Matt Cooke, did he go there?

[Dear Wiggo]

Re:

DW, you're still missing the issue.

When he was mentioned, the knives came out. An ex-team mate joined up and posted aspersions -- they were that -- insinuating Matt himself was dirty.

Even dragged Papp in and an "eating for two" BS claim.

Are you denying that?

No one was posting negatively about him.

I guess so.

Not much more discussion required then, is there?

Fancy telling me I am missing the issue.

Consider yourself lucky, the guy is a total condescending, mark for himself, and I don't believe a word out of his mouth. Unless there's something in it for him, he's basically quiet.

The rumour story about Cooke being a doper seems to have being doing the rounds on the US circuit when he was racing, ask Race Radio(all rights to B69) or maybe Izzy. Two guys who do know the US circuit and people involved in it.

Must be tough being anti-doping when your fellow pros think you are the guy who was doping.

Said it before but Cooke seems to be desperate for attention. Was friends with Phil Zajicek, rode on Navigators/Health Net/Exergy, said nowt about them but then once he retires, suddenly he is Mr. Anti-doping. The irony being that the word on the grapevine was that Cooke hinself was thought to be a doper and I am not the only person to have heard that.

Just like Steve Tilford, piling in on Garmin/Tommy D etc but completely ignoring the skeletons far closer to his own closet. Did Cooke contact USADA about all his former doping colleagues or said anything publically about them? Cooke seems bitter because he wasn't good enough to make it to the big leagues and you can bet if he had made it, he would have been as quiet as a mouse about what went on.

Here is what I know about domestic cycling’s new anti-doping hero:

-Started as a pro on Navigators and knew full well that he had teammates doping, yet stood by and cashed his checks
-Lived with Phil Z when Phil was buying from Papp, maybe Joe can let us know whether Phil was “eating for two"
-Defended Phil vehemently after Phil was popped.
-USADA contacted ex teammates of Matt's while investigating Matt around the time of the Phil bust. It was pretty clear to me that Matt himself was not cooperating.
-Was coached by Tyler Hamilton for a brief time and defended Tyler pretty adamantly, which really doesnt line up with how he views DZ, CVV etc. I’m pretty sure they were riding together in some of the 60 minutes footage.

Personally, it is my belief that Matt liked a little hot sauce here and there, if it wasnt a regular staple of his diet.
He’s a strange kid and a 180 on doping to keep his name in the spotlight doesnt surprise me in the slightest. Based on some other stories, which don't pertain to cycling, he didn't strike me as a person of such high moral standards that he wouldn't dope. Quite the opposite in fact.
...
I just hate seeing people who want to see a clean sport put their faith in some phony trying to stay relevant.

This picture of Matt Cooke hanging out with Tom Danielson is pretty sweet tho.
http://community.active.com/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/38-11430-6887/Pros-in-Estes---web.jpg

Nope. No one is saying anything negative. How could I possibly get it so wrong.


To clarify : I have no issue with potential dopers being outed / hinted at / whatever.

But to do it now, after he retired, only after he starts bashing known dopers and ex-doping team management?

Seems kinda suspicious yeah? Does to me.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

But we're still left with an almost-hero worship of someone who has done nothing to earn that position, to the point that any skepticism is seen as an attack.

Hero worship? Gimme a break. I'm just calling out omerta enforcement when I see it.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Re: Re:

Nope. No one is saying anything negative. How could I possibly get it so wrong.


To clarify : I have no issue with potential dopers being outed / hinted at / whatever.

But to do it now, after he retired, only after he starts bashing known dopers and ex-doping team management?

Seems kinda suspicious yeah? Does to me.

Fair enough. People were posting negatively. I forgot that isn't allowed in the clinic.

But we're still left with an almost-hero worship of someone who has done nothing to earn that position, to the point that any skepticism is seen as an attack.

Hero worship? Gimme a break. I'm just calling out omerta enforcement when I see it.

You realize there are other people on the forum? I'm not writing about your hero worship.

Once "bitter ex-doper" is thrown into a discussion, does it make the target a saint? Does the opinion of skeptics, rightly or wrongly, change the danger of some other tweeters or posters blindly putting faith in Matt Cooke's opinions?

 

[joe_papp]

Re: Re:

Hearsay is actually a type of evidence.

Magic Matt made his position and bias pretty clear. I don't see why you continue to rephrase his arguments to make it seem like he wrote something that he did not.

This place is hilarious, suddenly posters seemed to have developed a moral consciousness when it comes to accusations of people doping when it never previously stopped them. Most of the time, the clinic is blanket accusations, twisted takes on news/stories, cries of fraud or liar, blatant innuendo etc, all against those evil dopers, many of whom don't have a shred of so called evidence against them....

Good point - lol.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

No one was posting negatively about him.

Fair enough. People were posting negatively. I forgot that isn't allowed in the clinic.

I call that goal post shifting fallacy. Good one.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

You realize there are other people on the forum? I'm not writing about your hero worship.

In a post replying to me telling me I am missing the point, I think it's understandable I read that post as if it were addressed to me.

But thanks for the heads up that there are other people here. Alzheimers and all it's helpful to be reminded of things from time to time. Much obliged.

 

[joe_papp]

Re:

Hearsay is actually a type of evidence...

Yes: the [usually?] inadmissible-at-trial kind!

 

[Enrico Gimondi]

Cooke is great because he says "I have have been reading 'the clinic' if you want to talk to me please do it on here." But he'll just block you if you have a stance that is opposite of him. So how can we have talk to you on Twitter, Matthew? If someone takes a position that is difference than you, you won't engage in a dialogue.

 

[djpbaltimore]

Re: Re:

Hearsay is actually a type of evidence...

Yes: the [usually?] inadmissible-at-trial kind!

Totally admissible in the court of public opinion. No one is putting anybody on trial.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Re:

Ok you don't get it, that's fine. You don't understand and possibly didn't even try to understand what I wrote. That's also fine.

Let's leave it at I completely disagree with your argument that whistleblowers or people calling out active riders and management have to do their calling out in the manner that you decree, like you are some absolute moral authority. That's some arrogance I can't condone.

There's a doping problem in cycling and sport.

Anyone adding their voice to that should be supported, and I will continue to support them.

I don't care about the rest.

This is about where I am. Any possible potential for reform does worse than fails, it strengthens the resolve of the sports to keep doing the same thing, only with more secrecy.

Anyone that gets to that level, that acknowledges the issues is okay. Not my hero, just a fairly honest person. That's pretty rare in elite sport.

 

[Benotti69]

It is always funny when posters hate their riders being accused of doping without proofs, yet when a former rider does it, they have no problem then casting aspersions about his career in a similar manner. Hypocrisy much.

Then to compound it they go on off one about the clinic being a madhouse yet they keep coming back for more!!!!

Tells us a lot.

 

[pmcg76]

Re:

It is always funny when posters hate their riders being accused of doping without proofs, yet when a former rider does it, they have no problem then casting aspersions about his career in a similar manner. Hypocrisy much.

Then to compound it they go on off one about the clinic being a madhouse yet they keep coming back for more!!!!

Tells us a lot.

I think there is a bit of a difference between claiming someone is doped based on nothing more than the fact they are a pro or winning races and being told directly by someone within the Pro bubble that rider X is a doper. When other posters come with rumours from within the peleton, I do not automatically dismiss them as untrue.
Example, One poster has insinuated that Svein Tuft was a doper on more than one occasion here despite quite a few people inclduing Matt DeCanio vouching for Tuft, so I asked the poster by pm what they knew. Turned out the evidence was less substantial than what I had been told about Matt Cooke.

I said it before but I had conversations with a few people involved in the US scene. That was back in 2012/13. Our conversations covered everything from doping in the US to Garmin/JV, SKY etc, etc. I asked the same questions to the various people and gave my impressions of things and was surprised by the candid nature of the exchanges. They were very insighful and also illustrated how many things are not as clear cut as people potray things. I asked a question about dopers in the US and one of the responses was what I posted. I simply noted it and moved on at the time. I have no clue why someone would just sully a preson unless there was some sort of personal agenda.

So when that interview that has been linked came out a year later, I read it with that backstory ringing in my head. The interview reads great in terms of the content but I couldn't just swallow it because of what I had heard. I have not made a direct accusation against Cooke, just repeating what I heard and why I have reservations about his stance in light of what I was informed. I have on occasion questioned performances on here but I have never made unfounded accusations against any rider unlike so many here.

Also I would like to point out that even in that interview Matt Cooke says things have improved over the last few years so he seems to be in some sort of agreement with JV .

I don't do twitter, never have and no plans to do so but I hear Matt has read this thread and wants people to post any questions on twitter so maybe someone can tweet them.

Why does Matt think there were rumours about him being a doper floating around the US peloton?

Re-reading that interview, Matt seems pretty convinced of his own talents but after 2 seasons on the US scene, he was left without a contract for a year and then rode for some of the smaller US teams before again being left without a team until halfway through 2013. Why does he think he stuggled to get a contract with the bigger US teams, Kelly/UHC/Bissell. Could it have been related to the doping rumours?

Why was it that he only really started producing results in his 30s?

The Garmin un-maskings were 2012 so why did it take until late 2014 to go public about his feelings on the subject. Will Routley and a few others were vocal about the subject when it happened and they were still racing at the time.

How is it possible that someone rode on Navigators and not have had a clue what was going on there. It seems everyone else outside the team knew what was going on and they were knicknamed Nandrogators going back to the days of Matt DeCanio which was early 00s. Seems strange someone on the team wouldn't know.

Matt rode with HealthNet for a season. Ryder had been there the year before, surely there must have been a few stories about Ryder as apparently it was common knowledge that Ryder had doped with the US scene.

The impressions given by others was that Matt was desperate to make it to Europe and in the interview, he makes it clear he feels he was cheated out of that possibility by dopers. My question is why would a clean rider who is losing out to dopers in the US then wish to go to Europe where the situation was a lot, lot worse. I know there were riders based in the US who didn't want to go to Europe because they didn't want to be faced with that situation.

Matt says in the interview that we would never even know the names of the Garmin guys if they had not doped and in a doped up peleton, that is likely true. But how would anyone know if these could guys would have made it big in a clean field. Afaik, Vandevelde, Zabriskie and Millar were considered bit talents before they even made it to Europe, Leipheimer, Danielson, maybe less so.

Maybe if we get some answers I will be a little less skeptical of his motives.

 

[Benotti69]

Maybe a healthy dose of skepticism towards the sport might help you stop viewing certain riders through rose tinted spectacles.

I am all for riders making a noise about doping. If they turn out like Millar to be scumbag hypocrites, then fans with some grey matter will see that and they will be called on it.

 

[pmcg76]

Re:

Maybe a healthy dose of skepticism towards the sport might help you stop viewing certain riders through rose tinted spectacles.

I am all for riders making a noise about doping. If they turn out like Millar to be scumbag hypocrites, then fans with some grey matter will see that and they will be called on it.

Who are all these riders I view with Rose tinted classes? Just because someone doesn't throw out blanket accusations and rant and rave doesn't mean they are not skeptical about the sport. Taking a view such as "everyone is doping" and then trying to fit the narravtive around that in an attempt to say I told you so, is not skeptism in the normal sense.

When I see the constant refrain JV is a fraud/liar/scumbag for saying the sport cleaned up after 08, then yes I query those claims. Not because I am a big JV fan but because of what other evidence there is to support that view.1/ There was a graph floating about around 2010 that showed the changes in blood profiles after 08 and yes they really changed. 2/ Speeds did slow down, I did my own analysis for Alpe d'Huez(the most frequently used climb) and times did slow but are starting to rise again. 3/Antoine Vayer is public about backing Peraud/Barguill/Martin as being clean and I dont see how they could compete if things had not improved, I put more value on the opinions of Vayer than random guys on the internet. 4/The guys I talked with, I asked about the changes in doping and they also said that yes things had improved but it seemed to vary at different times and there were still plenty of dopers. 5/ Also numerous people have said things improved including whistleblowers such as Hamilton and even Cooke is saying the same thing so....why would the say that if it weren't true.

When JV was posting here a few years ago, he said the sport needed more testing. He was roundly mocked by you lot for suggesting this, as why would more testing be needed if the sport was cleaner as he claimed. He quite rightly pointed out that doping methods are not static and he seems to be right as things seem to be changing again for the worseunfortunately.

If people what to dismiss the opinions of people like Vayer and actual clean pros who actually compete in the sport just so they can rag on JV for being a lying fraud, as evil as Lance then that says more about them than anything.

To bring this back to Cooke, I heard about him before he ever went public with his anti-dopers view so of course I am going to be skeptical about his motives. If what I heard is incorrect, then I would be happy to apologise but I doubt we will ever get the real truth on the matter.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

AICAR and GW50516 won't do squat to a blood profile. Nor will cortisone as far as I know.

Testo will have minor impacts via an increase.

The graphs themselves are not supported by visible raw data, and we have no way of knowing how an organisation that seeks to show its new system is working constructed graphs to prove its point.

Just ... you know ... sayin'.

The mocking of JV is in line with the inconsistency of what he was saying, not because the idea of more testing is mock-worthy. Your anti-clinic bias is leaking all over your posts.

 

[Benotti69]

The peloton slowed down in 2008 = clean, since when?

Doping is a line and once crossed you are cheating, there is no big wide grey zone. So whether speeds were down or not does not equal clean.

JV got mocked for lots of things and all them imo justified. He claimed he had an internal testing program costing the team half a million $ a year. Proof his team were clean. Lies. JV is not part of a clean cycling solution. He was vociferous about catching Armstrong, but since then he has played omerta again as much anyone else in the sport. More so, calling Sky clean FFS.

Cooke is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things but another voice ranting :rolleyes and raving about doping aint no bad thing. Pity those in power were not ranting and raving at the dopers and cheats.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

For the JV lovers who have complained Matt Cooke didn't call out his current team mates when racing, here's a little reminder for you...

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2005/vaughters_1999

Still, it was Vaughters himself who received a fright at the pre-Tour medical tests, as his hematocrit posted a 51 percent reading, above the UCI's limit of 50 percent, but still under his special dispensation of 52 percent. (Frequent testing had shown that Vaughters - like many good climbers - have naturally high hematocrit levels and they are granted dispensation from doctors.)

"I'd never tested (at a race) above 50 percent, except before the start of the '99 Tour," he said. "I told the team doctor 'don't worry, I've got a certificate, I've got a hall-pass for this'," he recalled. "But the doctor said it wasn't me they were worried about, it was that the whole team was very close (to the 50 percent limit)."

But that year, it is now widely accepted even by the UCI, according to Vaughters, that its testing apparatus was calibrated somewhat high. He said this is not that uncommon, given that the machines are carried from race-to-race, through baggage handling and screening, and while efforts are made to ensure they are accurately calibrated, "there is some slop room" for variations.

But as far as Vaughters could see in the USPS team, "there was no first-hand evidence of anything (doping-related). I didn't see any evidence of EPO or anything like that. But that said, I wasn't there for the second and third weeks of the Tour," he said. (US Postal lost Jonathan Vaughters after he was caught up in the second fall over the Gois on stage 2. He was part of Armstrong's plan for the mountains.)

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Great power and great responsibility and all that, you know?

 

[pmcg76]

Re:

AICAR and GW50516 won't do squat to a blood profile. Nor will cortisone as far as I know.

Testo will have minor impacts via an increase.

The graphs themselves are not supported by visible raw data, and we have no way of knowing how an organisation that seeks to show its new system is working constructed graphs to prove its point.

Just ... you know ... sayin'.

The mocking of JV is in line with the inconsistency of what he was saying, not because the idea of more testing is mock-worthy. Your anti-clinic bias is leaking all over your posts.

No I am pretty sure that one of the main criticisms against JV is that he said that things had improved re doping post 2008. Maybe read some of your own(and others posts) posts.

Also interesting that the only part you pick out is about the graphs. How about Vayer and his opinions the likes of Hamilton, Cooke saying it has got cleaner.

 

[pmcg76]

Re:

The peloton slowed down in 2008 = clean, since when?

Doping is a line and once crossed you are cheating, there is no big wide grey zone. So whether speeds were down or not does not equal clean.

JV got mocked for lots of things and all them imo justified. He claimed he had an internal testing program costing the team half a million $ a year. Proof his team were clean. Lies. JV is not part of a clean cycling solution. He was vociferous about catching Armstrong, but since then he has played omerta again as much anyone else in the sport. More so, calling Sky clean FFS.

Cooke is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things but another voice ranting :rolleyes and raving about doping aint no bad thing. Pity those in power were not ranting and raving at the dopers and cheats.

Except nobody said it was clean just that things had improved enough so that clean guys could compete. You disagree with that, maybe query Vayer about what he says.

Did they not have an internal testing program? because at other times you have claimed it existed to make sure nobody tested positive. Which is it?

I dont think JV was vociferous about catching Lance. He contributed to the downfall when called as did his team members but he was never running around like Walsh with the big aim of taking down Lance. More revisionst nonsense.

All these things you claim are your own personal opinions rather than what the truth may actually be.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

AICAR and GW50516 won't do squat to a blood profile. Nor will cortisone as far as I know.

Testo will have minor impacts via an increase.

The graphs themselves are not supported by visible raw data, and we have no way of knowing how an organisation that seeks to show its new system is working constructed graphs to prove its point.

Just ... you know ... sayin'.

The mocking of JV is in line with the inconsistency of what he was saying, not because the idea of more testing is mock-worthy. Your anti-clinic bias is leaking all over your posts.

No I am pretty sure that one of the main criticisms against JV is that he said that things had improved re doping post 2008. Maybe read some of your own(and others posts) posts.

Also interesting that the only part you pick out is about the graphs. How about Vayer and his opinions the likes of Hamilton, Cooke saying it has got cleaner.

You have reading comprehension issues exacerbated by your anti-clinic / pro-JV bias.

There is no point in responding further. Good day.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

The peloton slowed down in 2008 = clean, since when?

Doping is a line and once crossed you are cheating, there is no big wide grey zone. So whether speeds were down or not does not equal clean.

JV got mocked for lots of things and all them imo justified. He claimed he had an internal testing program costing the team half a million $ a year. Proof his team were clean. Lies. JV is not part of a clean cycling solution. He was vociferous about catching Armstrong, but since then he has played omerta again as much anyone else in the sport. More so, calling Sky clean FFS.

Cooke is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things but another voice ranting :rolleyes and raving about doping aint no bad thing. Pity those in power were not ranting and raving at the dopers and cheats.

Except nobody said it was clean just that things had improved enough so that clean guys could compete. You disagree with that, maybe query Vayer about what he says.

Did they not have an internal testing program? because at other times you have claimed it existed to make sure nobody tested positive. Which is it?

I dont think JV was vociferous about catching Lance. He contributed to the downfall when called as did his team members but he was never running around like Walsh with the big aim of taking down Lance. More revisionst nonsense.

All these things you claim are your own personal opinions rather than what the truth may actually be.

I never got this idea that any team would want a guy who wouldn't dope. Especially after Bassons, teams would've wised up to the idea that a clean rider makes everyone else look bad.

Why would Riis, Lefevere, Marinelli, JV, Saronni, Rihs or anyone running a team needing results hire someone not prepared to do what it takes to get those results? Why have a couple of clean guys and the rest doping? The risk inherent in that doesn't make sence!

Revisitonist nonsense?? It was JV who approached Tygart. JV joining here and posting was not vociferous?

Yes i give my opinion on here, just as 99% do. You dont post opinion?

Cycling is a small sport, a minority sport and macho male dominated sport. It also has a gang mentality aka omerta. That guys could come in and ride clean making others feel dirty would be an extreme exception and that person is going to need to have a hide of titanium to stick it out. The sport has a culture of doping and to go against that culture is imo virtually impossible for more than a season. Especially now as the doping is so transformative.

 

[pmcg76]

Re: Re:

The peloton slowed down in 2008 = clean, since when?

Doping is a line and once crossed you are cheating, there is no big wide grey zone. So whether speeds were down or not does not equal clean.

JV got mocked for lots of things and all them imo justified. He claimed he had an internal testing program costing the team half a million $ a year. Proof his team were clean. Lies. JV is not part of a clean cycling solution. He was vociferous about catching Armstrong, but since then he has played omerta again as much anyone else in the sport. More so, calling Sky clean FFS.

Cooke is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things but another voice ranting :rolleyes and raving about doping aint no bad thing. Pity those in power were not ranting and raving at the dopers and cheats.

Except nobody said it was clean just that things had improved enough so that clean guys could compete. You disagree with that, maybe query Vayer about what he says.

Did they not have an internal testing program? because at other times you have claimed it existed to make sure nobody tested positive. Which is it?

I dont think JV was vociferous about catching Lance. He contributed to the downfall when called as did his team members but he was never running around like Walsh with the big aim of taking down Lance. More revisionst nonsense.

All these things you claim are your own personal opinions rather than what the truth may actually be.

I never got this idea that any team would want a guy who wouldn't dope. Especially after Bassons, teams would've wised up to the idea that a clean rider makes everyone else look bad.

Why would Riis, Lefevere, Marinelli, JV, Saronni, Rihs or anyone running a team needing results hire someone not prepared to do what it takes to get those results? Why have a couple of clean guys and the rest doping? The risk inherent in that doesn't make sence!

Revisitonist nonsense?? It was JV who approached Tygart. JV joining here and posting was not vociferous?

Yes i give my opinion on here, just as 99% do. You dont post opinion?

Cycling is a small sport, a minority sport and macho male dominated sport. It also has a gang mentality aka omerta. That guys could come in and ride clean making others feel dirty would be an extreme exception and that person is going to need to have a hide of titanium to stick it out. The sport has a culture of doping and to go against that culture is imo virtually impossible for more than a season. Especially now as the doping is so transformative.

Wait a second, Cooke claims he was clean but didn't have a clue of what was happening at Navigators despite almost the entire team doping. Why would they have signed him then? Why would Garmin have signed Gaimon with his reputation which was far more vociferous open than Cooke!!

As Di Luca said, doping has gone private so most people won't have a clue what their team-mates are doing so having a clean guy is not so risky as it was when Bassons was around. I don't believe you have read Bassons book.

There are enough ex-Garmin guys floating around the US scene with inside information for Cooke to have got some second hand rumours stories from somewhere. If he has some, why hasn't he posted them already?

I don't think JV joined here to attck Armstrong? Cannot remember him being discussed at all. Did JV appraoch Tygart? I thought the story was JV went to USADA in 2004 or sometime and told them what he knew. Then was called again to testify in the case against Armstrong.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

The peloton slowed down in 2008 = clean, since when?

Doping is a line and once crossed you are cheating, there is no big wide grey zone. So whether speeds were down or not does not equal clean.

JV got mocked for lots of things and all them imo justified. He claimed he had an internal testing program costing the team half a million $ a year. Proof his team were clean. Lies. JV is not part of a clean cycling solution. He was vociferous about catching Armstrong, but since then he has played omerta again as much anyone else in the sport. More so, calling Sky clean FFS.

Cooke is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things but another voice ranting :rolleyes and raving about doping aint no bad thing. Pity those in power were not ranting and raving at the dopers and cheats.

Except nobody said it was clean just that things had improved enough so that clean guys could compete. You disagree with that, maybe query Vayer about what he says.

Did they not have an internal testing program? because at other times you have claimed it existed to make sure nobody tested positive. Which is it?

I dont think JV was vociferous about catching Lance. He contributed to the downfall when called as did his team members but he was never running around like Walsh with the big aim of taking down Lance. More revisionst nonsense.

All these things you claim are your own personal opinions rather than what the truth may actually be.

I never got this idea that any team would want a guy who wouldn't dope. Especially after Bassons, teams would've wised up to the idea that a clean rider makes everyone else look bad.

Why would Riis, Lefevere, Marinelli, JV, Saronni, Rihs or anyone running a team needing results hire someone not prepared to do what it takes to get those results? Why have a couple of clean guys and the rest doping? The risk inherent in that doesn't make sence!

Revisitonist nonsense?? It was JV who approached Tygart. JV joining here and posting was not vociferous?

Yes i give my opinion on here, just as 99% do. You dont post opinion?

Cycling is a small sport, a minority sport and macho male dominated sport. It also has a gang mentality aka omerta. That guys could come in and ride clean making others feel dirty would be an extreme exception and that person is going to need to have a hide of titanium to stick it out. The sport has a culture of doping and to go against that culture is imo virtually impossible for more than a season. Especially now as the doping is so transformative.

Wait a second, Cooke claims he was clean but didn't have a clue of what was happening at Navigators despite almost the entire team doping. Why would they have signed him then? Why would Garmin have signed Gaimon with his reputation which was far more vociferous open than Cooke!!

As Di Luca said, doping has gone private so most people won't have a clue what their team-mates are doing so having a clean guy is not so risky as it was when Bassons was around. I don't believe you have read Bassons book.

There are enough ex-Garmin guys floating around the US scene with inside information for Cooke to have got some second hand rumours stories from somewhere. If he has some, why hasn't he posted them already?

I don't think JV joined here to attck Armstrong? Cannot remember him being discussed at all. Did JV appraoch Tygart? I thought the story was JV went to USADA in 2004 or sometime and told them what he knew. Then was called again to testify in the case against Armstrong.

Wait so you believe what Di Luca says? How can Di Luca know what is going on or he see nothing changes, just the lies get rolled out again and again with a different spin!

Why dont you ask Cooke on twitter anything you want to know?

Gaimon has a soap tattoo, that means little.

The peloton is small and riders change teams so often that there a no secrets. Teams have 4 doctors for saddle sores, cuts and grazes? I dont think so.

Just because everyone doesn't have a 60% HcT doesn't mean a clean peloton.

 

[pmcg76]

Re: Re:

The peloton slowed down in 2008 = clean, since when?

Doping is a line and once crossed you are cheating, there is no big wide grey zone. So whether speeds were down or not does not equal clean.

JV got mocked for lots of things and all them imo justified. He claimed he had an internal testing program costing the team half a million $ a year. Proof his team were clean. Lies. JV is not part of a clean cycling solution. He was vociferous about catching Armstrong, but since then he has played omerta again as much anyone else in the sport. More so, calling Sky clean FFS.

Cooke is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things but another voice ranting :rolleyes and raving about doping aint no bad thing. Pity those in power were not ranting and raving at the dopers and cheats.

Except nobody said it was clean just that things had improved enough so that clean guys could compete. You disagree with that, maybe query Vayer about what he says.

Did they not have an internal testing program? because at other times you have claimed it existed to make sure nobody tested positive. Which is it?

I dont think JV was vociferous about catching Lance. He contributed to the downfall when called as did his team members but he was never running around like Walsh with the big aim of taking down Lance. More revisionst nonsense.

All these things you claim are your own personal opinions rather than what the truth may actually be.

I never got this idea that any team would want a guy who wouldn't dope. Especially after Bassons, teams would've wised up to the idea that a clean rider makes everyone else look bad.

Why would Riis, Lefevere, Marinelli, JV, Saronni, Rihs or anyone running a team needing results hire someone not prepared to do what it takes to get those results? Why have a couple of clean guys and the rest doping? The risk inherent in that doesn't make sence!

Revisitonist nonsense?? It was JV who approached Tygart. JV joining here and posting was not vociferous?

Yes i give my opinion on here, just as 99% do. You dont post opinion?

Cycling is a small sport, a minority sport and macho male dominated sport. It also has a gang mentality aka omerta. That guys could come in and ride clean making others feel dirty would be an extreme exception and that person is going to need to have a hide of titanium to stick it out. The sport has a culture of doping and to go against that culture is imo virtually impossible for more than a season. Especially now as the doping is so transformative.

Wait a second, Cooke claims he was clean but didn't have a clue of what was happening at Navigators despite almost the entire team doping. Why would they have signed him then? Why would Garmin have signed Gaimon with his reputation which was far more vociferous open than Cooke!!

As Di Luca said, doping has gone private so most people won't have a clue what their team-mates are doing so having a clean guy is not so risky as it was when Bassons was around. I don't believe you have read Bassons book.

There are enough ex-Garmin guys floating around the US scene with inside information for Cooke to have got some second hand rumours stories from somewhere. If he has some, why hasn't he posted them already?

I don't think JV joined here to attck Armstrong? Cannot remember him being discussed at all. Did JV appraoch Tygart? I thought the story was JV went to USADA in 2004 or sometime and told them what he knew. Then was called again to testify in the case against Armstrong.

Wait so you believe what Di Luca says? How can Di Luca know what is going on or he see nothing changes, just the lies get rolled out again and again with a different spin!

Why dont you ask Cooke on twitter anything you want to know?

Gaimon has a soap tattoo, that means little.

The peloton is small and riders change teams so often that there a no secrets. Teams have 4 doctors for saddle sores, cuts and grazes? I dont think so.

Just because everyone doesn't have a 60% HcT doesn't mean a clean peloton.

I don't do twitter. Not a fan.

I do believe DiLuca when it is backed by what Michael Ashenden said. No team doping like old. Small pockets or individuals doping. Again, confirmed by what I have heard on the grapevine.

Maybe you should at look at connecting with some people involved at the sport, maybe those who have shown a willingness to speak out. Contact Cooke yourself and ask him what he knows in private. Actually learn something about what really goes on instead of your own version of reality.