Paris-Nice

[Sasquatch]

Yeah, I'm just saying that if you have the money and you bet a bit, concentrate on cycling and be smart and you can make a profit.

I'm not saying do it. I'm just pointing out that it is actually possible. It also involves luck in actually being able to place the bet in the first place. If they pick up on Farrar, then the bet would have been taken down, so you also have to be alert and quick to get the bet on.

You only bet if you are prepared to lose what you bet.

Bet365 offer live betting

so do sportingbet.com

I think Unibet offer it too, but not sure on that. I use bet365 and sportingbet for live betting.

But Mol and Steurs both $8 was just stupid by the bookie.

 

[Sasquatch]

Bet365 is the best though, in live betting.

Another example.

TDF last year. The stage before Ventoux.

Up the climb, Cavendish was on the front, not being dropped surrounded by 3-4 team mates. At that stage, he was paying $12 to win the stage. It was clear he wasn't going to be dropped and was worth the punt.

 

[Cerberus]

Yeah, I'm just saying that if you have the money and you bet a bit, concentrate on cycling and be smart and you can make a profit.

I'm not saying do it. I'm just pointing out that it is actually possible. It also involves luck in actually being able to place the bet in the first place. If they pick up on Farrar, then the bet would have been taken down, so you also have to be alert and quick to get the bet on.

You only bet if you are prepared to lose what you bet.

Bet365 offer live betting

so do sportingbet.com

I think Unibet offer it too, but not sure on that. I use bet365 and sportingbet for live betting.

But Mol and Steurs both $8 was just stupid by the bookie.

Thanks, I'll bookmark those sites and keep an eye out when I'm watching a bike race.

 

[step23]

Machado delighted with late Paris-Nice call-up Bet you RS staff have read the first pages of this thread (or there was another compliment about the best rider)
That's a pity for Kledy

 

[Sasquatch]

Thanks, I'll bookmark those sites and keep an eye out when I'm watching a bike race.

No worries.

Yeah, it's worth just looking at it. I don't bet all the time. Even if something is there, I may not back it, I'll just take notes.

You will be surprised at how strange the odds can be.

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

I honestly don't know. He did leave Algarve early because of a knee injury but beyond that all we have at the moment is Khazakhnerider's comments about a flat stage team vs mountain team (which doesn't make any sense looking at the route, but maybe that's just me). Grivko isn't very big and I know there was early talk about him riding the Tour so maybe AC and Martinelli want to see how things workout. All a mystery at the moment.

Specialized has it:



http://iamspecialized.com/road/news-article/paris-nice--contador-faces-first-serious-test

Thanks guys. I didn't realize his injury was that bad and thought he probably just needed a little rest.

Tell him to walk it off and get his **** back in there...

 

[theswordsman]

Team Liquigas

Roman Kreuziger Liquigas-Doimo heads the Paris-Nice, which begins Sunday and the asset for the sprints will be Francesco Chicchi.

Mauro Finetto, Aliaksandr Kuchynski, Peter Sagan, Ivan Santaromita, Brian Bach Vandborg and Frederik Willems complete the team.

http://www.biciciclismo.com/cas/site/noticias-ficha.asp?id=23546

Contador's website is down, but there's a press release floating around saying that a replacement Time Trial bike is on the way from the United States to Paris, so he won't use the one from the Algarve. I don't know what Specialized had time to cook up, but a legal version of the Shiv would be good at this point.

 

[DAOTEC]

5 / 03 15:00 - Cycling, Paris-Nice ~The AFLD drops UCI

The French Agency for the Fight against Doping (AFLD) announced Friday it will not cooperate with the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) at the Paris-Nice. It justified its decision in a statement.

"The UCI proposed collaboration in these terms:" if the AFLD has information justifying the control of a particular rider, simply report it to the UCI. " Accordingly, the AFLD will not cooperate with the UCI during the Paris-Nice race in 2010 and limit the information available to it to judicial authorities in accordance with the Act of July 3, 2008 on the fight against trafficking of doping products >http://www.sport24.com/cyclisme/fil-info/l-afld-lache-l-uci-358792/

Ohhh Ohhh McQuaid

 

[theswordsman]

5 / 03 15:00 - Cycling, Paris-Nice ~The AFLD drops UCI

The French Agency for the Fight against Doping (AFLD) announced Friday it will not cooperate with the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) at the Paris-Nice. It justified its decision in a statement.

"The UCI proposed collaboration in these terms:" if the AFLD has information justifying the control of a particular rider, simply report it to the UCI. " Accordingly, the AFLD will not cooperate with the UCI during the Paris-Nice race in 2010 and limit the information available to it to judicial authorities in accordance with the Act of July 3, 2008 on the fight against trafficking of doping products >http://www.sport24.com/cyclisme/fil-info/l-afld-lache-l-uci-358792/

Ohhh Ohhh McQuaid

I saw that version earlier, but I'm not awake yet and wasn't sure exactly how that would work. Eurosport spelled it out for me.

"Therefore, AFLD won't cooperate with UCI during the 2010 Paris-Nice race and it will transmit information it will have to relevant judicial authorities only," AFLD said.

French law prohibits doping substance trafficking and prosecutors could ask police to raid team hotels or cars if AFLD gives them information about possible suspects.

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/05032010/58/afld-play-hardball-uci-paris-nice.html

I still wonder if the OCLAESP will be waiting to take DNA samples from Popovych and Contador as part of their investigation from the Tour de France.

 

[python]

heres the complete googled copy of the afld document.
http://translate.googleusercontent....le.com&usg=ALkJrhhRP53lDq0FLV78-jdmxs4W6Rn9VQ

it appears saying more than the brief statement picked up by news agencies.

if i got it right, afld 's non-cooperation with the uci may include its own testing or other anti-doping actions. if so, i can see a situation when afld's controllers will step on the uci guys toes.

 

[theswordsman]

heres the complete googled copy of the afld document.
http://translate.googleusercontent....le.com&usg=ALkJrhhRP53lDq0FLV78-jdmxs4W6Rn9VQ

it appears saying more than the brief statement picked up by news agencies.

if i got it right, afld 's non-cooperation with the uci may include its own testing or other anti-doping actions. if so, i can see a situation when afld's controllers will step on the uci guys toes.

Bordry said they give up on additional controls. I'm not sure what information they would have to get a prosecutor to order raids on hotels and vehicles. It could make for a fun side show to what will hopefully be a great race.

 

[tourmalet]

Uci - afld

Can anyone make sense of this - from L'Equipe's website?

From what I can understand, it seems to be saying that the UCI suggested some kind of collaboration on doping, to which the AFLD replied that it was favourable, and proposed some ideas which the UCI then refused.

If the UCI were trying to retain control of Dope Testing so that they could prevent any scandals breaking out ( ie like in the 2007 Tour when the AFLD had complete independence), that would explain why they want the AFLD to give information to them first so they could decide who whether or not to prosecute etc

But if the AFLD as they are entitled to do under french law, give their evidence directly to the authorities then the UCI have no chance of being able to 'cover up' any scandal..

The UCI have got to get their act together and co operate with the AFLD who have proved themselves the only true organisation committed to proper dope testing




http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/breves2010/20100305_164018_conflit-afld-uci.html


«Après avoir proposé une collaboration limitée, l'UCI s'oppose à fournir des garanties légitimes pour la mettre en oeuvre», a estimé l'agence française. «En effet, lorsque, par un courrier du 19 février, l'AFLD lui a répondu qu'elle était favorable à cette collaboration en lui proposant la conclusion d'une convention assurant la confidentialité et le bon usage des informations, l'UCI a refusé». «L'AFLD ne coopérera pas avec l'UCI pendant la course Paris-Nice 2010 et réservera les informations dont elle disposera aux autorités judiciaires compétentes, conformément à la loi du 3 juillet 2008 relative à la lutte contre le trafic de produits dopants», a ajouté l'agence française. (Avec AFP)"

 

[kurtinsc]

Does this mean that the UCI won't be doing any testing at P-N... or that they'll be doing a separate set of testing?

If they are doing none... does this mean riders who get caught by the AFLD will go to jail/face criminal charges... but not be suspended because UCI will get none of the data?

 

[theswordsman]

From what I posted earlier from Eurosport, it seems that the AFLD did not seek, or at least did not receive, permission from the WADA to do fifteen doping controls at Paris-Nice in addition to the ninety or whatever to be done by the UCI. The UCI said they didn't want to collaborate with the AFLD. The AFLD said fine, they don't want to collaborate with the UCI either, so if they have any info about riders suspected of doping, they won't tell the UCI, they'll report it to police. The question is, without doing controls, what will be the source of information for the AFLD? It sounds to me like they might already be involved in a more police-like investigation, possibly with the OCLAESP. I haven't followed the story lately, but earlier in the year, the AFLD budget was four million Euros light due to politics. There could be some off-road fireworks next week. I'm picturing SWAT teams and Jason Bourne.

Therefore, AFLD won't cooperate with UCI during the 2010 Paris-Nice race and it will transmit information it will have to relevant judicial authorities only," AFLD said.
French law prohibits doping substance trafficking and prosecutors could ask police to raid team hotels or cars if AFLD gives them information about possible suspects.

 

[theswordsman]

Does this mean that the UCI won't be doing any testing at P-N... or that they'll be doing a separate set of testing?

If they are doing none... does this mean riders who get caught by the AFLD will go to jail/face criminal charges... but not be suspended because UCI will get none of the data?

The UCI will still be doing ALL of the testing at Paris-Nice. The AFLD wanted to do fifteen tests on their own. The UCI told them no way, and so the AFLD has apparently decided to act more like a government agency than a sporting one.

 

[tourmalet]

The UCI will still be doing ALL of the testing at Paris-Nice. The AFLD wanted to do fifteen tests on their own. The UCI told them no way, and so the AFLD has apparently decided to act more like a government agency than a sporting one.

What does it matter whether you call a Anti Doping Agency a 'government agency' or 'sporting one'? Surely every agency is committed to exposing doping... except perhaps the UCI - or else they would welcome additional help.

It is like Interpol saying 'no we dont want help' from the french police force

 

[Condorman]

What does it matter whether you call a Anti Doping Agency a 'government agency' or 'sporting one'? Surely every agency is committed to exposing doping... except perhaps the UCI - or else they would welcome additional help.

It is like Interpol saying 'no we dont want help' from the french police force

Interpol don't want help from the French Police who are primarily concerned with local stuff like motoring offences in town. I don't think AFLD will make a big deal of testing at Paris-Nice but will save it for the big one in July. The next "Showergate" is likely to involve M. Bordry in person backed up by armed Douaniers.

Hopefully.

 

[theswordsman]

What does it matter whether you call a Anti Doping Agency a 'government agency' or 'sporting one'? Surely every agency is committed to exposing doping... except perhaps the UCI - or else they would welcome additional help.

It is like Interpol saying 'no we dont want help' from the french police force

No, it's not like that, because Interpol and the French police are police. The UCI does a lot of things for amateur and professional cycling. Check out their website. Doping controls are just a part of it. They don't enforce the law, or send people to prison. They enforce their own rules in a manner they choose themselves. They have protocols for gathering samples. They don't have detectives, they don't search vehicles or hotel rooms or dumpsters. They don't call police agencies. They don't start criminal investigations. They can ban people from participating in their sport on a professional level. They aren't a French organization.

The AFLD will work with various levels of French police, and I imagine with the Central Office against Environmental Damage and Public Health who initiated the Astana investigation, to investigate criminal activity - the kind that leads to jump suits and prison time. They're apparently now willing to gather information without the use of doping controls - the only source of information the UCI has.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Australian cycling expert Mike Tomalaris has tipped this tio be the final podium:

Does the course for this year's Paris-Nice suit Simon Gerrans? I'd like to thinks so. Tomo's tips:1.Gerro 2. F.Schleck 3. Leipheimer.

How does this guy keep his job at sbs? Beyond Belief!

 

[karlboss]

Australian cycling expert Mike Tomalaris has tipped this tio be the final podium:



How does this guy keep his job at sbs? Beyond Belief!

I'm inclined to agree with you, but maybe mike knows something about specific preparations at sky we don't? I'd love to see his reasons.

 

[Moondance]

Australian cycling expert Mike Tomalaris has tipped this tio be the final podium:

How does this guy keep his job at sbs? Beyond Belief!

Pretty bad list indeed, kind of anti-Spanish too, no Contador, no LL Sanchez, they're only the last two winners.

Gerrans could do well, top 5 is defintely possible. But if Contador places a good attack on the stage to Mende Gerrans will defintely lose time, as will everyone else. If he's got the form he should probably be able to finish with the best on all the other stages.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I'm inclined to agree with you, but maybe mike knows something about specific preparations at sky we don't? I'd love to see his reasons.

He's really going to beat Contador and valverde. Mike knows jack shyte about cycling. Mike thought evans should go to lampre because his wife spoke italian. Gerro is a classics rider and I don't see how he's going to stay with some of those favourites on some of france's big alpine passes. gerro should of done tirenno as the route would favour him and I would give him a good chance to do a high overall.

 

[Sasquatch]

Australian cycling expert Mike Tomalaris has tipped this tio be the final podium:



How does this guy keep his job at sbs? Beyond Belief!

lol lol lol lol lol

 

[tourmalet]

No, it's not like that, because Interpol and the French police are police. The UCI does a lot of things for amateur and professional cycling. Check out their website. Doping controls are just a part of it. They don't enforce the law, or send people to prison. They enforce their own rules in a manner they choose themselves. They have protocols for gathering samples. They don't have detectives, they don't search vehicles or hotel rooms or dumpsters. They don't call police agencies. They don't start criminal investigations. They can ban people from participating in their sport on a professional level. They aren't a French organization.

The AFLD will work with various levels of French police, and I imagine with the Central Office against Environmental Damage and Public Health who initiated the Astana investigation, to investigate criminal activity - the kind that leads to jump suits and prison time. They're apparently now willing to gather information without the use of doping controls - the only source of information the UCI has.

According to your logic, there is the UCI's 'honorable' way to organise dope controls, and the AFLD's 'over the top' way.

Surely you agree with the principle that all legal methods of attempting to expose drugs in cycling must be considered desirable by any organisation committed to stamping out doping.

For a team to know that their hotel bins could be searched leading to jail and prosecution is surely going to make it harder for them to dope.

There is absolutely no logical argument for the expertise of the AFLD not to be included in Paris Nice doping controls. Think of the message that sends out to the riders and the teams... they know they will be more likely to be caught if the AFLD are on their case.

... unless Swordsman, you are actually saying that it is not fair or realistic to get too tough with the riders and that the UCI need to be able to decide themselves which doping cases are going to be publically pursued, in case a few huge stars test positive and the cycle racing industry as we know it comes crashing down in flames... deserted by all sponsors

 

[Ferminal]

Australian cycling expert Mike Tomalaris has tipped this tio be the final podium:



How does this guy keep his job at sbs? Beyond Belief!

At least he's got the token Shack rider in at 3rd.