Koechli & Helvetia/La Suisse-the clean team

[joe_papp]

Nothing to add on Bauer being clean or a strong rider, but I can confirm that he is a really nice guy. I met him in Cuba in '03 or '04 when we ended-up at the same hotel as him after one stage. It turned out he was in town to scout routes for his touring company, and he knew my then-mentor Mike Fraysse, who was meeting with Steve over lunch. They invited me to sit down and join them and Bauer was just class...actually, now that I think of it, he gave off a pretty strong anti-doping vibe, b/c I remember feeling scummy in general based on what he was saying, and in particular recall his mentioning being deathly ill during the Tour one year and only being able to count on aspirin for succor, never mind EPO.

 

[laziali]

You're trying really hard to convince yourself of something, I'm just not sure what.

You can't infer that WCs was my first exposure to doping from my post. I say nothing of my racing life prior to this incident, all it shows is that my public interpretation of 'program' was our team program and not 'doping program'.

Not sure what I'm 'side-stepping', and I certainly don't feel that I NEED to dispel your doubts - whatever they may be.

First bit in red - "Can", "can't", "can", "can't" etc. Awfully tedious.

Second bit in red - Oh, but you do. Your posts make that evident. I'll spell it out for you. You come on, assert a personal experience with a "star" and claim to have been a DS in Europe and elsewhere. But you seem to be more of a fan, particularly of Bauer, and not worldly enough. It just doesn't ring true on the posts to date.

It's simple, all you need to do is provide some compelling substantiation of your story. You don't need to name the "star" but you do need to present a more credible case if you wish your story to persuade. This is, after all, a forum dominated by the sceptical and the cynical.

So, there are three options for you, my friend:

(a) You now respond with substantiating information and your story will be believed; or

(b) You post back with more avoidance and will be taken to be fabricating your story; or

(c) You don't respond at all and will be taken to be a fabricator.

 

[Nick C.]

Geez why would anyone ever post their experiences if they are going to be parsed and pored over for corroborating evidence as if this is a murder trial.

 

[skidmark]

So, there are three options for you, my friend:

(a) You now respond with substantiating information and your story will be believed; or

(b) You post back with more avoidance and will be taken to be fabricating your story; or

(c) You don't respond at all and will be taken to be a fabricator.

To present an alternative viewpoint, I can certainly say this statement is not speaking for me (or, I imagine, lots of other forum posters). I couldn't care less if this guy substantiates his claim at all. I like that this forum combines fans with people who have had various involvement with all levels of pro cycling, and if someone comes in and makes up stories to get attention, that will become pretty clear over time as their stories get less and less believable. Or they just stop telling them. On the other hand, if I were a former pro and got the third degree for trying to share my experiences the first time I say something, I'd be less inclined to post more of them. I think the latter scenario would be worse for the forum than the former. So I'm willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt. I mean, I'm sure if I wanted to I could pretend to be anyone and be believed, if I had done my research enough. It's the internet. I guess I don't see the use in asking for 'substantiating information', if at the end of the day you never really know anyway. Also, I suppose I didn't see anything suspicious in the original post either, so maybe I'm just less skeptical than others.

That said, of course I'm curious if someone might have first-hand experience with the inner workings of the Euro peloton, it's fascinating for a fan. Hey Beaushrimp, you said you didn't want to say who the 'star' was, and that's fine. But if you ever want to have a conversation about what stars may or may not have had their picture on your wall, I'm all ears.

 

[joe_papp]

Why invite suspicion?

First bit in red - "Can", "can't", "can", "can't" etc. Awfully tedious.

Second bit in red - Oh, but you do. Your posts make that evident. I'll spell it out for you. You come on, assert a personal experience with a "star" and claim to have been a DS in Europe and elsewhere. But you seem to be more of a fan, particularly of Bauer, and not worldly enough. It just doesn't ring true on the posts to date.

It's simple, all you need to do is provide some compelling substantiation of your story. You don't need to name the "star" but you do need to present a more credible case if you wish your story to persuade. This is, after all, a forum dominated by the sceptical and the cynical.

So, there are three options for you, my friend:

(a) You now respond with substantiating information and your story will be believed; or

(b) You post back with more avoidance and will be taken to be fabricating your story; or

(c) You don't respond at all and will be taken to be a fabricator.

Geez why would anyone ever post their experiences if they are going to be parsed and pored over for corroborating evidence as if this is a murder trial.

This is a classic example of why people should post under their actual names from the outset. It's one thing to require anonymity because you're criticizing the Chinese Communist Party from w/in the PRC and fear for your life. It's another thing to want to chat about bike racing...

I don't have any thoughts on whether or not the poster in question is too-legit-to-quit or not, but seriously - why expose yourself to this kind of suspicion from the outset by choosing a pseudonym?

 

[Nick C.]

Joe I understand where you are coming from but not that this is something to hide but do you really want every busybody who googles your name, much less peopel you will see socially.

 

[joe_papp]

Joe I understand where you are coming from but not that this is something to hide but do you really want every busybody who googles your name, much less peopel you will see socially.

I hear you - I don't begrudge anyone their right to post anonymously. I just think for myself that if I was posting things I couldn't take credit for or acknowledge, I'd have to ask why I was posting them. But that's just my personal position. Pseudonyms challenging the authenticity of material posted by other pseudonyms is kind of surreal, if you look at it with good humor, right?

 

[Benotti69]

I hear you - I don't begrudge anyone their right to post anonymously. I just think for myself that if I was posting things I couldn't take credit for or acknowledge, I'd have to ask why I was posting them. But that's just my personal position. Pseudonyms challenging the authenticity of material posted by other pseudonyms is kind of surreal, if you look at it with good humor, right?

bang on the nail Joe this is the real black humour, about the internet. If you cant laugh about it whats the fú¸king point......

 

[joe_papp]

bang on the nail Joe this is the real black humour, about the internet. If you cant laugh about it whats the fú¸king point......

haha yeah.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

First bit in red - "Can", "can't", "can", "can't" etc. Awfully tedious.

Second bit in red - Oh, but you do. Your posts make that evident. I'll spell it out for you. You come on, assert a personal experience with a "star" and claim to have been a DS in Europe and elsewhere. But you seem to be more of a fan, particularly of Bauer, and not worldly enough. It just doesn't ring true on the posts to date.

It's simple, all you need to do is provide some compelling substantiation of your story. You don't need to name the "star" but you do need to present a more credible case if you wish your story to persuade. This is, after all, a forum dominated by the sceptical and the cynical.

So, there are three options for you, my friend:

(a) You now respond with substantiating information and your story will be believed; or

(b) You post back with more avoidance and will be taken to be fabricating your story; or

(c) You don't respond at all and will be taken to be a fabricator.

If you wish your AB & C to be standard then you might want to reveal some more details from your earlier post.....

OK, JMB, sorry to call you out on this, but I'm not yet persuaded by your story. I was riding at representational level too, just at the time you appear to have, and I have to say that I was exposed to doping a long, long time before rocking up to my first Worlds. ......

Names, addresses, fotos, email address or cell phones so that we are allowed cooberate the story....... DNA, urine, blood, semen sample, should also be ofered.

I am joking... This is simple - because someone says they are something does not mean they are.(Nor does it matter)

I 'judge' people on what they post not what or who they claim to be. Anyone wishing to be taken seriously while anonymous needs (IMO) to back up any claim with proper sources for their argument.

We are all adults here and can judge what we read as being true or false.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

First bit in red - "Can", "can't", "can", "can't" etc. Awfully tedious.

Second bit in red - Oh, but you do. Your posts make that evident. I'll spell it out for you. You come on, assert a personal experience with a "star" and claim to have been a DS in Europe and elsewhere. But you seem to be more of a fan, particularly of Bauer, and not worldly enough. It just doesn't ring true on the posts to date.

It's simple, all you need to do is provide some compelling substantiation of your story. You don't need to name the "star" but you do need to present a more credible case if you wish your story to persuade. This is, after all, a forum dominated by the sceptical and the cynical.

So, there are three options for you, my friend:

(a) You now respond with substantiating information and your story will be believed; or

(b) You post back with more avoidance and will be taken to be fabricating your story; or

(c) You don't respond at all and will be taken to be a fabricator.

Haha! I'm really getting a kick out of you! I like the "wish your story to persuade" part. And the ONLY three options I have, hilarious!

I jumped into this thread because it was people talking about an era that I had some personal experience with. That's it. Unlike you, I'm not looking to acheive some sort of self-agrandizement through anonymous posts.

By you being the self-appointed <judge> [edited by mod] of a mostly anonymous forum, it only makes you look like a bully. And that's sad... I think we're all grown up enough to know what motivates bullies.

What would I gain by fabricating my posts?

I would like to agree with Joe Papp that we should all just use our real names, unfortunately I am unable/unwilling to do that right now. If I had to use a real name, I never would have posted. Perhaps I'm still working in cycling, perhaps I have children in cycling, perhaps I don't want to garner attention to myself or my family.

If I seem like a fan, it's because I am a fan. I beleive that cycling is the best competitive sport on the planet. If I seemed Bauer-centric, that's because he was a big mover in the peloton and was on the team that this thread is named after. I also just really liked how he raced.

As for substantiating information, I've ignored some more overt questions regarding that, and I'm certainly not going to get suckered by some chump with a loose grasp of logic/argumentation, a well-worn thesaurus, and an obvious chip on his shoulder.

 

[Spider1964]

Keep on posting Shrimpboy...

You just keep posting my invertebrate friend and don't listen to the detractors/trolls/fanboys around here... they'll do your fr!ckin head in. This is fair dinkum the most interesting post that's happened to this place in ages. Go you good thing. I couldn't give a rat's @rse who the hell you are... You'll always be Shrimpboy to me... (Tongue in cheek that last bit )

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Thanks, Spidey.

It's going to take more than some grumpy ******* to scare me off, although I did get a bit ****y in that last post...

 

[laziali]

... As for substantiating information, I've ignored some more overt questions regarding that, and I'm certainly not going to get suckered by some chump with a loose grasp of logic/argumentation, a well-worn thesaurus, and an obvious chip on his shoulder ...

So that's option (b) then "You post back with more avoidance and will be taken to be fabricating your story".

I would have no brook with your story if you hadn't come on and accused a "star" of doping. Anonymous stories of your experiences as a DS and semi-professional would be of genuine interest. But as soon as you start accusing individuals of doping, you are going to need to pony up or appear incredible.

I have to say, the juvenile vitriol with with you react suggests you are deeply sensitive on being called out as a fabricator. You pose the question: what motive do you have to fabricate? - I'll hazard a guess at a sense of belonging, importance and knowing more about you un-named "star" than others.

If I seemed Bauer-centric, that's because he was a big mover in the peloton ...

This is where all credibility ends - the same guy that rocked up with a Chopper bike and no contract to Paris Roubaix, c'mon!

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

So that's option (b) then "You post back with more avoidance and will be taken to be fabricating your story".

I would have no brook with your story if you hadn't come on and accused a "star" of doping. Anonymous stories of your experiences as a DS and semi-professional would be of genuine interest. But as soon as you start accusing individuals of doping, you are going to need to pony up or appear incredible.

I have to say, the juvenile vitriol with with you react suggests you are deeply sensitive on being called out as a fabricator. You pose the question: what motive do you have to fabricate? - I'll hazard a guess at a sense of belonging, importance and knowing more about you un-named "star" than others.



This is where all credibility ends - the same guy that rocked up with a Chopper bike and no contract to Paris Roubaix, c'mon!

Wow! Your tenacity is exhausting...

The 'star' I mentioned is of no consequence. He tested positive, got banned, and then retired. My keeping his name out of it is solely to maintain my annonymity. I know no more than anyone else, and certainly don't get a sense of importance from my interaction with him. The point was that was how open doping was/is at that level.

As to your historical opinion of Bauer, I don't even know how to respond. Let's take a cursory look at some of his palmares:
-Olympic medalist
-World Championship medalist
-Held the white jersey for most of the 85 TdF
-TdF stage winner
-14 days in the yellow jersey in the TdF
-More classic placings and one-day wins than I can remember

I guess you're right, my viewing him as key player in cycling in that era obviously destroys my credibility.

I believe I'm done with you. Don't expect a response...

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Thanks, Spidey.

It's going to take more than some grumpy ******* to scare me off, although I did get a bit ****y in that last post...

Hmmm... I didn't realize 'b@st@rd' and 'p1ssy' would get censored...

 

[Hugh Januss]

Hmmm... I didn't realize 'b@st@rd' and 'p1ssy' would get censored...

All kinds of stupid and humorous things get wiped out by the 5th grade censoring system here. Such as anti doping crusader **** Pound.

 

[Neworld]

... the same guy that rocked up with a Chopper bike and no contract to Paris Roubaix, c'mon!

Dude,

Take it easy on my mate Bauer. Undoubtedly you couldn't even stay with the peleton for the first 20Kms at PR, and you're diss'n Bauer becuase of his avant garde approach to new bike technology?

I sort of see what your asking Shrimp, "hey, help us believe you" but...attacking Shrimp like that is not on.

We don't know who you are! You could be typing from a penitentiary library, after being convicted of God knows what. Easy tiger. We should consider all posters legit until their posts 'out' them, IMO.

NW

 

[laziali]

Bauer's palmares was ok but nothing great. The 1990 stint in yellow only occurred because the peleton let massen pensec chiappucci and your idol get 30 minutes. Precisely because they were ok but nothing great.

Your final line is of course the option (c) I identified - so again you are confirmed as a fantasist.

 

[Neworld]

Bauer's palmares was ok but nothing great.

Yu read post 38 right? And you still think Bauer is average? Compared to who? I think you're a little misguided. Yes I am a fan of his but the guy was a winner at every level and was mostly a stage/classics rider for sure and still managed to wear the Yellow for long time ending up 4th.

The 1990 stint in yellow only occurred because the peleton let massen pensec chiappucci and your idol get 30 minutes. Precisely because they were ok but nothing great

So, lets say that you good enough to be a team leader in the TdF. With your evaluation of cycling talent you would have let Bauer, Pensec and Chiappucci go up the road and build a lead like the did? Really? Because they're just average right? Hummm.

Bauer's stats: see Shrimps stats or visit Bauer's team's website.
http://cyclesportmanagement.com/management-and-staff/steve-bauer/

Chiappucci: Won multiple tour climbing jerseys, multiple podium finishes in both TdF and Giro, MSR, San Seb...

Pensec: don't know his stats off the top of my head but a solid rider.

Your final line is of course the option (c) I identified - so again you are confirmed as a fantasist.

I don't really care how you classify me or others. Yes I am a fan of S. Bauer, I assume that since this is a cycling website and forum that cycling fans read, and put input into, these threads. I am only a fantasist when it comes to catching dopers and protecting my family.

Cheers
NW

 

[NashbarShorts]

Reading this little spat from the outside is a bit amusing.

Laziali, you seem to have a stick up your asterisk, telling JMB to prove himself to be "as legit as I am" -- yet you have not offered one iota of "evidence" that you are even half the 'old-school playa' that you purport to be.

I think JMB was pretty clear in his post saying he may have friends, children, etc. still involved in the sport... Or perhaps he doesn't want ppl to know he's on here and somehow sucked in to defending his honor against a one-man Don Quixote vendetta-ist who's single-handedly trying to "out" ppl in an anonymous cycling forum?

It's... a bit weird.
(Just my two cents)

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Being in this spat on the inside is pretty amusing as well. In a *** sort of way...

 

[frenchfry]

Dude,

Take it easy on my mate Bauer. Undoubtedly you couldn't even stay with the peleton for the first 20Kms at PR, and you're diss'n Bauer becuase of his avant garde approach to new bike technology?

I remember reading that Bauer was asked in an interview if any of his bikes had been damaged on flights. He replied that nothing that couldn't be bent back into shape (or something to that effect). I guess that was before the carbon age.

 

[laziali]

Chiappucci: Won multiple tour climbing jerseys, multiple podium finishes in both TdF and Giro, MSR, San Seb...

Pensec: don't know his stats off the top of my head but a solid rider.




I don't really care how you classify me or others. Yes I am a fan of S. Bauer, I assume that since this is a cycling website and forum that cycling fans read, and put input into, these threads. I am only a fantasist when it comes to catching dopers and protecting my family.

NW

Hey NW, wasn't referring to you as the fantasist. Unlike JMB you haven't been telling porkies.

Chiappucci - the results you quote come after the 1990 tour. He was a little Gregorio before then. Amazing what epo will do

Pensec had been ok in the same way Bauer was but was on the way down. Franzie maassen was avoid classics rider. That why lemond etc let them get 30 mins.

You asked to whom I compare Bauer? I'd say Phil Anderson. Jackie Durand. Not in the same league as Kelly musseuw etc. I can understand why a Canadian might think Bauer was great, and by Canadian standards he was, but not by world standards

 

[laziali]

Laziali, you seem to have a stick up your asterisk, telling JMB to prove himself to be "as legit as I am" -- yet you have not offered one iota of "evidence" that you are even half the 'old-school playa' that you purport to be.


cents)

1990 equals "old school"??? What are you - 12?