I won't speak to allegations of doping, because, well, it's not in my best interests to do so in this case. However, as I said via Twitter, I almost choked to death on a Triscuit when I read that bit about "sticking steadfastly to the rules." No one in cycling at the elite level (or any level for that matter) is a saint, and the organization referenced in that article shouldn't be presented as holy. My understanding is that in their business/contract dealings, they've proven in at least one case to be no better than an organized crime family that strong-arms individuals into abrogating their legal rights for fear of being black-balled and never being able to secure work anywhere else in pro cycling, ever again.hrotha said:I like Vaughters and I want (nay, need) to believe he's being honest about Slipstream, but at the end of the day there's not much to believe that is the case.
Out of respect for the victim, I won't reveal his identity in a public forum, and I don't plan to write about the case anywhere else. But unless this person was profoundly mistaken in their interpretation of events, they enabled the organization in question to stick to the rules only by giving up their contractually-guaranteed rights after being intimidated and scared by a pantheon of minor deities.