Nicole Cooke attacks drug cheats in the womens peloton

[Cycle Chic]

Dirty Doctors

What, a doctor making someone better? Is that is their job description?

Yes buy WHY do they all go to the same select few dirty doping related doctors....???

You tellin me that Cooke couldnt find a trainer / doctor other than one that has a doping past ?

If I was a pro cyclist i,m blummin sure i,d avoid them like the plague...but they dont...cause up until now they never thought they would be investigated.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Yes buy WHY do they all go to the same select few dirty doping related doctors....???

You tellin me that Cooke couldnt find a trainer / doctor other than one that has a doping past ?

You make a good point, but overlook the fact that Cooke's performances in 2008 weren't hugely out of line, if out of line at all, with what she'd done before. Her record on the world stage from her late teens to before her dodgy knees speaks for itself. Thus, whatever medical assistance she received only restored her to levels of performance she'd demonstrated solidly for years.

So even if there is a doping angle - and I'm sure there isn't - it's more subtle than a journeyman rider going to visit a doping doctor and suddenly improving in their mid to late 20s.

 

[Cycle Chic]

You make a good point, but overlook the fact that Cooke's performances in 2008 weren't hugely out of line, if out of line at all, with what she'd done before. Her record on the world stage from her late teens to before her dodgy knees speaks for itself. Thus, whatever medical assistance she received only restored her to levels of performance she'd demonstrated solidly for years.

So even if there is a doping angle - and I'm sure there isn't - it's more subtle than a journeyman rider going to visit a doping doctor and suddenly improving in their mid to late 20s.

Just like Sky with Leinders...Cooke and Bartolucci....they have no answer to WHY CHOOSE a dodgy doctor.

 

[ebandit]

£

Just like Sky with Leinders...Cooke and Bartolucci....they have no answer to WHY CHOOSE a dodgy doctor.

and just how did you think nicole financed such a scheme?

her income was rather...............tiny....compared with team sky budget

has this 'dodgy doctor' actually been proven of misconduct?

 

[zigmeister]

Good read. Highly recommend for those that didn't to click the first post and link and give it a read.

 

[Mellow Velo]

and just how did you think nicole financed such a scheme?

her income was rather...............tiny....compared with team sky budget

has this 'dodgy doctor' actually been proven of misconduct?

In a word: No.
Already posted up thread.
Of course, ignore by the usual fanatics.
One of nine doctors taken in for questioning at San Remo, along with 75 others.
Released, no charges.


In anycase, not sure how effective epo is at treating a persistent knee injury.

 

[Darryl Webster]

Cyclist Nicole Cooke: 'I had to say exactly how it is'
Cycling champion Nicole Cooke's retirement speech was a fearless attack on inequality in her sport. She tells why she had to speak out – and why Lance Armstrong should go to jail

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/jan/16/cyclist-nicole-cooke-say-exactly-how-is

 

[racyrichuk]

Just like Sky with Leinders...Cooke and Bartolucci....they have no answer to WHY CHOOSE a dodgy doctor.

How many doctors do you think there are able to advise a champion cyclist with dodgy knees how to regain champion status ?

In fact, let's contemplate that a bit further. Every cyclist I've ever known who's gone to their GP with a problem that is caused or exacerbated by cycling is instantly told to not cycle then. That helps, thanks doc!
So you go to a sports doctor. How many have any cycling-specific knowledge? Minimal - it's a minority sport. If you want to prosper in sports medicine pick a popular sport!
So instantly it's obvious there will not be many people about who can advise an elite cyclist how to manage a cycling-related injury. In fact the only hope you have of finding one is by recommendation. So the same old names stay in business. Occasionally a doctor who is also a cyclist will specialise out of his own interest. And will mostly end up treating his clubmates, again, expanding his clientele through recommendation. If he's lucky and successful his fame might reach the attention of elite level riders. Most likely it won't.

 

[Hooptie]

Ask Nicole about the Univega/Lifeforce/Cervelo coaching legacy....
Fabio Bartalucci -> Manel Lacambra -> Priska Doppmann

That is all.

 

[Parker]

Ask Nicole about the Univega/Lifeforce/Cervelo coaching legacy....
Fabio Bartalucci -> Manel Lacambra -> Priska Doppmann

That is all.

Ask her yourself. She's on twitter - @NicoleCooke2012

Rather than making anonymous insinuations, why don't you man up and take your accusations to the woman herself.

Let us know what happens.

Or are you too much of a coward? (And don't give me 'I'm not on twitter' - join up.)

 

[Hooptie]

I'm not accusing Nicole, it's just sad...she retires, everyone else continues to make a living in the sport. It's a theme that plays out over and over.

 

[Franklin]

Those who don't see the blanket accusation are absolutely lacing in reading comprehension.

- She laments that those who protest are rare (Oh the help you get of one other paladin in a team).
- She accuses whole management groups (and thus the teams).

but to the reader it's up to decide who she meas... aside from the thorough message that it's really common. The result is that in effect she accuses every competitor/teammate. Who subsequently can't defend themselves as they aren't named secifically.

It's really, really classy.

And the rich thing is that this is hailed by those who call the clinic a lynching mob. It's beyond ridiculous.

Similarly, Frankin twisted "the facts" by inferring she kept the dodgy doctor secret, when in fact all the time she has been open & fullsome in her praise for the work he did with her in rehabilitation.

Ohohoh

I don't say she keeps it secret, I say it's hypocritical to blanket accuse you competitors while alligning with Bartalucci.

And well, people have been praising Lance, landis, Ferrari etc. It's absolutely fantastic that what Nicole says somehow here is seen as gospel.

He may have a point about questioning trusting belief in what people say, but then he kinda shoots himself in the foot by distorting / ignoring what people actually do say, making me distrustful of any opinions he subsequently voices.

Too bad I seldom use opinions (and try to be clear when it is opinion), but point out facts and verifiable data (for example data about doctors).

And in this thread I don't distort/ignore anything. I gave the facts about Bartalucci and I point out that nothing Nicole says can be verified, yet she accuses an unknown, yet large portion of cycling.

As if nobody knew it was bad.... This does not help except fan the flames. If she wants to help she needs to name names (behind closed doors, as those need to get a fair chance to explain themselves!).

 

[JimmyFingers]

I suggest you get a life..some of us cant read every bloody post of every thread.

Point being - Cooke is about to retire due to injury then sees Dr Skylucci and then gets medals.

You seem to have plenty of time to use google and dig up and read three different articles however

 

[Franklin]

Whats not right about that:
"Cooke revealed another key influence for the first time yesterday: an Italian coach named Fabio Bartolucci who works with the French professional men's trade team Bouygues Télécom, a squad with a reputation for riding clean"

Doesn't sound to me like someone with something to hide: what is your point?

About distorting info, it's a good idea to at least add the latest details. Bartalucci's then colleagues at Bougyes Telecom are implicated in a scandal at Europcar. And yeah, same DS (actually same team except sponsor). We have seen this movie many times, yet someones still tend to believe the fairy tale.

And I certainly don't think Nicole is remotely involved, but it's just another example where Bartalucci is connected with less saviory colleagues. The dismissal of his earlier case clearly isn't the whole story, as clearly he's okay with cooperating with less virtuous colleagues.

Wiggins once thought people like this good doctor should be kicked out of the sport. Opinion: He was right back then.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Well, we can see that he seems to have no issues working with dirty colleagues.

- Hubert Long (Bouguyes Telecom Scandal)
- Jean-Pierre Goillandeau (Bouguyes Telecom Scandal)
- Thomas Klimaschka (Hamilton, Botero and Landis)

That doesn't say he's necessarily dirty, but that list of close colleagues is not reassuring.

Fair point.

I won't pull the LA Godwin, so I'll just point towards jan Ulrich.

I could say Lemond or Mottet.

There is no hard evidence. Chances are he's clean. However, he seems to have no qualms with dodgy associates, which is not a great sign.

So really you have no idea one way or the other.

Put that one into perspective please. The anger was about his earlier very good statements, namely "question everyone and remove any doc with even a whiff of dope", being changed into "how dare you question me and my team!".

And so far I have seen no "She's a doper",

You're kidding right... so I misunderstood these?

I hope I am wrong, but in cycling working with a dodgy Doctor only means 1 thing.

the top women are like the men. Cooke is a hypocrite.

And that is just looking back on the first page.

I do see: "Nicole is rather vocal when she has a connection to a dodgy doctor." I maintain that that is indeed a very good point. And yet a lot of the retorts were about how good her statement felt. Indeed, Benotti got fried about even bringing it up.

You repeatedly call him dodgy and yet there is nothing really on him. Even if he has not been found guilty there is scant proof in this thread he has been involved in anything.

Had Bassons not clearly been outed due to his stance we would have as much info on him as we have on Damiano "I use a sticker as tattoo" Cunego.

Bassons is a victim and deserves applause. But in his case we have pretty strong evidence he was indeed clean.

And about Moncoutie we have a similar thing. Riders and DS's point him out to be not involved.

On Cooke we have Cooke's words. See the difference?

You are missing my point. Maybe not so much with Bassons but if Moncoutie had not been caught up with Cofidis I am confident that people would be accusing him of doping.

Rides for Cofidis. Check
Won numerous Tour stages. Check x 2
Won numerous Vuelta stages. Check x 4
King of the mountains. Check x 4

Now my guess is there are similar guys at that level that are clean and the only reason Moncoutie gets a pass is because of what came out of the police investigation. Pointing out associations is one thing but some people think that is proof in and of itself. See the difference?

The funny thing is that when Benotti69 had the chance to talk to a known drug dealer he soon changed his tune and started saying people were being OTT with him when they started having a go at said dealer.

As someone said on the thread

You endlessly berate the sport for its drug cheats, but when you actually come into contact with one, you ***** foot around like teenager with a crush.

Comical.

 

[sniper]

So really you have no idea one way or the other.

sigh.

Yes franklin has an idea. A pretty clear one. but it somehow doesn't dawn on you.
having an idea doesn't mean knowing for sure. it means having an idea.

anyway, excellent informative posts, franklin, wrt Fabulucci and Coke.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

sigh.

Yes franklin has an idea. A pretty clear one. but it somehow doesn't dawn on you.
having an idea doesn't mean knowing for sure. it means having an idea.

anyway, excellent informative posts, franklin, wrt Fabulucci and Coke.

So why did he say chances are that he is clean?

 

[sniper]

So why did he say chances are that he is clean?

granted, "chances are" means "it's likely".

but reading the rest of Franklin's post it seemed clear to me that Franklin meant to say "there are chances", meaning "it's possible".

And yes it's possible.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

granted, "chances are" means "it's likely".

but reading the rest of Franklin's post it seemed clear to me that Franklin meant to say "there are chances", meaning "it's possible".

And yes it's possible.

Well, I am sure he can clarify. However, from what he has written that is what I inferred.

 

[Hawkwood]

Those who don't see the blanket accusation are absolutely lacing in reading comprehension.

- She laments that those who protest are rare (Oh the help you get of one other paladin in a team).
- She accuses whole management groups (and thus the teams).

but to the reader it's up to decide who she meas... aside from the thorough message that it's really common. The result is that in effect she accuses every competitor/teammate. Who subsequently can't defend themselves as they aren't named secifically.

It's really, really classy.

And the rich thing is that this is hailed by those who call the clinic a lynching mob. It's beyond ridiculous.



Ohohoh

I don't say she keeps it secret, I say it's hypocritical to blanket accuse you competitors while alligning with Bartalucci.

And well, people have been praising Lance, landis, Ferrari etc. It's absolutely fantastic that what Nicole says somehow here is seen as gospel.



Too bad I seldom use opinions (and try to be clear when it is opinion), but point out facts and verifiable data (for example data about doctors).

And in this thread I don't distort/ignore anything. I gave the facts about Bartalucci and I point out that nothing Nicole says can be verified, yet she accuses an unknown, yet large portion of cycling.

As if nobody knew it was bad.... This does not help except fan the flames. If she wants to help she needs to name names (behind closed doors, as those need to get a fair chance to explain themselves!).

I'm beginning to think you haven't read her statement. Having read the whole of her statement twice I do not get the impression that she in effect `...accuses every competitor/teammate'. If you do read the statement much of it is about the inequalities that exist in British cycling between the support for the men and the women, and that Cooke hopes these will be addressed in future. If you read Pendleton's book you will pick up similar views, and if you are anti British Cycling/Sky you will enjoy the read. Cooke's statement was not supposed to be a detailed discussion of doping in cycling, but I'm sure that if approached by the authorities she will dish out the names,details. Apart from the two big wins in 2008 the only reason that Cooke registers in my memory is because I remember that she made at least one very strong anti-doping statement several years ago.

 

[coinneach]

About distorting info, it's a good idea to at least add the latest details. Bartalucci's then colleagues at Bougyes Telecom are implicated in a scandal at Europcar. And yeah, same DS (actually same team except sponsor). We have seen this movie many times, yet someones still tend to believe the fairy tale.

And I certainly don't think Nicole is remotely involved, but it's just another example where Bartalucci is connected with less saviory colleagues. The dismissal of his earlier case clearly isn't the whole story, as clearly he's okay with cooperating with less virtuous colleagues.

Wiggins once thought people like this good doctor should be kicked out of the sport. Opinion: He was right back then.

I hate to get in to a "you said" "I said" argument, especially with someone in a different time zone.

But just to clarify, the quote about Bartalucci you pick up on here is one from a newspaper in 2008 (can't remember if it was Guardian or Independant)....the point being, that is what was known/ thought about him then. Cooke couldn't know any more then.

I agree, knowing what we do now, it would be good if she could provide more information on working with him, but she has never kept him secret, unlike many cyclists.

You say she accuses a large part of cycling of cheating: sounds on the money to me. She doesn't name new names, but the way I read her statement, she sure will when the proper chance is given her.

As I said before, facts are often just opinions that are agreed; it doesn't help to pretend that by using them makes your argument superior.

I did think your comments about the difference between Mens & womens cycling were insightful and I agreed with them.

 

[Cycle Chic]

Knees

In a word: No.
Already posted up thread.
Of course, ignore by the usual fanatics.
One of nine doctors taken in for questioning at San Remo, along with 75 others.
Released, no charges.


In anycase, not sure how effective epo is at treating a persistent knee injury.

Ask Nadal how his infamous doctor has treated his knees ??

 

[JimmyFingers]

Those who don't see the blanket accusation are absolutely lacing in reading comprehension.

- She laments that those who protest are rare (Oh the help you get of one other paladin in a team).
- She accuses whole management groups (and thus the teams).

but to the reader it's up to decide who she meas... aside from the thorough message that it's really common. The result is that in effect she accuses every competitor/teammate. Who subsequently can't defend themselves as they aren't named secifically.

It's really, really classy.

And the rich thing is that this is hailed by those who call the clinic a lynching mob. It's beyond ridiculous.



Ohohoh

I don't say she keeps it secret, I say it's hypocritical to blanket accuse you competitors while alligning with Bartalucci.

And well, people have been praising Lance, landis, Ferrari etc. It's absolutely fantastic that what Nicole says somehow here is seen as gospel.



Too bad I seldom use opinions (and try to be clear when it is opinion), but point out facts and verifiable data (for example data about doctors).

And in this thread I don't distort/ignore anything. I gave the facts about Bartalucci and I point out that nothing Nicole says can be verified, yet she accuses an unknown, yet large portion of cycling.

As if nobody knew it was bad.... This does not help except fan the flames. If she wants to help she needs to name names (behind closed doors, as those need to get a fair chance to explain themselves!).

For someone who deals in facts not opinions,you've certainly come up with a very subjective intepretation of Cooke's remarks. I understand omerta to be a bad thing, but you seem to take exception to her describing some of her experiences with doping because it implicates entire teams? You're joking right? I thought in cycling everyone is implicated anyway. Certainly the burden of proof with many people here lies with the riders. Here you very much are guilty until proven innocent.

I find this morality and indignation for these riders and staff who can't defend themselves bemusing at best. In fact I'd go as far to say that you are arguing the toss, taking a negative line here because it suits your own narrative, and misrepresenting her words merely because of a 'party line', a 3 line whip so to speak.

Of course its very touching that you are so concerned for all those potentially innocent riders and team management welfare.

I very much doubt this is the last we will hear on this subject from Nicole Cooke. Hers could be a very compelling and illuminating story, if you are prepared to listen, and she has nothing to lose now she is retired. If there is anything going on at BC and Sky, the clinic has its perfect whistle blower.

Her statement is exactly what I look for riders to be saying right now, and makes the strange things eminating from Bradley Wiggins all the more baffling and disappointing. I notice LA said he stopped doping in 2005, everyone else said 2006, we hear of the truce in 2008, and we hear the repeated mantra from current pros that it is in the past. She's one of the few that is saying different.

 

[Mellow Velo]

[/color]

Ask Nadal how his infamous doctor has treated his knees ??

Since you seem to be saying that you have inside knowledge of Nadal's "medical" association with Fuentes, post OP, perhaps you would be so kind as to bring us up to speed and give us a brief outline of the successful, if illegal, treatment?
Unfortunately, I am only aware of a persistent knee problem since June of last year.

 

[peterh]

Since you seem to be saying that you have inside knowledge of Nadal's "medical" association with Fuentes, post OP, perhaps you would be so kind as to bring us up to speed and give us a brief outline of the successful, if illegal, treatment?
Unfortunately, I am only aware of a persistent knee problem since June of last year.

Google is your friend.

http://gototennis.com/2010/09/25/rafael-nadal-knee-update-his-doctors-spin-on-prp-therapy/

Since this is totally off- topic here i apologize to the mods, should be in the tennis thread.