Moncoutie

[Le breton]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=972602&highlight=smlc+moncouti%E9#post972602

I just reread my post (above), still relevant I think.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=972602&highlight=smlc+moncouti%E9#post972602

I just reread my post (above), still relevant I think.

You are good with numbers, what would Moncoutie do when he was 3 or 4 kilos lighter? One minute faster?

 

[blackcat]

not clean, but not dirty, some amorphous place betwixt

 

[Taxus4a]

I think he could have been clean all his career.
It is hard to believe in some results, he should have a big talent.

 

[Afrank]

I was on the side that he was clean.... i wish RaceRadio would talk some more.

I was always under the impression he was one of the few clean guys as well. Of course I can't declare him to definitely be clean without a shadow of a doubt, can't do that with any cyclist. But any hard evidence, from RR or anybody else, to the contrary would be appreciated.

 

[blackcat]

I was always under the impression he was one of the few clean guys as well. Of course I can't declare him to definitely be clean without a shadow of a doubt, can't do that with any cyclist. But any hard evidence, from RR or anybody else, to the contrary would be appreciated.

if a man casts no shadow, is he a man, or is he a god?

 

[thehog]

not clean, but not dirty, some amorphous place betwixt

Clean.

Wiggins 09 blood values were the same as Landis 06.

For JV an RR to spew out this stuff is fairly vile.

Cofdis have a checked history but they did manage to clear house after Miller, O'Grady and White treated the team like a nightclub.

 

[Afrank]

if a man casts no shadow, is he a man, or is he a god?

I have no idea what point your making?

 

[Le breton]

Clean.

Wiggins 09 blood values were the same as Landis 06.

You mean about 49.2% hematocrit at the start of the 3rd week?

 

[Galic Ho]

Clean.

Wiggins 09 blood values were the same as Landis 06.

For JV an RR to spew out this stuff is fairly vile.

Cofdis have a checked history but they did manage to clear house after Miller, O'Grady and White treated the team like a nightclub.

+10char

Good rider. Good team. After the Anglos left Cofidis, my how their image changed.

If I remember correctly, wasn't Wiggins riding for them back in the dark days? Oh that's right, he was, when he was getting dropped first mountain stage in the Tour by the groupetto.

Moncoutie get's the benefit of the doubt IMO. Stage hunter at best who won some very hardly fought battles and paid for it later on. Not really the mark of a doper. I like a lot of Cofidis non anglo riders. They look real and their riding reflects that. Like Taaramae for instance.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

It is funny how riders today are declared dirty because they win.....but a guy who won the KOM at the Vuelta 4 times gets a pass because one guy said something 15 years ago

Why don't you just tell us what you've been told without naming your source(s)? I don't get it. You've spent the last 4 years posting inside info about LA and USPS, but whatever you heard about Moncoutié cannot be disclosed.

 

[pmcg76]

It is funny how riders today are declared dirty because they win.....but a guy who won the KOM at the Vuelta 4 times gets a pass because one guy said something 15 years ago

The same can be applied to Christophe Basson's, without Willy Voet declaring Basson's clean, he would not even be remembered nowadays.

I witnessed one of Moncoutie's stage victories at the Vuelta and it came from a break like a lot of his victories. It's not like he was just out and crushing things a la Froome or Porte.

Whilst I am not saying Moncoutie is definitely clean, your reasoning as illustrated is way off base. If you can at least explain what you heard, it would be a help but right now you are slumming it with the trolls of the clinic 12.

 

[The Hitch]

It is funny how riders today are declared dirty because they win.....but a guy who won the KOM at the Vuelta 4 times gets a pass because one guy said something 15 years ago

Who is declared dirty because they win?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

RR has plenty of goodwill here, but I do have some queries.

If they do have dirt on Moncoutié, then why have they sat back and let us all defend him, and use his results as a rough indicator of clean possibilities, for several years without saying anything?

Also, the introduction of the concept of dirt on Moncoutié, which has not been elaborated on yet, also comes at the same time as RR explains that they have confidence in Team Sky being clean via the impression given off when they spoke to Richie Porte.

I have no problem with either, and as I say, RR has a lot of credibility and goodwill on the boards, so their words carry more weight than if some random poster without their history came in. Hell, if somebody without RR's history came in posting stuff along the lines of "Sky are clean because they told me convincingly" and posting on comments about Moncoutié being clean with "sadly, no" then they'd probably be dismissed as trolling.

Sky are doing a very strange job of this, because it seems like they clearly talk a very good talk as people like RR and David Walsh buy them. In which case it's doubly strange because they perform in such a way that the layman can't believe in them (because they look so utterly ridiculous) but the anti-doping crusaders can. I can't possibly imagine that they don't baulk at some of these performances, but their doubts are clearly being assuaged by the people at Sky, however that may be.

But let's remember, when the first CERA positives were announced, Sebastian Lang said that the Gerolsteiner Tour team were able to celebrate, smile and laugh about this new wave of dopers getting caught. All except Stefan Schumacher, who became slightly withdrawn and quiet. Lang asked him if they had anything to worry about, and Schumacher lied that they didn't. Lang found nothing suspicious about the behaviour of Bernhard Kohl, who laughed and joked along with the rest of the team. Presumably Kohl's just a better actor. But then, I doubt Sky are signing people based on their acting skills.

 

[Arnout]

But let's remember, when the first CERA positives were announced, Sebastian Lang said that the Gerolsteiner Tour team were able to celebrate, smile and laugh about this new wave of dopers getting caught. All except Stefan Schumacher, who became slightly withdrawn and quiet. Lang asked him if they had anything to worry about, and Schumacher lied that they didn't. Lang found nothing suspicious about the behaviour of Bernhard Kohl, who laughed and joked along with the rest of the team. Presumably Kohl's just a better actor. But then, I doubt Sky are signing people based on their acting skills.

Lang said that after Schumacher was caught and before Kohl was caught, if I remember correctly. So maybe he was selectively remembering that episode.

 

[Heckler]

Sky are doing a very strange job of this, because it seems like they clearly talk a very good talk as people like RR and David Walsh buy them. In which case it's doubly strange because they perform in such a way that the layman can't believe in them (because they look so utterly ridiculous) but the anti-doping crusaders can.

In the beginning, almost everyone wanted believe in the American miracle.

At the height of the suspicions, no one wanted to get sued.

After the reasoned decision, almost everyone, exhausted, was relieved or wishfully thinking that the war on drugs was won.

In this newest, improved edition, most everyone is still just a little past the halfway point of phase one. And, everyone is still exhausted, still trying to exorcise the Armstrong era; maybe too tired, maybe just giving in.

Sky aside, consider the CAS decision to reinstate Katusha...

2011 TO 2012 THE "Competition Expenses" grew by 195% to 28m euros. That is almost 3 times the total budget of some World Tour teams. No definitive explanation has ever been produced. 12 whereabouts infractions (I think) in 4 years. 4 doping infractions in that same period.

RAH! RAH! Rodriguez!
How did that happen?

But let's remember, when the first CERA positives were announced, Sebastian Lang said that the Gerolsteiner Tour team were able to celebrate, smile and laugh about this new wave of dopers getting caught. All except Stefan Schumacher, who became slightly withdrawn and quiet. Lang asked him if they had anything to worry about, and Schumacher lied that they didn't. Lang found nothing suspicious about the behaviour of Bernhard Kohl, who laughed and joked along with the rest of the team. Presumably Kohl's just a better actor. But then, I doubt Sky are signing people based on their acting skills.

There have been some soap opera soundbites; WAGs twitter fight, Froome's dramatics, Pre Giro smack talk and Uran being honest, but in the big picture Team Sky controls the message closer than any team before them.

 

[Frosty]

Havent got a copy with me but didnt Millar in his book reckon that Moncoutie was clean, at least while Millar was at Cofidis? ie, it's not just what Gaumont said.

 

[Race Radio]

RR has plenty of goodwill here, but I do have some queries.

If they do have dirt on Moncoutié, then why have they sat back and let us all defend him, and use his results as a rough indicator of clean possibilities, for several years without saying anything?

Also, the introduction of the concept of dirt on Moncoutié, which has not been elaborated on yet, also comes at the same time as RR explains that they have confidence in Team Sky being clean via the impression given off when they spoke to Richie Porte.

I have no problem with either, and as I say, RR has a lot of credibility and goodwill on the boards, so their words carry more weight than if some random poster without their history came in. Hell, if somebody without RR's history came in posting stuff along the lines of "Sky are clean because they told me convincingly" and posting on comments about Moncoutié being clean with "sadly, no" then they'd probably be dismissed as trolling.

Sky are doing a very strange job of this, because it seems like they clearly talk a very good talk as people like RR and David Walsh buy them. In which case it's doubly strange because they perform in such a way that the layman can't believe in them (because they look so utterly ridiculous) but the anti-doping crusaders can. I can't possibly imagine that they don't baulk at some of these performances, but their doubts are clearly being assuaged by the people at Sky, however that may be.

But let's remember, when the first CERA positives were announced, Sebastian Lang said that the Gerolsteiner Tour team were able to celebrate, smile and laugh about this new wave of dopers getting caught. All except Stefan Schumacher, who became slightly withdrawn and quiet. Lang asked him if they had anything to worry about, and Schumacher lied that they didn't. Lang found nothing suspicious about the behaviour of Bernhard Kohl, who laughed and joked along with the rest of the team. Presumably Kohl's just a better actor. But then, I doubt Sky are signing people based on their acting skills.

Engaging in a discussion on these boards has become close to impossible.

I have explained how I came to my opinion on Moncutie. I have also explained that I do not believe SKY has a team doping program. Certainly it is highly possible riders on the team are doping, it is Pro cycling.....but team wide program? No way. I have explained that I came to these conclusions by talking to a wide variety of people in the sport. Riders, staff, administrators. Former Pro's, Current Pro's.

Of course this is not good enough for most here.

 

[Race Radio]

Wiggins 09 blood values were the same as Landis 06.
.

Math is not your strength is it?

Not saying Wiggins is clean but his fluctuations are not even close to Floyd's 10% increase in Hct and drop in Reti. Floyd had an off score of 105 Wiggins was between averaged around 90 for the Tour, dropping below 85 in the final week

 

[Race Radio]

Who is declared dirty because they win?

Have you read the clinic lately?

It is funny to watch a few posters attack any rider who rode on SKY when Lienders was there but ignore a guy who rode on one of the dirtiest teams in the sport for over a decade. How many positives on Cofidis during his time? How many police raids? How many doping doctors? How many junkies? Lots.

 

[Digger]

Have you read the clinic lately?

It is funny to watch a few posters attack any rider who rode on SKY when Lienders was there but ignore a guy who rode on one of the dirtiest teams in the sport for over a decade. How many positives on Cofidis during his time? How many police raids? How many doping doctors? How many junkies? Lots.

It's also funny to watch people who were so determined in their posting of lance, now not willing to call it as it is....Leinders being a blood doping doctor for example...or sky's use of TUES or other methods.....

 

[Mr.38%]

Have you read the clinic lately?

It is funny to watch a few posters attack any rider who rode on SKY when Lienders was there but ignore a guy who rode on one of the dirtiest teams in the sport for over a decade. How many positives on Cofidis during his time? How many police raids? How many doping doctors? How many junkies? Lots.

90+% doped during the 80ies, especially on PDM. LeMond is surely a doper, right?

Dude, name your sources or keep quiet.

 

[hrotha]

Engaging in a discussion on these boards has become close to impossible.

I have explained how I came to my opinion on Moncutie. I have also explained that I do not believe SKY has a team doping program. Certainly it is highly possible riders on the team are doping, it is Pro cycling.....but team wide program? No way. I have explained that I came to these conclusions by talking to a wide variety of people in the sport. Riders, staff, administrators. Former Pro's, Current Pro's.

Of course this is not good enough for most here.

Of course it's not good enough, and it shouldn't be. You haven't said anything about the content of those conversations regarding Moncoutié, so it just comes down to "trust me". And you have a good record, so people trust you. But we're talking about challenging one of the most solid points of reference we have. It's as if someone (who wasn't a troll) said LeMond wasn't clean - they'd be required to elaborate, because the implications in our understanding of doping history would be massive.

It's the same here. Saying that a discussion on the Clinic is nigh impossible is not only unfair to the people who are asking you to elaborate (most of whom, I think, have never given you reason to believe they wouldn't engage in a civilized discussion), but also, honestly, a cop-out.

Moncoutie's team history has been discussed here at length, so you're not going to convince anyone with that argument. It doesn't make sense that someone would become a pariah by doping in secret in a team where everyone else (bar Moncoutié and Tombak, apparently) did it openly in an era where acceptance of doping was practically universal.

 

[Race Radio]

It's also funny to watch people who were so determined in their posting of lance, now not willing to call it as it is....Leinders being a blood doping doctor for example...or sky's use of TUES or other methods.....

Digger, this is not directed at you because I know you are great guy. I simply do not see the same level of evidence.

When I started writing about Lance it was because I had talked to many teammates, staff, and people connected with the sport who had direct knowledge of the doping. I saw positives tests, doctors like Ferrari, Del Moral, Celya, and Marti. DS' like Bruyneel. Bags of drugs being dumped. The evidence in the public, and non-public, domain was overwhelming.

I still talk to a lot of people in the sport on a daily basis. Many of whom are connected to SKY. I have not found anything yet. As I have written many times, it is very possible that riders on the team are doping.....i just have not found any direct, or indirect, evidence that would make me comfortable enough to write about it

 

[Le breton]

Engaging in a discussion on these boards has become close to impossible.

I have explained how I came to my opinion on Moncutie.

Moncoutié.

Then he must have been doping from 1999 to 2012 since his performances have been consistent over his whole career.

Do I understand it correctly that your opinion on Moncoutié is based on talking to other pros, staff, soigneurs?

In other words, no "smoking gun"?
Just people who have a vested interest in propagating the myth that everybody is a doper,
and the other myth
that since everybody dopes the pro peloton is a level-playing field