- Aug 13, 2009
- 12,854
- 1
- 0
Beech Mtn said:
That is the one we are looking for.
Please scan a copy and Joe can give it to Wikipedia
That is the one we are looking for.
Please scan a copy and Joe can give it to Wikipedia
- Jun 18, 2009
- 1,225
- 1
- 0
Dr. Maserati said:
Funny, I guess the official spin is that "it was overturned", even though it wasn't. Interesting...
A buddy of mine e-mailed the author of this article here: http://www.pressdemocrat.com/articl...yclists-support-Levi-doubt-doping-allegations
The author told him that, yeah, they knew about it, but heard that it was overturned??
The author was then e-mailed the current champion results, including the listing of the current 1996, Matthew Johnson. The author never responded to that e-mail.
Hmmm..... It really does seem that the cover-up is in full effect. That said, I think Levi has bigger things to worry about now. Still, I find the cover-up to be pretty telling.
If they really believe Levi's suspension was overturned, prove it to Wikipedia...
Race Radio said:
I don't have access to a working scanner at the moment. Go to any public library and give them the magazine info - volume & issue number, date, page number, etc and they can do an interlibrary loan, where they can get you a photocopy of the page within a couple days.
131313 said:
Thanks for refreshing everyone's memory. By the way; it would take a clean LA and a clean Levi to describe Matt Johnson's bike after he rode away from them. He was by far the more talented rider and was among the younger riders that didn't want to drug up.
Levi's been ignoring that fact his whole career.
So wait... this big 1996 doping scandal was from a positive for Claritin-D? Or was there some other drug he used that came out as a positive in 1996 that lost him the Nat'l Champs?
- Jun 18, 2009
- 1,225
- 1
- 0
Gee333 said:
No, the positive was for 'Ephedra'. Levi claimed it was contained in Claritin-D. Maybe it was, but it's worth noting that this was during a time when OTC-Ephedra-based cocktails were in vogue. It's also worth mentioning that Kenny William's now wife, Annette Hansen also lost a jersey from an Ephedrine positive: http://bike-zone.com/results/2001/dec01/dec19news2.php
This was in 2001, so it's not like Ephedra was immediately take off of the list after Levi's positive. My understanding is that it's back on the list, but I'm honestly not sure if that's the case. Even if I weren't racing, I'd never take it given the potential side effects.
Ephedra stimulates the central nervous system, has beta-agonist properties and it's also a bronchial dialator, i.e. it would actually be potentially beneficial for an event such as a crit. It's also potentially pretty dangerous.
- May 13, 2009
- 1,864
- 345
- 11,180
random thoughts on this...
Just want to let you guys know that anyone can go ahead and edit the LL Wikipedia entry to reflect the archiving of a hard-copy of the suspension news article. That said, email it to me as well and I'll add it to the post on my site and make sure it's accessible going forward.
Thanks to everyone who has taken an interest in this. And remember, it's not about carrying out a vendetta against a particular rider - rather, it's about ensuring that the truth concerning doping at all levels of the sport, from amateur to professional, is accessible to those who are willing to look for it.
I don't agree with the contradictory statements made by people like Pat McQuaid, where they trumpet suspending Valverde for cheating linked to an investigation into practices originating in the early-2000's, while at the same time they excoriate Floyd Landis for the same kind of truth-telling, simply because his revelations are commercially-inconvenient. Those of us who doped have to take responsibility for what we did - not pretend that it didn't happen. Likewise for those who enabled doping, in whatever way. Cycling as a sport is strong enough to withstand the kind of scrutiny that exposes hypocrisy, immoral behavior and profiteering from life-threatening behavior. The individual empires built by certain riders, organizers, cycling officials and even media (like Graham Watson) might not survive the disclosure of a complicity to cover-up - or in some cases facilitate - doping, but why should it?
The people who would cover-up wrong-doing in hopes of protecting short-term income are the same parasites who have a direct role in warping the thinking of more-impressionable athletes such that doping becomes a legitimate possibility. When it becomes apparent that the people who should be throwing you out on your *** for cheating actually will try to protect you and even help you escape responsibility for what you've done, why should they be allowed to continue? Why should we want them to stay-on?
And why should riders who doped and were caught doing so pretend that it never happened? Granted, I absolutely don't think they need to revisit the subject week-in and week-out, but even the rider who maintains his innocence after a doping ban can at least make an unequivocal statement rejecting drug-use and stating their intent to compete w/o PED's for the remainder of their career. Then if they're caught again they should be seen as a source of the problem - and no longer a victim of a corrupt system.
So if Leipheimer is eventually proven to have doped as Floyd says, he should be banned from sport for life. Give him the chance to come forward voluntarily and reveal his past and accept an immediate career-ending ban...don't bother trying to get money back from him or retrieve suddenly-worthless medals (since the logistical cost and complexity probably isn't worth it, except in the case of an Olympic or wc medal [arbitrary distinction on my part]), but if he contests the charges and is still proven guilty...crucify him as an example to the next rider who refuses to flip on his teammates and all the support people who made his cheating possible.
In my opinion, the way Basso was allowed to stop cooperating - when it was clear that he could have implicated those who were linked to his cheating - and return to competition with the ringing endorsement of Zomegnan is horrifying. It's completely understandable from a commercial perspective, but this quote from the Giro organizer makes clear the unmanageable link between and dependence on star riders and race organizers that makes it impossible to trust the latter to make rationale, moral, consistent judgments against the former:
"I think Ivan Basso's victory represents a resurrection, and an important comeback. I think his success is good for Italian cycling and for the Giro d'Italia," Zomegnan said.
His perspective is wholly commercial and his concern in seeing a scandal-free Giro isn't based on the fact that doping risks the health of riders or makes implicitly fair, open competition impossible. Rather, he knows that another scandal is bad for business and so the systemic issues need only be glossed-over or neutralized, but not necessarily fixed if a snow-job will keep the money flowing. Why would anyone trust A.Z. or Pat Mac or Levi or J>B> or Steven Johnson to make decisions that cause them pain in the short-term but make long-term sense for the health of cycling and all those who practice it?
And its precisely because Floyd Landis has nothing to gain from keeping quiet anymore that his accusations are likely true. Doesn't it make complete sense from a financial perspective that - having determined that the risk of losing was outweighed by the potential gain from a long-shot win - Floyd would lie through his f'ing teeth to try to keep his Tour win? And then, after having committed to that path - but then lost - the difficulty of backing out of that position with any hope of redemption through truth-telling was not worth confronting until his very soul was in jeopardy? And in contrast, someone like Levi, whose income from cycling is simply unfathomable given the fact that he's being paid, in essence, to ride a bike, has no incentive to admit even to doping 14 years ago because of the risk it would present to his marketability now?
Even the fans who don't want to consider the possibility that their hero doped because their emotional investment in him is so substantial that to lose it would be devastating can be seen to be acting rationally when one considers their positions with a more cynical eye.
I don't think this is rocket-science, and I have to laugh at myself for ever thinking that the French media would accuse Lance of doping because of nationalistic bias and jealousy...it's all about money and power and identity and not wanting to have to have a real job or be demoted to membership in "the masses" as opposed to a position of exclusivity and celebrity in the rarefied air of mega-stardom...
Levi will never admit to doping - though he should - just like Landis would never have admitted to being doped in 2006, even though if he had he might have kept the better part of his fortune and established a path to return to the highest levels of the sport in Europe in some capacity after having served the standard ban.
The last thing I'll say is that I don't think FL is motivated primarily by jealousy, rage or envy, because those emotions require a level of energy that doesn't seem to correspond to the state of despair that typically catalyzes a burst of shockingly graphic and vivid revelation delivered without regard to their impact on one's reputation in sport or the wider world. What some would consider to be sour grapes or even career suicide could actually be a cathartic release of a toxic truth long-repressed and near-fatal in its hidden effects.
JP
PS. I did think the Giro rocked and was pure spectacle, but God-help those having to race it!
Race Radio said:
Beech Mtn said:
Just want to let you guys know that anyone can go ahead and edit the LL Wikipedia entry to reflect the archiving of a hard-copy of the suspension news article. That said, email it to me as well and I'll add it to the post on my site and make sure it's accessible going forward.
Thanks to everyone who has taken an interest in this. And remember, it's not about carrying out a vendetta against a particular rider - rather, it's about ensuring that the truth concerning doping at all levels of the sport, from amateur to professional, is accessible to those who are willing to look for it.
I don't agree with the contradictory statements made by people like Pat McQuaid, where they trumpet suspending Valverde for cheating linked to an investigation into practices originating in the early-2000's, while at the same time they excoriate Floyd Landis for the same kind of truth-telling, simply because his revelations are commercially-inconvenient. Those of us who doped have to take responsibility for what we did - not pretend that it didn't happen. Likewise for those who enabled doping, in whatever way. Cycling as a sport is strong enough to withstand the kind of scrutiny that exposes hypocrisy, immoral behavior and profiteering from life-threatening behavior. The individual empires built by certain riders, organizers, cycling officials and even media (like Graham Watson) might not survive the disclosure of a complicity to cover-up - or in some cases facilitate - doping, but why should it?
The people who would cover-up wrong-doing in hopes of protecting short-term income are the same parasites who have a direct role in warping the thinking of more-impressionable athletes such that doping becomes a legitimate possibility. When it becomes apparent that the people who should be throwing you out on your *** for cheating actually will try to protect you and even help you escape responsibility for what you've done, why should they be allowed to continue? Why should we want them to stay-on?
And why should riders who doped and were caught doing so pretend that it never happened? Granted, I absolutely don't think they need to revisit the subject week-in and week-out, but even the rider who maintains his innocence after a doping ban can at least make an unequivocal statement rejecting drug-use and stating their intent to compete w/o PED's for the remainder of their career. Then if they're caught again they should be seen as a source of the problem - and no longer a victim of a corrupt system.
So if Leipheimer is eventually proven to have doped as Floyd says, he should be banned from sport for life. Give him the chance to come forward voluntarily and reveal his past and accept an immediate career-ending ban...don't bother trying to get money back from him or retrieve suddenly-worthless medals (since the logistical cost and complexity probably isn't worth it, except in the case of an Olympic or wc medal [arbitrary distinction on my part]), but if he contests the charges and is still proven guilty...crucify him as an example to the next rider who refuses to flip on his teammates and all the support people who made his cheating possible.
In my opinion, the way Basso was allowed to stop cooperating - when it was clear that he could have implicated those who were linked to his cheating - and return to competition with the ringing endorsement of Zomegnan is horrifying. It's completely understandable from a commercial perspective, but this quote from the Giro organizer makes clear the unmanageable link between and dependence on star riders and race organizers that makes it impossible to trust the latter to make rationale, moral, consistent judgments against the former:
"I think Ivan Basso's victory represents a resurrection, and an important comeback. I think his success is good for Italian cycling and for the Giro d'Italia," Zomegnan said.
His perspective is wholly commercial and his concern in seeing a scandal-free Giro isn't based on the fact that doping risks the health of riders or makes implicitly fair, open competition impossible. Rather, he knows that another scandal is bad for business and so the systemic issues need only be glossed-over or neutralized, but not necessarily fixed if a snow-job will keep the money flowing. Why would anyone trust A.Z. or Pat Mac or Levi or J>B> or Steven Johnson to make decisions that cause them pain in the short-term but make long-term sense for the health of cycling and all those who practice it?
And its precisely because Floyd Landis has nothing to gain from keeping quiet anymore that his accusations are likely true. Doesn't it make complete sense from a financial perspective that - having determined that the risk of losing was outweighed by the potential gain from a long-shot win - Floyd would lie through his f'ing teeth to try to keep his Tour win? And then, after having committed to that path - but then lost - the difficulty of backing out of that position with any hope of redemption through truth-telling was not worth confronting until his very soul was in jeopardy? And in contrast, someone like Levi, whose income from cycling is simply unfathomable given the fact that he's being paid, in essence, to ride a bike, has no incentive to admit even to doping 14 years ago because of the risk it would present to his marketability now?
Even the fans who don't want to consider the possibility that their hero doped because their emotional investment in him is so substantial that to lose it would be devastating can be seen to be acting rationally when one considers their positions with a more cynical eye.
I don't think this is rocket-science, and I have to laugh at myself for ever thinking that the French media would accuse Lance of doping because of nationalistic bias and jealousy...it's all about money and power and identity and not wanting to have to have a real job or be demoted to membership in "the masses" as opposed to a position of exclusivity and celebrity in the rarefied air of mega-stardom...
Levi will never admit to doping - though he should - just like Landis would never have admitted to being doped in 2006, even though if he had he might have kept the better part of his fortune and established a path to return to the highest levels of the sport in Europe in some capacity after having served the standard ban.
The last thing I'll say is that I don't think FL is motivated primarily by jealousy, rage or envy, because those emotions require a level of energy that doesn't seem to correspond to the state of despair that typically catalyzes a burst of shockingly graphic and vivid revelation delivered without regard to their impact on one's reputation in sport or the wider world. What some would consider to be sour grapes or even career suicide could actually be a cathartic release of a toxic truth long-repressed and near-fatal in its hidden effects.
JP
PS. I did think the Giro rocked and was pure spectacle, but God-help those having to race it!
so he was banned for using ephedra and had his title taken away
or according to the levi press wagon
he used a allergy medicine and the ban was overturned
so erm.. why wasnt his US title given back?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
so at the moment:
there is evidence that he was banned, had his title taken off him and served a suspension for ephedra, so that can be entered onto wiki
there is as yet no evidence to show it was overturned, so that evidence cannot be put on wikipedia
or according to the levi press wagon
he used a allergy medicine and the ban was overturned
so erm.. why wasnt his US title given back?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
so at the moment:
there is evidence that he was banned, had his title taken off him and served a suspension for ephedra, so that can be entered onto wiki
there is as yet no evidence to show it was overturned, so that evidence cannot be put on wikipedia
- Mar 13, 2009
- 16,853
- 2
- 0
has anyone ever seen a more San Francisco bath-house deco scheme website than Bottle's?
check it http://www.levileipheimer.com/
check it http://www.levileipheimer.com/
- Mar 11, 2009
- 10,526
- 3,288
- 28,180
Yeah, but at least his house isn't uber-posh and gaudy. Looks like a nice, upscale California home with some property.
Video here.
Photo link here.
A hard life. Right?
Video here.
Photo link here.
A hard life. Right?
- Mar 11, 2009
- 10,526
- 3,288
- 28,180
I have changed the title of this thread to a generic title on Levi, as the discussion keeps shifting, and anyone not familiar with what Joe originally intended in his first post can certainly bring continue taht. Thus, the topics at hand seem to be:
• That Levi was positive for ephedra in 1996, and was sanctioned for it. But this is ignored by most fans, and arguably swept under the carpet.
• That Taylor Phinney was critical of dopers and said he wouldn't want to be around one after Vino won LBL, but seemed unaware of Levi's past positive.
• That Levi has yet to address Floyd Landis' claims of doping at USPS, though they were not on the team at the exact same time. Though if the case moves on, he will very likely be called to question.
We may as well discuss Levi's disappointing showing at the ToC here as well. Plus what position he has regarding the Tour, and if he will be the team leader should Lance not race it, or falter.
• That Levi was positive for ephedra in 1996, and was sanctioned for it. But this is ignored by most fans, and arguably swept under the carpet.
• That Taylor Phinney was critical of dopers and said he wouldn't want to be around one after Vino won LBL, but seemed unaware of Levi's past positive.
• That Levi has yet to address Floyd Landis' claims of doping at USPS, though they were not on the team at the exact same time. Though if the case moves on, he will very likely be called to question.
We may as well discuss Levi's disappointing showing at the ToC here as well. Plus what position he has regarding the Tour, and if he will be the team leader should Lance not race it, or falter.
Doping in bed?
I'm relatively new to cycling, so the extreme focus on doping in many forums has surprised me. It obviously is a major problem, but it definitely is a reflection of society in general. I find it ironic that guys think a doper is one of the worst people on earth, yet pop Cialis or Viagara at will. If that isn't a PED, what is? Two year sex bans anyone?
I'm relatively new to cycling, so the extreme focus on doping in many forums has surprised me. It obviously is a major problem, but it definitely is a reflection of society in general. I find it ironic that guys think a doper is one of the worst people on earth, yet pop Cialis or Viagara at will. If that isn't a PED, what is? Two year sex bans anyone?
dzsnuts said:
Sex is not a competitive sport.
If you think it is, I suggest you've been doing it all wrong.
- Mar 11, 2009
- 10,526
- 3,288
- 28,180
I was making a quip. Or trying to anyway. Well, at least I was the one who changed the title of the thread to something more objective, and posted links to his lifestyle that's an accurate portrayal of who he is to contribute to the discussion.
You need to spend more time here. Most of us that are truly anti-doping are at heart anti-cheating We also feel that in many ways the riders receive harsh punishment while those equally culpable - the suppliers, doctors, trainers, managers and other support, not to mention a corrupt governing body - often go untouched. The riders are the ones who are most visible, thus face the most direct criticism. But by and large it's the system of doping that's the problem, and recognized by probably 98% of the people on here, regardless of which "side" they are on.dzsnuts said:
It may also need clarification to others who aren't familiar with some of my posts that I have been fairly supportive of Leipheimer in the past. I'll list all those reasons again if need be.
Taking your name into consideration, I'm going to assume you were making a quip, or attempt at humor as well. But you know, it's never too late to contribute to the topic at hand...Creatine Bob said:
131313 said:
to be fair the edits that where made citing the ban where pretty crap.
" In 1996 he won the National Criterium Championship but this result was overturned due to a positive dope test. Leipheimer was suspended for 3 months and had to return the Jersey and prize money"
is hardly the stuff great writers are made of.
Ive put on the discussion ideas for how it should be worded, hopefully the admins will enter discussion and agree on what will be written when they decide the evidence is acceptable (which they will have to do soon)
- Aug 9, 2009
- 640
- 0
- 0
Ferminal said:
Ferminal - I thought it was a cardinal rule of this forum to be critical of other members. You must be new here.
As far as BaconBoy (TM) goes, he wouldn't put out on the first date, so I am over him. As we all know 99% of his posts and "rumors" are related to his obsession, so I tend to ignore them, except for the recent post where he quoted "E!online" (with no link) to back up his claims re LA being extradited or whatever. Posting BS like that needs to be called out - a lot of people new to this forum may not know that he is... I'm trying to phrase this politely... he is a "special" kind of guy.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Tour de Suisse 2025 - Men's (June 15- June 22)- Started by Tricycle Rider
- Replies: 1K
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025 stage 20: Verrès – Sestrière, 205 km- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 1K
-
Giro d'Italia Giro D'italia 2025 Stage 16: Piazzola sul Brenta – San Valentino- Started by YavorD
- Replies: 1K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 31K
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025 Stage 17: San Michele all’Adige – Bormio, 155 km- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 742
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 32K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram