishful, or naive, thinking. Cheers
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Granville57 said:
I wasn't pointing to you, or even this forum specifically, as much as referring to the public opinion that seems to have formed. We are in complete agreement when it comes to Kimmage. He is taking his own stand, for his own reasons, to be sure. I suppose the relevancy of my perspective to Kimmage's anger is that it easily fans the flames for those who hate Contador without any rational perspective. I think many people just find it convenient to cast the anti-hero status without recognizing how a great deal of the negative sentiments towards AC originally found their footing.

Personally, I was suspicious when he was trading shots with Rasmussen in 2007. But that's another story ;)
I agree with you that uniballer convinced a lot of people that Contador was bad but in cycling terms that was the kettle calling the pot black.

i admired Contadors ability to overcome all that and defeat such a person as uniballer. it probably has been the biggest disappointment in his career to date.

But Contador's career route is very similar in a substance path to uniballers.

I am glad Contador got caught, even for such a tiny amount. his reason for the clen is out of the ball park as far as i am concerned. I am hoping that more dopers are caught, the Schlecks, Menchov, Vino again, Di Luca again as many as possible.

But Kimmage has made mistakes and he admits he got Kohl's ride up Alpe D'Huez totally wrong.
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
rhubroma said:
The Truth is that there two diferent measures for the same weight.

The US market and investments had a particularly heavy weight.

All the rest is wishful, or naive, thinking. Cheers
Can you elaborate? I'm honestly not clear on what you're saying, or suggesting, here. Thanks.
 
Granville57 said:
I would submit that there is one primary reason for the deep-seated hatred towards Contador: That is the narrative that was established by one particular, vindictive and sociopathic Texan before the 2009 TdF had even began.
Yes, and no. Yes, there was indeed a lot of venom sent his way by Armstrong and his supporters, no doubt. Alberto was clearly made out to be the bad guy. We remember it well.

But for me this issue is not about that. It's that AC tested positive for a banned substance. And for reasons I think cattle farmer Runningboy pointed out, coupled with the massive doping problem in the sport, I don't possibly see how this was an accidental ingestion any more than Tyler Hamilton had a chimera and Floyd Landis drank too much whiskey. That by the time it was detected with a hyper sensitive test was a micro amount is not relevant to me, providing the test is scientifically accepted as accurate. The highly likely fact he was one of many dopers is not relevant either in my eyes. He doped, he cheated. Good riddance.

As to Roche speaking out - a separate issue - I'd like it if he's going to write an article that he speaks about the obvious elephant in the room, and I think it would be better for the sport overall, but if he doesn't, so be it. I'd also like a health-nut like Leipheimer to speak out against doping now that his career is winding down, and Armstrong to speak out that drugs like corticoids, testosterone or HGH can cause or advance cancer, but I don't expect either to happen.
 
Oct 25, 2009
344
0
0
Benotti69 said:
....But Kimmage has made mistakes and he admits he got Kohl's ride up Alpe D'Huez totally wrong.
I am interested to know whether PK has ever conceded making a mistake going the other way i.e. accusing or casting suspicion but then retracting? Of course if someone gets pinged, as Kohl was, a "he is clean" mistake is obvious for all to see - it is a tad more difficult to prove you are not dirty.
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
0
0
Granville57 said:
There has been a tremendous amount of venom cast toward Contador, and long before the "positive" test came to light. Not on this thread specifically, but on other threads here, and most certainly on other sites altogether. I would submit that there is one primary reason for the deep-seated hatred towards Contador: That is the narrative that was established by one particular, vindictive and sociopathic Texan before the 2009 TdF had even began.
Absolutely not. Armstrong's behaviour during the 2009 Tour de France only made Contador appear classy and professional by comparison. This more than most sites is a place where Armstrong's word is not treated as gospel. Sure, there is anger towards Contador. That's hardly surprising - he is dominating Grand Tours, there was much suspicion about him being a doper prior to his positive, he has been caught with a banned substance in his system, and he rolled out another in a long line of lame excuses while pointing the finger at the testing system. If you're looking for a source of the 'venom', I'd suggest you look there rather than attributing it to the pathetic and desperate acts that Armstrong pulled 18 months ago.
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
pedaling squares said:
Absolutely not. Armstrong's behaviour during the 2009 Tour de France only made Contador appear classy and professional by comparison. This more than most sites is a place where Armstrong's word is not treated as gospel. Sure, there is anger towards Contador. That's hardly surprising - he is dominating Grand Tours, there was much suspicion about him being a doper prior to his positive, he has been caught with a banned substance in his system, and he rolled out another in a long line of lame excuses while pointing the finger at the testing system. If you're looking for a source of the 'venom', I'd suggest you look there rather than attributing it to the pathetic and desperate acts that Armstrong pulled 18 months ago.
I think some of my perspective has been misunderstood. To what I've highlighted in your response, I'll refer back to my OP with...
Granville57 said:
There has been a tremendous amount of venom cast toward Contador, and long before the "positive" test came to light. Not on this thread specifically, but on other threads here, and most certainly on other sites altogether.
I more than recognize the elevated perspective that exists here compared with much of the uniformed and over-opionionated spewing that takes place on other sites. Much of what I was referring to was the (American) public perception at large. But AC is still at a disadvantage when it comes to "having a say" with English speaking audiences, because he would appear to have only a very limited grasp on English, at best.

I totally understand the more informed perspective of those (most of the people on here) that have followed his career and understand the implications of all the "systems" that Contador has been a part of. I'm certainly not here to defend him. His past is highly suspect.

And yes, Contador did come out of 2009 looking more dignified than the other side of camp that tried to derail him. But not everyone sees it from that more enlightened point of view. And that's really where I was directing my perspective. Because with all the splashing around that LA & Co. did against Contador, I think that sometimes those waves do tend to lap on to the shores of some otherwise reasonable minded people. I also never lose sight of the fact that The Clinic has many more readers than it has members (or least more) and so it was with that in mind that my comments were made.

I just think it's something to be aware of. This isn't always the bubble that it appears to be (or at times feels like).
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Nearly said:
I am interested to know whether PK has ever conceded making a mistake going the other way i.e. accusing or casting suspicion but then retracting? Of course if someone gets pinged, as Kohl was, a "he is clean" mistake is obvious for all to see - it is a tad more difficult to prove you are not dirty.
i think in the 1990's and the 2000s that would be nigh virtually impossible as it would appear they were all at it.

but Kimmage is extremely honest and if he made a mistake he would admit it.

He has said he believes in Garmin, so he might have made another mistake.

But as for calling someone a doper and being proven wrong. I dont know if he has done that. Pretty hard to do though isn't it.
 
May 22, 2010
440
0
0
131313 said:
Exactly. How can you have outrage when you yourself are worried about blowing a positive test for an inconsequential amount of something which could easily be from contamination.

Sorry, but the strict liability for substances such as this are total BS. I have more outrage for that than for Contador.
you're kidding yourself. there is no evidence of clenbuterol being used as a meat additive in spain, where it has long been banned. let's look at the probability:

(odds of Astana buying contaminated meat from highly regulated EU member country) x (odds of him eating it on the traditional day for doping at the Tour) = infintesimally small

here's a more logical explanation: Alberto was partaking in a bit of good ol' homologous blood doping, but messed up by using blood that wasn't completely clear of the clen he had been using to help lose weight ahead of the Tour.

s**t happens - even lance tested positive to corticosteroids. Alberto's downfall was using a drug that didn't lend itself to a retrospective prescription from the friendly team doctor.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
delbified said:
you're kidding yourself. there is no evidence of clenbuterol being used as a meat additive in spain, where it has long been banned. let's look at the probability:

(odds of Astana buying contaminated meat from highly regulated EU member country) x (odds of him eating it on the traditional day for doping at the Tour) = infintesimally small

here's a more logical explanation: Alberto was partaking in a bit of good ol' homologous blood doping, but messed up by using blood that wasn't completely clear of the clen he had been using to help lose weight ahead of the Tour.

s**t happens - even lance tested positive to corticosteroids. Alberto's downfall was using a drug that didn't lend itself to a retrospective prescription from the friendly team doctor.
+1
add to that the odds of his teammates not eating the same meat, so that his steakstory cannot be corroborated.

EDIT: plus the odds of a positive plasticizer test along with the CLENpositive.
EDIT 2: plus the odds of some HUMO journalist coming up with an incredibly plausible story about AC needing to loose a couple of pounds after the Dauphiné
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
sniper said:
+1
add to that the odds of his teammates not eating the same meat, so that his steakstory cannot be corroborated.

EDIT: plus the odds of a positive plasticizer test along with the CLENpositive.
EDIT 2: plus the odds of some HUMO journalist coming up with an incredibly plausible story about AC needing to loose a couple of pounds after the Dauphiné
first: the others (at least the Spanish part of the team) did eat the meat, only Vino ate fish, Vino was the only other that was tested

Second: the plasticizer test is not a certainty in the least. I believe he was positive for it, but there is no clear


Third the Humo article was not printed any further than a teaser and nothing else was heard about it, which really seems odd.

Now I believe he did use Clenbuterol and most probably reintroduced it into his system through a blood transfusion, but your arguments are certainly not airtight
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS