Moncoutie

[skippythepinhead]

+1 luckyboy; I can't even pretend to understand the motivations of the self-styled contrarians. If it's some kind of backdoor way of turning this thread into another referendum on a not-to-be-mentioned rider, then it's ridiculous. I'm certain there is more than one rider riding on talent and training alone; I personally would give them all immunity/reduced penalties just to know.

 

[VeloCity]

Because they're willingly ignoring some of the most important dots. Hell, at least glenn didn't even know those dots existed, yet was quick on passing judgment and hasn't moved one inch from his original position.

What am I "willingly ignoring"? I know it was Moncoutie in those pics and I know about what has been said about him and I know that he has the reputation of being clean. I've repeatedly said that I personally believe that he's clean. But what we "believe" means squat, which is true of Glenn's statements, but equally true of everyone who's jumped all over him for taking the position that a rider for Cofidis = doping (and yes, that's why it's irrelevant that it's Moncoutie). I also know that a lot of riders who were believed to be clean turned out to be dopers, yet that possibility doesn't seem to be an acceptable option when it comes to Moncoutie.

Why should Glenn "move one inch" from his original position just because he maybe isn't so convinced as others seem to be that Moncoutie (or more accurately, any Cofidis rider) is clean?

 

[Hugh Januss]

A couple of things going on here that need to be addressed.
1. You are the one labeling Moncoutie a 'dope fighter.' Moncoutie and other clean riders knows what works for them and made what is for them a very easy decision to ride clean. No heroics. No righteous battles.

2. You consistently repeat the opinion that the entire Pro peloton dopes. Let go of that opinion because it's not true. Even in the very worst of a widely doped peloton during the 90's there were clean riders. Many of their careers were likely cut short because they did the right thing. That's the cost of having strong ethics.

Moncoutie and other clean riders in the history of Pro cycling are not to be faulted for performing among the best riders in the world without doping. What they've done is enough. Really.

If you want to use the thread to explore 'Is just riding clean enough?', then go for it. Otherwise your arguments are fatally flawed many different ways.

I don't believe the entire pro peloton dopes and I don't recall anyone stating that. Your contention that there were some clean riders but they usually didn't last very long, doesn't refute my theory that the vast majority of the pro peloton dopes at least to some level.

 

[patricknd]

That's the point. He's not a hero. It's not reasonable to expect normal people to be heroes.

heroes only come from the league of justice perhaps? heroes come from the ranks, they are ordinary people doing extraordinary things.

 

[patricknd]

can we all agree that if moncoutie is in fact clean, it is not due to being moral or ethical, but simply because he's frrrrench and simply too lazy and cowardly to do what it takes to win? i think we can.

 

[pmcg76]

i believe glenn and velocity are connecting the dots as well. from a team with a questionable history to one of their riders. that's the way it's done with others, why is it wrong in this case?

I cannot believe people are being so obnoxius on this. No can prove anyone is clean or dirty until they either test positive or we hear some sort of inside info on them. No can say 100% Moncoutie is clean but it seems more likely than most other pros out there regardless based on the inside info we have.

In terms of connecting the dots, its not the same at all. For example people insinuate Cadel Evans is dirty because of the teams he has been associated with. Therefore the same should apply to Moncoutie.

But has a known doper on one of Evans team ever come out and said that the only team-mate he knew that didnt dope was Evans. NO.

That is why there is a difference in connecting the dots with Evans and Moncoutie or Bassons.

I would like to know the psychology of known dopers who would lie to exonerate a team-mate of doping especially if they werent friends.

 

[Benotti69]

<snip>

too retort on the same level. there are only 2 things to come from texas, steers and queers...

 

[hrotha]

I also know that a lot of riders who were believed to be clean turned out to be dopers, yet that possibility doesn't seem to be an acceptable option when it comes to Moncoutie.

Such as?

Why should Glenn "move one inch" from his original position just because he maybe isn't so convinced as others seem to be that Moncoutie (or more accurately, any Cofidis rider) is clean?

Because he clearly didn't know it was Moncoutié we were talking about, and he clearly didn't know what Gaumont and his DS's said about him. He was missing key info, and now that he has it he refuses to reconsider his position even though it's severely weakened by it. Basically, he's being stubborn (no, I don't have proof, I'm connecting the dots)

heroes only come from the league of justice perhaps? heroes come from the ranks, they are ordinary people doing extraordinary things.

Emphasis on "extraordinary things". You can't fault people for not being heroes. Otherwise the word 'hero' loses its meaning.

 

[Hampsten88]

1) The whole idea of "guilt before innocence" is asinine, especially when it comes to doping since you can never prove to everyone that you are 100% clean.

2) Are all the people saying Moncoutie is 100% clean willing to give all riders who are said to be clean the same benefit of the doubt?

 

[patricknd]

too retort on the same level. there are only 2 things to come from texas, steers and queers...

and i got horns

 

[Benotti69]

1) The whole idea of "guilt before innocence" is asinine, especially when it comes to doping since you can never prove to everyone that you are 100% clean.

2) Are all the people saying Moncoutie is 100% clean willing to give all riders who are said to be clean the same benefit of the doubt?

The whole idea "guilt before innocence" is the fault of the sport and anyone who cannot see that has not followed it closely enough. There are plenty of books and confessions from former pros out there to show that doping was and is prevelant throughout the sport ever since the beginning. No one has said that Moncoutie is clean because no one can. The dots join up to someone who is clean.

 

[VeloCity]

Such as?

pretty much every single rider for which there was no evidence of doping until they got popped for doping. Landis, say - any evidence that he was doping until '06? I don't recall having heard anything. Then out of nowhere he gets popped for testosterone. Then we find out he's been doing the whole EPO/HGH/transufsion shebang for years.

Because he clearly didn't know it was Moncoutié we were talking about, and he clearly didn't know what Gaumont and his DS's said about him. He was missing key info, and now that he has it he refuses to reconsider his position even though it's severely weakened by it. Basically, he's being stubborn (no, I don't have proof, I'm connecting the dots)

you're missing the point - it's irrelevant that it was Moncoutie. Glenn's position is that if the guy - doesn't matter who it is, Moncoutie or otherwise - rides for Cofidis, then he's a doper. You can argue that that's an unfair position, but so what? The "key info" is also irrelevant - what Gaumont or anyone says about Moncoutie or any other rider means nothing.

 

[skippythepinhead]

1) The whole idea of "guilt before innocence" is asinine, especially when it comes to doping since you can never prove to everyone that you are 100% clean.

2) Are all the people saying Moncoutie is 100% clean willing to give all riders who are said to be clean the same benefit of the doubt?

What do you mean by "said to be clean"? Can you provide examples including who is doing the saying?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I think who does the saying has a lot to do with how sincere it is felt.

A lot of it is interpretive as well; a very intense, driven-to-win character who is said by a known doper to be clean may be harder to believe than a character such as Moncoutié, whose quotes, history and character suggest that he isn't really a very competitive guy and is much more in it for fun. Somebody who doesn't really compete to win and who sets modest, achievable targets is more readily believable than somebody who is very driven, highly-strung and intense. Though he is hardly the most intense character out there, it is for this reason that I'm less inclined to believe Xavier Tondó has always been clean with LA-MSS on his team list than Moncoutié. Look at the team roster of Cofidis now too - much less international than in the days of the controversy.

Besides, the pictures of Moncoutié I used to start this thread were from the last couple of years. Let's not insult each others' intelligence by suggesting, as all too often happens, that doping is a lightswitch, and if you doped once you doped for every single race you ever entered. A rider like Damiano Cunego, at least reputation-wise, shows this to be false (leaving the Mantua investigation to the Mantua investigation thread). Is it not feasible that somebody who could compete only via doping in the 'bad old days' could compete clean at a later date? Or that riders with clear peaks in their season could ride clean at part of the season and dope up for other parts of it?

David Moncoutié's career reinvigoration at the 2008 Vuelta had more to do with his preferring to be away from pressure and being able to use his natural tendency to attack in the mountains. He lucked his way into the Pla de Beret victory by being in the right break when the Contador/Valverde/Antón attack lost impetus, and then hopped off the front to secure the KOM. After that, he recognised that that was something he enjoyed and was within his grasp - the KOM jersey is not hunted by riders as strong as in years gone by, and not especially hard-fought in the Vuelta; the big points available in a handful of stages gave him the opportunity to win it by getting in the break on a handful of select stages. Most of his big mountain wins are from breakaways or in smaller races. Is it not feasible that you could do that clean, even in the mid-90s?

Since the Cofidis logo is enough for people to be against him (though I fail to see why it is irrelevant that it is Moncoutié that I posted, considering I posted him based on his reputation. I wouldn't have posted, say, El Fares or Saramotins, not because I think they dope or are suspicious, but because they don't have the reputation that Moncoutié has), let's hit the reset button then.

 

[Frosty]

David Moncoutié's career reinvigoration at the 2008 Vuelta had more to do with his preferring to be away from pressure and being able to use his natural tendency to attack in the mountains. He lucked his way into the Pla de Beret victory by being in the right break when the Contador/Valverde/Antón attack lost impetus, and then hopped off the front to secure the KOM. After that, he recognised that that was something he enjoyed and was within his grasp - the KOM jersey is not hunted by riders as strong as in years gone by, and not especially hard-fought in the Vuelta; the big points available in a handful of stages gave him the opportunity to win it by getting in the break on a handful of select stages. Most of his big mountain wins are from breakaways or in smaller races. Is it not feasible that you could do that clean, even in the mid-90s?

Maybe getting in trouble with the team boss had an influence on his motivation for the Vuelta?

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...iumphs-in-vuelta-s-second-pyrenean-stage.html

His best performance in the tour was in 2002, coming 12th. I think the much-displayed graph of power on final climbs in the tour over the years shows a dip in that edition. Apparently he was shocked by the increase in speed the following year.

 

[Hampsten88]

The whole idea "guilt before innocence" is the fault of the sport and anyone who cannot see that has not followed it closely enough. There are plenty of books and confessions from former pros out there to show that doping was and is prevelant throughout the sport ever since the beginning. No one has said that Moncoutie is clean because no one can. The dots join up to someone who is clean.

There is a culture of having a mistress in Italy, should we simply assume everyone is philanderer?

Can you please explain the part in I put in bold. It sounds like you are saying that nobody is saying Moncoutie is clean and the reason for that is that nobody can say that. Am I reading this correctly?

 

[Hampsten88]

What do you mean by "said to be clean"? Can you provide examples including who is doing the saying?

I think it is very obvious what "said to be clean" means.

 

[poupou]

The extremist fans of dubious dopers are jealous of Moucoutié or other clean riders,
Sadly, they want revenges and they are the real haters.

We can hope that they soon move to the status of full acceptation of the fault of their deposed heros.

 

[luckyboy]

In terms of connecting the dots, its not the same at all. For example people insinuate Cadel Evans is dirty because of the teams he has been associated with. Therefore the same should apply to Moncoutie.

The difference there is that Evans beats and competes with known dopers in GTs and hilly classics every year. Moncoutie wins stages from breakaways before disappearing into the autobus the next day.

Anyway, I choose to put my faith in Moncoutie and a few other riders and support them. I think it's sad that others don't have this belief in any rider.

 

[hrotha]

pretty much every single rider for which there was no evidence of doping until they got popped for doping. Landis, say - any evidence that he was doping until '06? I don't recall having heard anything. Then out of nowhere he gets popped for testosterone. Then we find out he's been doing the whole EPO/HGH/transufsion shebang for years.

Seriously? Your example is Floyd Landis? You got to be kidding. Okay, just to make things simple: the only similarity between pre-2006 TdF Landis and Moncoutié is that neither had a positive doping test.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

The difference there is that Evans beats and competes with known dopers in GTs and hilly classics every year. Moncoutie wins stages from breakaways before disappearing into the autobus the next day.

Anyway, I choose to put my faith in Moncoutie and a few other riders and support them. I think it's sad that others don't have this belief in any rider.

The other thing with Evans is that he is an intense character who is very driven by victory and the will to win, as we've seen from him turning himself inside out any time he has the sniff of victory, usually to his long-term detriment.

It's much more easy a dot to connect that somebody who is driven by a will to win who is competing with dopers, and who has dopers around them, could be convinced of the need of doping to compete, than that somebody who isn't really especially fussed about the big wins.

 

[Benotti69]

There is a culture of having a mistress in Italy, should we simply assume everyone is philanderer?

Can you please explain the part in I put in bold. It sounds like you are saying that nobody is saying Moncoutie is clean and the reason for that is that nobody can say that. Am I reading this correctly?

If you think I am Italian can I presume you are Andy Hampsten and that you live In Italy?

Let's generalise about americans shall we, no better not there isn't enough server space on CN for that.

you have yet to correctly interpret any of my posts.

What posters and i am saying is the dots join to a clean Moncoutie. We don't know if a rider is clean or a doper without having a positive. But cycling has proven to be a sport where a higher percentage of pros are doping. How do we know this? the speeds of the races are still higher than when the PEDs started to affect performance and not recovery. All the info is contained in many of the threads in here as it has been discussed and debated at length.

 

[Angliru]

Why pick on Glenn? He's right - you guys really have no idea whether or not Moncoutie (or Bassons) is clean. I'd like to believe that he is, and the evidence seems to point that way, but you can say the same about a thousand riders who then got popped.

Don't you think that Glenn would be better served in his argument if he didn't feel the need to belittle Bassons and Moncoutie by calling them out of their names (Baffoon/Mancutie) as if it is they who are here opposing his perspective and not some anonymous posters? I can see his point to a certain degree its just that his approach isn't conducive to a civil conversation.

 

[patricknd]

Don't you think that Glenn would be better served in his argument if he didn't feel the need to belittle Bassons and Moncoutie by calling them out of their names (Baffoon/Mancutie) as if it is they who are here opposing his perspective and not some anonymous posters? I can see his point to a certain degree its just that his approach isn't conducive to a civil conversation.

check out the other name *******izations throughout the forum. glenn is simply joining the club.

 

[VeloCity]

Anyway, I choose to put my faith in Moncoutie and a few other riders and support them. I think it's sad that others don't have this belief in any rider.

I'm more than willing to give any rider the benefit of the doubt until evidence suggests otherwise, but I've been burned too many times in the past to have "faith" that this or that rider is clean simply because there hasn't been, up until this point, evidence linking them to doping. With a rider like Moncoutie, I see no reason at this point to think that he's a doper, but for all we know, he could get busted tomorrow. But by not having "faith" in him, if that were to happen, I would be more than a little disappointed but I wouldn't be devastated. Given the history of the sport over the past 2 decades or so, I just don't see the point in having "faith" in any rider, Moncoutie or otherwise. I used to have favorite riders but not anymore - personally, and just speaking for myself obviously, nowadays I follow the "sport" of cycling as opposed to rooting for individual riders, if that makes any sense.