Rabobank riders connected with Austrian doping ring?

[BroDeal]

"In October 2005, in response to calls from the International Olympic Committee and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) for an independent investigation, the UCI appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman to investigate the handling of urine tests by the French national anti-doping laboratory, LNDD. Vrijman was head of the Dutch anti-doping agency for ten years; since then he has worked as a defense attorney defending high-profile athletes against doping charges.[45] Vrijman's report cleared Armstrong because of improper handling and testing.[46][47] The report said tests on urine samples were conducted improperly and fell so short of scientific standards that it was "completely irresponsible" to suggest they "constitute evidence of anything."[48] The recommendation of the commission's report was no disciplinary action against any rider on the basis of LNDD research. It also called upon the WADA and LNDD to submit themselves to an investigation by an outside independent authority.[49] The WADA rejected these conclusions.[50] The IOC Ethics Commission subsequently censured **** Pound, the President of WADA and a member of the IOC, for his statements in the media that suggested wrongdoing by Armstrong".

The so called Vrijman report has been discredited. It relies upon technicalities to explain why the EPO in Armstrong's urine cannot be used to apply a doping sanction. It does not deal with the reality that artificial EPO was in Armstrong's urine because he injected artificial EPO once before the 1999 TdF and twice during it. The two scientists who developed the EPO test have both weighed in on the scientific validity of Armstrong's positives.

No one here is making the argument that the 1999 positives should be used to apply sanctions to Armstrong. The question is whether Armstrong took banned substances. That debate has been conclusively resolved. He used EPO.

 

[slowoldman]

You do realize that you are complaining about people who are complaining also? Kind of stings when you realize you are the one filling the mirror huh **** Cheney? Then again, show me where I am complaining about people who complain. I just pointed out the imbicility (I made that up, my mommy will be so proud) of morons like you. The rest of your post deserves no response.

Cheney, wow you're original. Well, before you edited your post it stated you found it tiresome that people complained about other peoples post. So you just break your arm patting yourself on the back little one. I will find better things to do with my time. You are now added to my favorite list.

 

[elapid]

It is a pity that many doping related threads both get misdirected towards Lance and then degenerate into these kind of posts.

I am not a Lance fan, but I am not looking for him to be suspended. I think he polarizes opinion because of his public persona (I don't know him, but he comes across as arrogant, controlling and ruthless) and his support of the omerta and, indirectly as a result, doping. I believe BigBoat in that the vast majority of GT contenders are dopers to some degree. So why is Lance targeted disproportionately compared to other cyclists? He could have done something positive after winning the 1999 Tour of Redemption, but he didn't. He reinforced the omerta (closing down Bassons, chasing down Simoni, and excluding journalists from all media events because they asked questions regarding drugs) and coming out with the very unconvincing "I am the most tested athlete in the world and I have never tested positive." However, the evidence that testing does not work and Lance doped is quite convincing.

Lance had HCG levels through the roof as a result of his testicular cancer but he never tested positive for this despite being tested many times during this period. The argument that he never tested positive is meaningless with evidence such as this and Kohl's recent testimony.

In regards to the six positive samples from the 1999 TdF, you have to put this into the correct context. The samples from the 1999 TdF were being tested for a new EPO test. They were not handled and nor were they intended to be handled according to drug testing protocols. They were just testing and validating a new test, not looking for guilty riders. An l'Equipe reporter knew they were testing these samples and requested Lance's permission to have access to his results from the 1999 TdF, which he granted. The l'Equipe reporter then matched the numbers and found these results. These cannot and will never be used by the USADA or the UCI, but, because the EPO test was validated, the results are irrefutable.

I am convinced he doped, but so did every other top level cyclist during his tenure. I am not sure what to think about the likely level of doping in the pro peloton, but hope the whistle blowing of dopers like Kohl may move things in the right direction.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Connections to Ferrari. 1999 post-test TUE, 1999 EPO re-test, backed up and explained in great deal in Ashenden interview. Swart assertions. Andreu (Frankie and Betsy) testimony. O'Reilly confessions. Anderson confessions (and lawsuits). Every other rider on podium next to Lance at Tours involved in scandals or tested positive. Dozen or so former teammates tested positive. IM between Vaughters and Andreu. $500k "donation" to the UCI for mysterious blood machine. Chasing down Bassons. Chasing down Simeoni. Supremely upholding the omerta at every chance. Lots more, tired of posting about it.

Should he be sanctioned? I don't know. Maybe. But I wasn't stating that. I was stating that he doped, and most everyone I come across, on almost every level believes it's so, based on what I just stated.

 

[ElChingon]

Andreu (Frankie and Betsy) testimony.

This alone should echo in the heads of the non-believers (of him doping), they testified under oath and non-believers still turn the other cheek as if it never happened. Then the case was dropped because the contract did not explicitly state that he (Lance) couldn't dope to win and the case was dropped and he took the money.

Man after that how could anyone even wear a yellow bracelet? Boggles the mind really.

 

[biker jk]

from what i gather. you and brodeal and some otheres believe pretty much every single accusation made by anybody about lance.
since you keep making the comment about it being irrefutable, i'll do some refuting. tell me what you find irrefutable? the old blood samples?
if those tests are one of the reasons you think should have been banned or convicted of something i hope you someday are on trial for a crime that will be made or broken on the scientific evidence and it's a lab like LNDD that the jury is going to hear from in your trial. i'd like to hear from you then on "irrefutable evidence."
here's a short version.

"In October 2005, in response to calls from the International Olympic Committee and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) for an independent investigation, the UCI appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman to investigate the handling of urine tests by the French national anti-doping laboratory, LNDD. Vrijman was head of the Dutch anti-doping agency for ten years; since then he has worked as a defense attorney defending high-profile athletes against doping charges.[45] Vrijman's report cleared Armstrong because of improper handling and testing.[46][47] The report said tests on urine samples were conducted improperly and fell so short of scientific standards that it was "completely irresponsible" to suggest they "constitute evidence of anything."[48] The recommendation of the commission's report was no disciplinary action against any rider on the basis of LNDD research. It also called upon the WADA and LNDD to submit themselves to an investigation by an outside independent authority.[49] The WADA rejected these conclusions.[50] The IOC Ethics Commission subsequently censured **** Pound, the President of WADA and a member of the IOC, for his statements in the media that suggested wrongdoing by Armstrong".

i also recommend http://velonews.com/article/9932

do you think he should have been banned on the basis of those tests?

somehow i think you are aware of this but have you own paranoid conspiracy theories about it.

does this prove he didn't dope?
of course i doesn't. but the blood tests certainly don't prove he did and the question is far far far from irrefutable.

i'm tired of this.

but if you guys keep acting like no reasonable person can disagree with you i guess i'll have to keep calling you out.
so... is the the blood evidence that's irrefutable or what? what have you got. bring it on.

Here you are. Enjoy!

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Then the case was dropped because the contract did not explicitly state that he (Lance) couldn't dope to win and the case was dropped and he took the money.

Partly. I obviously don't like the guy, but the other sticking point was that because he had not been deemed positive by the UCI or sanctioned as such, all of the testimony and evidence brought up in the case was thus not legally relevant when it came to fraud or breach of insurance claim as the contract was written. It's late and I'm working from memory, but if I'm off base, feel free to correct me anyone.

 

[issoisso]

Yes, that's the general idea, yes.

My personal favorite from that trial is the part when Betsy Andreu had testified in court what Lance had said to his oncologists (admitting to taking cortico, testosterone, EPO and a slew of other stuff).

At this point, Tim Herman (lance's legal counsel) jumps out from behind a rock and yells "YOU MISUNDERSTOOD! HE SAID HE WAS USING THAT STUFF TO FIGHT THE CANCER!"...................wait, so how did she misunderstand what was said in that meeting if lance's entire defence is based on constantly repeating that that meeting never happened and those doctors are fictional people made up by Mrs. Andreu?

The smoking gun is plain for everyone to see. Just because many choose to pretend it isn't there, doesn't mean it isn't there.

 

[Anonymous]

im completely and utterly confused.. :?

when exactly did lance ride for rabobank?

 

[Anonymous]

Cheney, wow you're original. Well, before you edited your post it stated you found it tiresome that people complained about other peoples post. So you just break your arm patting yourself on the back little one. I will find better things to do with my time. You are now added to my favorite list.

..awwwe....does daddy wanna spank me for being bad? Again, address your own hypocrisy before addressing the hypocrisy of others. Its the choice of a new generation. I THINK you meant "ignore list," but I understand the mind starts to slip when you have to use Depends.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Thoughtforfood,

Please cool it with the personal comments.

Thank you.

Susan

 

[nobody]

Yes, that's the general idea, yes.

My personal favorite from that trial is the part when Betsy Andreu had testified in court what Lance had said to his oncologists (admitting to taking cortico, testosterone, EPO and a slew of other stuff).

At this point, Tim Herman (lance's legal counsel) jumps out from behind a rock and yells "YOU MISUNDERSTOOD! HE SAID HE WAS USING THAT STUFF TO FIGHT THE CANCER!"...................wait, so how did she misunderstand what was said in that meeting if lance's entire defence is based on constantly repeating that that meeting never happened and those doctors are fictional people made up by Mrs. Andreu?

The smoking gun is plain for everyone to see. Just because many choose to pretend it isn't there, doesn't mean it isn't there.

Never heard that part of story... if true that is terrific!

 

[davidg]

im completely and utterly confused.. :?

when exactly did lance ride for rabobank?

Or that he was Austrian

In fact I am surprised there has been little comment on McEwen, O'Grady, Gerrans in all of this. Oh wait, they are Australian.

 

[franciep10]

This is what I don't like about this forum, when I got to this forum I thought that I hated LA but it is clear to me now that I just don't like the guy. I don't like Lance Lovers that continue to say he rode clean. But you Idolized haters annoy me also you complain about him when you hear about him too much but you talk about him more than any other rider. I wish for a week that we ignore him, unless he wins a race or tests positive. You haters and lovers hijack every doping thread to talk about armstrong, this thread had nothing to do with him but he gets dragged into it. I would like to get back to point, we can't just simply brush this under the rug we have to take these accusations seriously, If this was astana this thread would've hit 200 post already. Rabobank does not have a super clean history, and as for Menchov, well di luca looks doped up and menchov is beating him I think that's suspicious.

 

[BroDeal]

Or that he was Austrian

In fact I am surprised there has been little comment on McEwen, O'Grady, Gerrans in all of this. Oh wait, they are Australian.

I'm 'merican. What's the difference? Those Austrians should stay on their island and deal with their cane toads and ozone holes. The Australians should stick to making sausages.

 

[Anonymous]

Thoughtforfood,

Please cool it with the personal comments.

Thank you.

Susan

You forgot a couple of names in addressing this subject.

 

[BikeCentric]

Rabobank does not have a super clean history, and as for Menchov, well di luca looks doped up and menchov is beating him I think that's suspicious.

I agree with you on this Franciep, and yes of course it worries me a bit. I could care less about "identifying with the riders personally" anymore, but as we all know the constant drumbeat of scandal is bad for the sport.

Also, remember the Carabinieri (at least I think it was the Italian police, someone correct me if I'm wrong) seized all those 2008 Giro blood samples as well right before this race and we haven't heard anything about that yet either.

Seems like there's a big bomb out there waiting to drop, and it also seems like every year when we get to the 3rd week of a Grand Tour all the talk starts turning to "now who is going to get busted."

 

[Bala Verde]

Seems like there's a big bomb out there waiting to drop, and it also seems like every year when we get to the 3rd week of a Grand Tour all the talk starts turning to "now who is going to get busted."

In that case, 'hunting season' is opened, with the Giro now, the TdF in July and the Vuelta in September!

 

[luckyboy]

Is it wrong that sometimes I find that the dope talk can be as interesting as the racing?

 

[Bala Verde]

Is it wrong that sometimes I find that the dope talk can be as interesting as the racing?

No, it's just what housewives call 'As the world turns' or 'The bold and the beautiful', or younger people (women?) 'Desperate housewives', 'Sex in the city' or 'Grey's Anatomy'....

so what are we watching:

'As the peloton pedals round and round'

'The bold and the tricheurs'

'Desperate domestiques'

'Epo in the peloton'

'(insert any rider's name) Anatomy'

 

[BroDeal]

Is it wrong that sometimes I find that the dope talk can be as interesting as the racing?

It adds to the drama. Since the race results are highly suspect, what we have left is a big horror show. Doping plays the part of the unstoppable slasher, who jumps out at inopportune moments and hacks one of the hapless teenagers to death. As the audience, we get to marvel at the gore and blood as the poor soul meets his gruesome fate.

 

[BikeCentric]

It adds to the drama. Since the race results are highly suspect, what we have left is a big horror show. Doping plays the part of the unstoppable slasher, who jumps out at inopportune moments and hacks one of the hapless teenagers to death. As the audience, we get to marvel at the gore and blood as the poor soul meets his gruesome fate.

Ha ha ha nice analogy. Unfortunately for the sport, each time the slasher strikes it loses more sponsorship Dollars until sooner or later it adds up to real money!

 

[BroDeal]

Ha ha ha nice analogy. Unfortunately for the sport, each time the slasher strikes it loses more sponsorship Dollars until sooner or later it adds up to real money!

Low budget horror films are always the best, so there might be hope yet.

 

[Escarabajo]

This alone should echo in the heads of the non-believers (of him doping), they testified under oath and non-believers still turn the other cheek as if it never happened. Then the case was dropped because the contract did not explicitly state that he (Lance) couldn't dope to win and the case was dropped and he took the money.

Man after that how could anyone even wear a yellow bracelet? Boggles the mind really.

Not to mention that Frankie Andreu rode with him, so he has some inside information.

 

[Anonymous]

Ha ha ha nice analogy. Unfortunately for the sport, each time the slasher strikes it loses more sponsorship Dollars until sooner or later it adds up to real money!

Here is an alternative: The UCI could actually get serious about testing and scare the riders into clean riding. Unfortunately, they are terrified of your exact scenario occurring and only put in half measures meant to give the appearance of a clean peloton.