Plus, Degenkolb never actually had the treatment (apparently).Kwibus said:I believe Kittel and Degenkolb when they say they were naive back then.
Personally I would've done the same when I was at their age. I'm the kind of person who isn't able to cheat in a card game for ****s and giggles. I just do not cheat and I hate it, but if I was 18 years and I was sick and the doctor from the national cycling federation says "He let's try this" and than I would ask "Is this allowed?" and if the doctor than says it is... well ofcourse I would do it.
I believe the 2 Argos guys. Not 100% sure about Martin, but I want to believe him yes.
Exactly and what reason do we have to suspect Kittel?kingjr said:And it's not like it was a secret that the doctor in question used UV-light to treat illnesses. It says so on that doctors ****ing website there for anybody to see.
It never had anything to do with enhancing performances.
Are young riders who know that there WAS doping widespread but never actually have been confronted with doping automatically complicits?blackcat said:the more egregious when they have all been in the tent and touted the armstrong talking points.
they were complicit.
I don't understand how he is at fault if this wasn't banned at the time. This is like faulting a business for not paying more taxes than is required.Fearless Greg Lemond said:To be fair, WADA prohibited this in 2011, UCI later, Kittel got treatment in 2008.
Not to speak of the UV/OZON - therapy hoax
That worked out well, being police and therefore clean so not to lose my pension, look up Mrs Pechstein.Mr.38% said:Tony is sqeaky clean. Guaranteed from someone who performance-tested him for many years. Like John, he is police officer. Any doping offense would probably not just cost them their career but also their pension provisions.
In contrast to Martin, Pechstein grew up in a doping environment and lived the omertá for most of her life. Doping and lying have been like polishing the skids...Roude Leiw said:That worked out well, being police and therefore clean so not to lose my pension, look up Mrs Pechstein.
Agree. I saw Martin drag his sorry *** up a stage of the Vuelta last year with a 2 km 17% stretch. He finished so far behind, he crossed most of the riders on their way down to the team buses.Bratam said:Wow, stunned to hear that Tony Martin may be clean. I know what it takes to sign such a document in Germany, even as a puclicity stunt. Those guys will be crucified by the German Press and its citizens if they he are ever found to have doped. Germany is at the opposite end of the spectrum to Spain when it comes to doping and fair play. By signing such a document, I would say that there is very a good chance that Tony Martin is clean.
Tony Martin is a machine in the TT. He rides it to near perfection and he usually thoroughly exhausted at the end of it. He has beaten many dirty riders over the years. It is quite exciting to learn that a clean rider can be so succesful in the modern era.
Lucky for him he wasnt 10 years older. Armstrong and Co would have ensured that he never got onto the podium. The thing I notice in the photos is that Tony Martin is so god damn skinny. All head, no shaft ! I thought he had a little more muscle and bone structure than that. Can someone take a check on his body fat levels.
Wow you really dont get it, do you.That UV treatment was never about enhancing performances or doping, it was a treatment for illnesses such as an angina or a cold! That's it!will10 said:I see Kittel's UV treatment on the same level as the US Olympic team in the 80s who used transfusions before they were outlawed. Technically both treatments were not illicit practices at the time but does that really make it "okay"? I'm not sure. I think if I was Kittel I'd be keeping my head down a little more.
Then you must read this:will10 said:I see Kittel's UV treatment on the same level as the US Olympic team in the 80s who used transfusions before they were outlawed. Technically both treatments were not illicit practices at the time but does that really make it "okay"? I'm not sure. I think if I was Kittel I'd be keeping my head down a little more.
I have been saying in numerous posts that the initiative, i.e. the push to prove the peloton is clean MUST come from the riders, publicly. It is the riders that have the most to gain by being transparent with the fans. This is a good first start.mattghg said:Is this omerta weakening or more of the same?
del1962 said:Don't really understand why any of these three shouldn't be considered clean, no evidence against them and as far as I can see Kittels treatment was above board.
Have to agree with comments like these. If riders are clean (& successful) then they must come forward and open out to the public. There should be more of these direct PR excercises from other riders. Not bull**** open ended PR work like that of the Sky Team, that end up being broken promises and cover ups.RobbieCanuck said:I have been saying in numerous posts that the initiative, i.e. the push to prove the peloton is clean MUST come from the riders, publicly. It is the riders that have the most to gain by being transparent with the fans. This is a good first start.
However the riders need to follow up by routinely telling the fans publicly
1. What their haematocrit levels are.
2. The results of all of their in competition and out of competition test results
3. If they have missed a whereabouts disclosure
This is the price the current peloton must pay for the sins of the past peloton but anything less leaves the fans cynical and doubting.
yeah, but gb and germany are different - it will change after/in case sky gets busted one day but germans have been betrayed by the media for too many years to suddenly start believing in them again.The Hitch said:Yeah but people do fall for this crap. when wiggle ghost writer wrote the -I would never dope because I would feel ashamed if I got caught, line the comments were overwhelmingly positive.
Yeah, poor Armstrong. Give me a break.Dazed and Confused said:But calling out Armstrong is pointless now. He has already been hit by the bus hundreds of times in the last 6 months.
The poster his point is not 'poor armstrong'. It's just not really original to bash armstrongZweistein said:Yeah, poor Armstrong. Give me a break.
Paid off the UCI to cover up positives.
Used his cancer awareness foundation for personal profit.
Fraudulently collected money from insurance companies.
Forced people out of their profession.
Sued individuals and newspapers left and right.
Federal witness tampering.