Pevenage confesses

[sherer]

wonder if the UCI will make any response to this and look into it.

He's admiting his team had a doping program so surely they should find out when it was used and take the results away

 

[Cloxxki]

"The UCI has taken notice of Mr. Pevenage's claims of having had a team-organized team program for distribution and abuse of illegal performance enhancing substances. The UCI is sadly surprised that Mr. Pevenage seems to have reason to focus attention on himself this way, and using his claims to damage professional cycling which the UCI so proudly promotes.
As not all denials of doping abuse have been proving truthful, the UCI wishes to not believe these allegations by Mr. Pevanage of himself, and the riders he employed.
The UCI welcomes the fans and insiders of the wonderful sport of cycling to lay aside any diffusion claims of doping abuse, to focus on te greatness of our sport, specifically the daily blessings by Mr. Armstrong, his fight against the only disease worth fighting, the sole knight qualified to take on the fight.
We kindly refer to his Twitter page for universal declarations of truth, which allow any reader to elevate their spiritual life experience, on and off the bike.
The UCI will continue to take anti-doping samples from various riders including Mr. Armstrong, but could care less on any test results. Labs will be asked to find suiting blood and urine levels for ultra-elite athletes such as required to merely finish a single Tour de France stage.
Let's move on, and focus more on the athletic and tactical greatness on wheels, and let bygones be bygones."

 

[McLovin]

sad, but i would not be surprised

 

[lean mean &green]

it was his d*ck move of taking advantage of a major crash in the first week. the time he gained by taking off and not waiting for everyone, chief among them alex zulle, was almost exactly his margin of victory. i'll never forget the scene--frankie was screaming at lance to wait because that is "how it is done," and lance was screaming "ride, ride, zulle is down, ride."

not really. 99 tour would have been much closer but without that crash LA/EPO still beats zulle by a minute or two. etiquette is to ride as you would if the crash hadn't occurred. waiting for people after crashes is not really standard practice. don't speed up to take advantage, don't slow down. if you crash, you have to WORK your way back into a race. said another way, if i crash or have a mechanical i don't expect anyone to wait for me. call me old school but there's an element of luck in bike racing.

i think pevenage is mostly telling the truth, maybe because the truth is now self-serving but who knows? he also seems to be confirming landis a bit. after the festina affair in 1998 teams seemed to be scared away from systemic doping practices and the rider was left to his own devices more. landis said when he left postal, phonak was much less organized and he had to create his own program.

sadly, my gut says that today's peloton has shifted back toward team programs. internal team controls started to pop up and it appears to me that teams began to worry about leaving their investments in the hands of individual rogue dopers.

 

[hrotha]

Wasn't the Gois passage like over 100 Km from the finish line, and ONCE and others pulled like crazy to put time on Zülle, Boogerd, Gotti and the rest?

 

[SoCalCyclingfan]

Response from Jan

So now what does Ullrich do? Stay silent or join in the confession? It's been more than 12 years since his tour title, so he won't lose it any more than Bjarne Riis did. Then again, he has nothing to gain.

 

[Oldman]

"The UCI has taken notice of Mr. Pevenage's claims of having had a team-organized team program for distribution and abuse of illegal performance enhancing substances. The UCI is sadly surprised that Mr. Pevenage seems to have reason to focus attention on himself this way, and using his claims to damage professional cycling which the UCI so proudly promotes.
As not all denials of doping abuse have been proving truthful, the UCI wishes to not believe these allegations by Mr. Pevanage of himself, and the riders he employed.
The UCI welcomes the fans and insiders of the wonderful sport of cycling to lay aside any diffusion claims of doping abuse, to focus on te greatness of our sport, specifically the daily blessings by Mr. Armstrong, his fight against the only disease worth fighting, the sole knight qualified to take on the fight.
We kindly refer to his Twitter page for universal declarations of truth, which allow any reader to elevate their spiritual life experience, on and off the bike.
The UCI will continue to take anti-doping samples from various riders including Mr. Armstrong, but could care less on any test results. Labs will be asked to find suiting blood and urine levels for ultra-elite athletes such as required to merely finish a single Tour de France stage.
Let's move on, and focus more on the athletic and tactical greatness on wheels, and let bygones be bygones."

Thanks, I needed a laugh now that all the rats are scurrying for cover.

 

[Escarabajo]

wonder if the UCI will make any response to this and look into it.

He's admiting his team had a doping program so surely they should find out when it was used and take the results away

Sorry but it is long gone. Especially the most important results. Nothing can be done about it. The "Statute of Limitations" in Cycling is 8 years:

Eight years
The new test means that the winners at the 2008 Beijing Olympics are not yet assured of keeping their medals and in theory, Lance Armstrong could lose four of his seven consecutive Tour de France victories.

At the moment, official doping laboratories keep urine samples for three months after testing but if the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the Tour de France organisers have their way, doping labs will have to keep urine samples for at least eight years.

According to Herman Ram, the new test allows sports authorities to concentrate on new future drug cheats, "The IOC and the Tour de France announcement that they are prepared to retroactively test and prosecute competitors also has a preventive function. Competitors realise that while they may have escaped detection this year, the sample could be retested. A drug that was undetectable in 2010 could be detectable in 2017 and they could be banned and stripped of their medals. We hope this will persuade people that it's not worth taking the risk".

The winners at the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics will be officially confirmed this year and every competitor knows that their results won't be confirmed until 8 years down the road.

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/tour-cyclists-fear-new-dutch-doping-test

Besides, who cares, because whoever came second when he won most likely was doped too.

 

[Cobblestones]

So now what does Ullrich do? Stay silent or join in the confession? It's been more than 12 years since his tour title, so he won't lose it any more than Bjarne Riis did. Then again, he has nothing to gain.

Good question, what will the 'hijo de Rudy' do?

Probably what he's done for four years now. Eat sausage, drink bear, and mumble about a book which will never be forthcoming.

 

[MacRoadie]

Besides, who cares, because whoever came first when he won most likely was doped

I think we're pretty sure on that...

 

[Escarabajo]

...
i think pevenage is mostly telling the truth, maybe because the truth is now self-serving but who knows? he also seems to be confirming landis a bit. after the festina affair in 1998 teams seemed to be scared away from systemic doping practices and the rider was left to his own devices more. landis said when he left postal, phonak was much less organized and he had to create his own program.

....

Actually I am starting to believe that it is true, at least the statistics are proving it. Here is a piece from Michael Ashenden interview:

AS: The other thing that struck me about these results, which I was surprised never came up before, was that if you take away those 6 positives, you have 7 remaining positives out of 81 samples. That's 8.6%. Does that say to you that at that time the peloton was relatively clean?

MA: Yeah, it's an interesting observation, 'cause you cast back to the '98 Tour, obviously it was a debacle. And, I've heard anecdotal or off the cuff remarks, that '99 was a new beginning. It had gotten as bad as it could possibly get, or so we would've thought, and '99 was, "Ok, let's start again, we've really got to make an effort to be clean this year."

Well, obviously, based on Lance Armstrong's results, he wasn't racing clean. But for the rest of the samples collected during the Tour, relatively speaking there wasn't a very high prevalence of EPO use in the rest of the peloton, at least in the peloton that was tested, which was your top 3 place getters, for example.

And then the interviewer add the following:

AS: I just want to go back to the percentage. Obviously, stage winners are always tested, and there were, I believe Cipollini won four, Steels won three, Etxebarria won two, so, not that I'm accusing them, but there's a chance that some of these positives are from the same person, so there's a chance that the number of people positive is even lower than 8%. And not only that, a great deal of these samples are from stage winners, so they're the stronger riders. So the samples are a skewed sampling of the entire peloton.

MA: Yeah, that's correct.

AS: So you could say as a whole it might've been 8% or less.

 

[La Vie Claire]

i'm a little surprised by CN's translation of the quote i mentioned above. perhaps they have access to other comments, i don't know. but i am concerned that they do not mention pevenage's clear accusation of armstrong.

Maybe it has something to do with all those beer and ham radio parts company ads we see on CN. Read CN for cycling results. Certainly not for the head-in-the-sand "reporting."

 

[Blakeslee]

jan was a gifted cyclist since he was about 10 years old; before 1999, lance armstrong couldn't even finish a tour

Armstrong was a dominant one day racer before 1999. In the early part of his career he won races like the world championships, the two tour stage wins, fleche wallone etc with the same kind explosive attacks he used to later win the tour. Armstrong was a dominant rider throughout his career, it is likely he was doping throughout his career along with practically all of the rest of the riders at the top of the sport.

 

[Cozy Beehive]

Pevenage is just bitter. Jan is the most tested athlete in history and has never tested positive.

Love it!

 

[Anonymous]

Armstrong was a dominant one day racer before 1999. In the early part of his career he won races like the world championships, the two tour stage wins, fleche wallone etc with the same kind explosive attacks he used to later win the tour. Armstrong was a dominant rider throughout his career, it is likely he was doping throughout his career along with practically all of the rest of the riders at the top of the sport.

What utter nonsense.

Surely you know that he has "never tested positive"

Just because everyone else was doping, and he was beating them .......

Oh, wait ......................

 

[Blakeslee]

What utter nonsense.

Surely you know that he has "never tested positive"

Just because everyone else was doping, and he was beating them .......

Oh, wait ......................

My point was that all of the top riders in the sport, including Armstrong, were doping during the years that Armstrong was racing. I only used the term likely because for Armstrong there isn't yet the same kind of incontrovertible physical evidence that exists for riders like Ulrich where you have a blood bag in the possession of Dr. Fuentes. Hopefully this will change as a result of the investigation currently underway after Landis came forward with the information about the practices of the U.S. Postal team.

 

[Anonymous]

My point was that all of the top riders in the sport, including Armstrong, were doping during the years that Armstrong was racing. I only used the term likely because for Armstrong there isn't yet the same kind of incontrovertible physical evidence that exists for riders like Ulrich where you have a blood bag in the possession of Dr. Fuentes. Hopefully this will change as a result of the investigation currently underway after Landis came forward with the information about the practices of the U.S. Postal team.

I know what your point was.

I don't do smiley faces, or roll-eyes , or ..............

Maybe the meaning of my posts would be clearer if I did.

 

[SpartacusRox]

Maybe it has something to do with all those beer and ham radio parts company ads we see on CN. Read CN for cycling results. Certainly not for the head-in-the-sand "reporting."

More likely he was sick of his T-Mobile team getting their *** kicked.

 

[Animal]

Actually I am starting to believe that it is true, at least the statistics are proving it. Here is a piece from Michael Ashenden interview:



And then the interviewer add the following:

Definitely.

After 1998 they implemented an internal "not testing positive" program. Obviously the onus was on the riders to prepare themselves, but the team had medical backup, and tried to ensure that the riders did not test positive which they could then spin as "clean".

"I've never tested positive"

They fired Gontchar under their not testing positive program.

 

[Race Radio]

Jens does his normal response, Rudy should just shut up

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/4...ould-substantiate-his-claims-or-be-quiet.aspx

 

[Animal]

Voigt is partly right.

Pevenage should say exactly which riders and teams were involved.

But he might be sued if he did, so he can really only talk about Telekom which he was a first hand witness to.

 

[oldschoolnik]

Voigt is partly right.

Pevenage should he can really only talk about Telekom which he was a first hand witness to.

You never know, he was traveling there so often and for so many years maybe he ran into other riders or saw them entering leaving the clinic. 200 athletes X's a few dozen treatments per year - that's alot of foot traffic - of course some, like Frank Schleck were just getting $10,000 worth of training advice so just being there in person doesn' t mean they were getting transfusions

 

[mr. tibbs]

Voigt is partly right.

Pevenage should say exactly which riders and teams were involved.

But he might be sued if he did, so he can really only talk about Telekom which he was a first hand witness to.

Jens is entirely right. This is the important part of what he said: "[Pevenage] should stop beating around the bush and say exactly which riders and teams were involved."

Zabel chimes in: "They found more than 200 blood bags in Spain. Up until this point, only 5 riders have been suspended. So one has to wonder where the other names - including those from other sports - have gone."

Pevenage needs to spill the beans. I'm all for it, and I'm sure the rest of the sporting world would love to know. It's infuriating that he has now admitted to being on the inside but not revealed anything about it.

 

[mr. tibbs]

You never know, he was traveling there so often and for so many years maybe he ran into other riders or saw them entering leaving the clinic. 200 athletes X's a few dozen treatments per year - that's alot of foot traffic - of course some, like Frank Schleck were just getting $10,000 worth of training advice so just being there in person doesn' t mean they were getting transfusions

I've actually heard from a third-hand source (grain of salt) that a certain F1 and male tennis star were there during one of Jan's appointments, too.

 

[McLovin]

I've actually heard from a third-hand source (grain of salt) that a certain F1 and male tennis star were there during one of Jan's appointments, too.

that's simple...anybody but nadal...he's so clean! he's cleaner then me because i just ate a nutella and gave me energy.