Kreuziger going down?

[Benotti69]

I don't know it was 70%. And I didn't in 2005. But if you ask me to define a percentage that I think were riding the Tour clean in 2005, then that's what I'd answer, because that's my belief. And in 2005, at the moment I was asked this question, my belief was 80-85%.

But my belief carries no more weight than yours.

My opinion is that doping is even more prevalent in teams due to the need to appease and please sponsors who appear to be unwilling to align their brands with pro cyclists.

The problem with cycling is simple. UCI mismanagement for personal financial gain has kept this sport in the tiny little cesspit that it inhabits. I don't see Cookson as being the person to bring the sport out of the cesspit merely by his non commitment to making anti doping a properly funded independent body only answerable to the likes of WADA.

Till we see that along with doping in sports a crime throughout the Western world people will cheat and as federations don't care whether athletes cheat as long as they dont get caught nothing will change.

EPO changed the face of cycling, but now that its usage has been curtailed (not eradicated) doesn't make the sport clean.

 

[murali]

In summary, an expert reviews a case (either random, targeted or flagged by software) and decides if there is something.

Then it gets send to three experts who must all agree.

Then and only then they get the riders information and race program etc. If they still feel that there is a case to answer that is when the letter goes to the rider (and team?) for any information/evidence they wish to bring.

After those justifications are considered, if the three person panel still thinks there is a case, then one gets opened.

thank you.

how much time do these experts take? this must be data based, right? so agreeing is just matching three data, right?

what do these ppl do once the rider gives explanation? i mean, how much time do they really need to make the decision.

if the delay by UCI can be explained as normal procedural delays, then there is nothing wrong.
But if the delay is not expected, then i stick to my opinion that ppl who dont want AC to win had conspired with UCI. (since only sky fans are raising all sorts of objections as if they were being paid to do so, i will believe that Sky is behind this.)

 

[Benotti69]

In summary, an expert reviews a case (either random, targeted or flagged by software) and decides if there is something.

Then it gets send to three experts who must all agree.

Then and only then they get the riders information and race program etc. If they still feel that there is a case to answer that is when the letter goes to the rider (and team?) for any information/evidence they wish to bring.

After those justifications are considered, if the three person panel still thinks there is a case, then one gets opened.

Would that be a committee of experts or is it Zoroli?

Remember Armstrong's profiles from 2009 and 2010 and no case opened.

Nothing has changed from then.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

About freakin' time for this guy and i hope more to come as well but probably not.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Would that be a committee of experts or is it Zoroli?

Remember Armstrong's profiles from 2009 and 2010 and no case opened.

Nothing has changed from then.

BUt i suppose you are happy that he is going down.

 

[JimmyFingers]

The mind boggles that a rider gets pinged and yet again there is a lot of complaining and misdirection. If you want a clean sport you should be happy about it, if you just want your man to win I can see the need to conjur conspiracies from the ether. So much fun.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Lal, so I'm a Skybot now. This is better than that time I was called a Contador fanboy. Or the time I was accused of being pro-Valverde. I must be doing something right.

He once accused me of being a froome fanboy.

 

[LaFlorecita]

The mind boggles that a rider gets pinged and yet again there is a lot of complaining and misdirection. If you want a clean sport you should be happy about it, if you just want your man to win I can see the need to conjur conspiracies from the ether. So much fun.

Jimmy you must be happy, odds for your man to win just dropped a whole lot.

 

[The Hitch]

So what would be the right thread to discuss the possibility that the UCI sidelined Kreuziger to weaken Tinkoff-Saxo and give Froome a much bigger chance to win the Tour?

Like I said at the start, the Sky thread.

 

[Benotti69]

BUt i suppose you are happy that he is going down.

Yep, happy Roman got busted. But he is one swallow that does not make it summer. How many profiles from Astana alone must resemble Romans? Never mind other teams......

 

[Rollthedice]

The mind boggles that a rider gets pinged and yet again there is a lot of complaining and misdirection. If you want a clean sport you should be happy about it, if you just want your man to win I can see the need to conjur conspiracies from the ether. So much fun.

Of course there's complain. It took several years from the moment the values were deemed suspiscious until now when action of some sorts is being taken. It's even more odd that they take action just before TdF, last year and this year again.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Yep, happy Roman got busted. But he is one swallow that does not make it summer. How many profiles from Astana alone must resemble Romans? Never mind other teams......

That will be a never ending wait for the uci to give us more swallows to count as summer as i said upthread.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Yep, happy Roman got busted. But he is one swallow that does not make it summer. How many profiles from Astana alone must resemble Romans? Never mind other teams......

That will be a never ending wait for the uci to give us more swallows to count as summer as i said up thread.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Jimmy you must be happy, odds for your man to win just dropped a whole lot.

Lulz, just the silliness I was referring too. I won't be shouting for Froome next month anyway.

Anyway, Kreuziger, good that a likely doper is under scrutiny, right?

 

[DirtyWorks]

A serious question.

Do you really believe that or are you just trolling?

Why not? The UCI has done exactly that before for Armstrong.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Like I said at the start, the Sky thread.

Let's discuss the Kreuziger case in the Sky thread?

 

[the sceptic]

Why not? The UCI has done exactly that before for Armstrong.

Yes, but apparently it has become a conspiracy theory to suggest they might do it again. New UCI era!

 

[LaFlorecita]

Lulz, just the silliness I was referring too. I won't be shouting for Froome next month anyway.

Anyway, Kreuziger, good that a likely doper is under scrutiny, right?

Thank god you won't be shouting for him, less skybot nonsense

I cannot comment on your second point because I can't talk about the UCI and Sky.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Why not? Everything gets chucked in there and lets face it any doping anywhere somehow has something to do with them

 

[LaFlorecita]

Why not? The UCI has done exactly that before for Armstrong.

Yes, but apparently it has become a conspiracy theory to suggest they might do it again. New UCI era!

This is it. Exactly

 

[DirtyWorks]

Would that be a committee of experts or is it Zoroli?

Committee of experts is on WADA's side in this situation. It's another control to minimize false positive. They make a conclusion, send it to the anti-doping authority for them to decide whether or not to open a case.

To be clear, WADA/NADO is only providing a recommendation. Again, no authority to do anything.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Why not? Everything gets chucked in there and lets face it any doping anywhere somehow has something to do with them

You're right but I won't start a discussion about Kreuziger and the UCI in the Sky thread, it just feels weird.

 

[argyllflyer]

Not explaining away the guilt. But as Jens pointed out, you could find passport irregularities for 75% of the peloton. Why did they go after Kreuziger specifically? It's interesting to say the least

A very cynical view of the sport LF! Bear in mind they've been after him for a year and he's been deflecting away the day of reckoning.

 

[hrotha]

Yes, but apparently it has become a conspiracy theory to suggest they might do it again. New UCI era!

No, it's a conspiracy theory because so far there's nothing supporting it (as there wasn't anything to support it in 2004), but, crucially, a factor or two against it. The timeline doesn't match up well with the conspiracy scenario: the process started a year ago, not when Contador beat Froome, and so far we don't know that the UCI forbade Tinkoff-Saxo from having Kreuziger race the Tour, as he hasn't been suspended yet (that said, it looks like there was external pressure, either from the UCI or from ASO).

I wouldn't mind it being brought up as a possibility, because it sure looks like the UCI and Sky are cozy, and there's precedent for this kind of thing. But the problem is this narrative is being brought up as a near certainty and it's basically monopolizing the whole thread.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Alternatively, ASO and CADF have a deal to keep riders with impending cases or something out of the Tour, and CADF pressured the team.

I'd buy ASO having a hand in this. We learned a couple of weeks ago that ASO is directly involved in team selection.

Jump in the Way Back Machine for a minute and recall Hein Verbruggen warning he can make anyone positive. We know the federation hasn't changed a bit since then. Today it is Kreuziger.