Reactions from the Pro Peloton to #USPSConspiracy (USADA) - post here

[joe_papp]

Joaquim "Purito" Rodríguez

Rider: Joaquim "Purito" Rodríguez

Quote: "Me he enterado esta mañana de la noticia antes de la salida y no quiero comentar nada, pero como corredor solo puedo decir que es un supercampeón, ha dado mucho al ciclismo y ha sido un ejemplo", dijo "Purito" en el circuito de Alcañiz.

"I heard the news this morning before the stage depart and I do not want to say anything, but as a cyclist I can only say he [Lance] is a superchampion, who has given a lot to cycling and has been an example," said "Purito" in the Alcaniz circuit.

Source: epa (euopean pressphoto agency) via Google News http://www.google.com/hostednews/epa/article/ALeqM5hjv_m7iZI-gBOdezn2J_qNqUAksA?docId=1855113

There's nothing sophisticated about that - we all get why all those ex-dopers aren't condemning Armstrong. But compare the response we're getting to the outrage about Riccò.

Relative to the response of more mainstream fans and observers, I would say ours is a pretty nuanced and sophisticated view. As for Riccò, no surprise there in the radically-different responses to his (+)'s and LA's. T. Frei and I both spoke very explicitly about the unequal treatment being suffered by Riccò w/r/t other dopers who were barely condemned by their peers.

 

[cycladianpirate]

The bandwagon is just around the corner.

The peloton are waiting in line to jump on it.

Meehhh. I'll still follow cycling whatever. Sure I'll have my doubts but:

1. I would the same with any other pro sport out there
2. Can you imagine any other sport crucifying their "poster boy" like this?

Is cycling cleaner than other pro sports? I don't know.

It's far, far more honest about the problem though.

 

[Big Doopie]

Rider: Joaquim "Purito" Rodríguez

"I heard the news this morning before the stage depart and I do not want to say anything, but as a cyclist I can only say he [Lance] is a superchampion, who has given a lot to cycling and has been an example," said "Purito" in the Alcaniz circuit.

om-freakin'-g.

how any cycling fan can now go and cheer on "purito" is beyond me.

 

[Arnout]

AFDL Reaction

http://www.nieuwsblad.be/sportwerel...oers&utm_content=article&utm_campaign=seeding

AFDL reaction on Armstrong news.

They say Armstrong was aware of all doping controls. There were lot of difficulties to test Armstrong by surprise. Armstrong was always informed beforehand, so he still had 20 minutes to wash out the doping traces. He injected only small doses of EPO at a time, so it wasn't traceable anymore after that time. The anti-doping controls were powerless against that way of working, according to Michel Rieu, scientific adviser of the AFLD.

To escape the doping controls, Armstrong would have counted on a network of employees. "Armstrong surrounded himself with a lot of physiologists. On the logistical level, everything was possible as well. Rumor is that he used his private jet to fly over blood from the USA."

According to the French anti-doping official, Armstrong would also be behind the dismissal of former AFDL chairman Pierre Bordry. "We know he went to visit then-president Sarkozy to ask for the dismissal of Bordry in March 2009. A year later, Bordry indeed quit his job. In exchange, Armstrong donated a bike to the president in March 2010."

My translation, so there might be weak points.

 

[hrotha]

Riccò was not liked, and his departure was cherished, for whatever reason. Compare it to the Contador positive, or the Frank Schleck positive. No-one appears to give a damn. This whole saga has made me, from someone who doesn't care about doping, to being very annoyed at the least with dopers. That's at least one victory of the USADA

I know, and it's not that it surprises me, I just find it so frustrating. With Riccò, some early and still confusing reports in the media were enough to throw the most disgusting abuse at him. Armstrong is officially banned, and we barely get a few French pros like Engoulvent calling it as it is while many riders don't even dare to open their mouths and most of those who do can only praise Armstrong. It's sickening. Expected, and consistent with what we've been hearing for years, but still sickening.

 

[Arnout]

I know, and it's not that it surprises me, I just find it so frustrating. With Riccò, some early and still confusing reports in the media were enough to throw the most disgusting abuse at him. Armstrong is officially banned, and we barely get a few French pros like Engoulvent calling it as it is while many riders don't even dare to open their mouths and most of those who do can only praise Armstrong. It's sickening. Expected, and consistent with what we've been hearing for years, but still sickening.

Yes, agreed.

One more reaction, from Voeckler: "I was racing with him, was in the yellow jersey in 2004 (true narcissist that he is, he first mentions his own story of course ). Maybe if I would've been second behind him, it would've been different, but now it's not affecting me. I am focusing more on the future than on the past."

Well, that's hardly a strong condemning of Armstrong, but more than we get from most, as he at least seems to accept that Armstrong was doping.

 

[hfer07]

om-freakin'-g.

how any cycling fan can now go and cheer on "purito" is beyond me.

but you have to consider that Joaquim has not been affected directly by the Armstrong reign at all-he's from the new generation that emerged while LA was coming to retirement. His words are only related to what "the myth" was built from-not from direct experience-so overall-I'd give him the benefit of the doubt..

OTOH-Valverde has more liability in his opinion than Purito- but we all know that Piti is from the Old school & Omerta still in his veins....

 

[noddy69]

Jacques-Maynes



wise words

This is the crux of when the new cycling really starts,” Jacques-Maynes said. “Everyone's been saying, year in year out, that this is the cleanest cycling's ever been. Well I think this is the first step. From this point, maybe it will start cleaning itself out. I don't think it's cleaned itself out yet. I think this is the first sign that however big your ambitions are, you're not too big to fail. People can go down, whatever you think of yourself.”

Thank god for an opinion thats got sense, bravo.

 

[hrotha]

but you have to consider that Joaquim has not been affected directly by the Armstrong reign at all-he's from the new generation that emerged while LA was coming to retirement. His words are only related to what "the myth" was built from-not from direct experience-so overall-I'd give him the benefit of the doubt..

OTOH-Valverde has more liability in his opinion than Purito- but we all know that Piti is from the Old school & Omerta still in his veins....

Purito is older than Valverde and turned pro one year earlier. While he was never contending races against Armstrong, he knows what was going on at the time.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

but you have to consider that Joaquim has not been affected directly by the Armstrong reign at all-he's from the new generation that emerged while LA was coming to retirement. His words are only related to what "the myth" was built from-not from direct experience-so overall-I'd give him the benefit of the doubt..

OTOH-Valverde has more liability in his opinion than Purito- but we all know that Piti is from the Old school & Omerta still in his veins....

Haven't they both been racing for pretty much the same time?

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Very few people are adequately informed of the scope, intensity, and backdrop of the USADA's pursuit in the last few months, beyond this forum. The riders on the other hand, to me, don't demonstrate the omerta, just ignorance of what is actually taking place: who else is involved, the motive of the USADA, the evidence being claimed, etc.

It could be said that they should be in the know, but I disagree with their obligation to know the ins and outs of every legal battle.

 

[noddy69]

Very few people are adequately informed of the scope, intensity, and backdrop of the USADA's pursuit in the last few months, beyond this forum. The riders on the other hand, to me, don't demonstrate the omerta, just ignorance of what is actually taking place: who else is involved, the motive of the USADA, the evidence being claimed, etc.

It could be said that they should be in the know, but I disagree with their obligation to know the ins and outs of every legal battle.

But the simple ins and outs of Lances guilt have been known in the peloton for a long time and yet they fail to condemn, in fact still honour him as purito did by saying he was good for cycling and a great champion.

So trying to say that they answer the way they do because they dont know the scope of the case just does not wash. They do damage to cycling speaking the way they do.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

The riders on the other hand, to me, don't demonstrate the omerta, just ignorance of what is actually taking place: who else is involved, the motive of the USADA, the evidence being claimed, etc.

It will be interesting to see how this thread compares to the Pro Rider reaction to Ricco news thread.

 

[hfer07]

Purito is older than Valverde and turned pro one year earlier. While he was never contending races against Armstrong, he knows what was going on at the time.

as I stated - Valverde & Purito are from an "emerging generation"-not directly affected by LA's reign. when Lance stopped at 05-cycling carried on with "their own" problems-not Lance's-so I don't know how they get to know directly what was going on-perhaps hearsay & gossiping among colleagues for sure, but details-I don't think so. Contador OTOH is the rightful rider to speak of what went on-rather than those two...

Haven't they both been racing for pretty much the same time?

read above

 

[More Strides than Rides]

But the simple ins and outs of Lances guilt have been known in the peloton for a long time and yet they fail to condemn, in fact still honour him as purito did by saying he was good for cycling and a great champion.

So trying to say that they answer the way they do because they dont know the scope of the case just does not wash. They do damage to cycling speaking the way they do.

I tried responding to this post trying to defend the riders, but in the process I've convinced myself otherwise. I think tweets reflect their perceptions of Lance's relative guilt, and stem from uninformed ideas of the breadth and goals of the investigation, and legitimate concerns of the timing and procedures of the process (it was a mess, admit it), but you are right, but that does not excuse their ignoring of the absolute truth. Certainly, some riders have absolute knowledge of his guilt, and they have suffered from a mob mentality of legitimizing doping after many years.

Others may genuinely be young and naive; growing up in the peloton, they may have been conditioned to the myth without realizing it. But even the clean riders must know the absolute truth...

It will be interesting to see how this thread compares to the Pro Rider reaction to Ricco news thread.

I glanced through that thread just now. Obvious points were made about twitter being the forum of a popularity contest. Same applies here. I bet most riders now are more familiar with the myth than the man...

 

[el chava]

http://www.nieuwsblad.be/sportwerel...oers&utm_content=article&utm_campaign=seeding

AFDL reaction on Armstrong news.

They say Armstrong was aware of all doping controls. There were lot of difficulties to test Armstrong by surprise. Armstrong was always informed beforehand, so he still had 20 minutes to wash out the doping traces. He injected only small doses of EPO at a time, so it wasn't traceable anymore after that time. The anti-doping controls were powerless against that way of working, according to Michel Rieu, scientific adviser of the AFLD.

To escape the doping controls, Armstrong would have counted on a network of employees. "Armstrong surrounded himself with a lot of physiologists. On the logistical level, everything was possible as well. Rumor is that he used his private jet to fly over blood from the USA."

According to the French anti-doping official, Armstrong would also be behind the dismissal of former AFDL chairman Pierre Bordry. "We know he went to visit then-president Sarkozy to ask for the dismissal of Bordry in March 2009. A year later, Bordry indeed quit his job. In exchange, Armstrong donated a bike to the president in March 2010."

My translation, so there might be weak points.

Thanks for this. Of course that sleazebag Sarkozy was involved. I hope the details of the avoidance of doping controls will eventually be reported in full.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

No Vaughters. No Hincapie. I thought that was telling.

I very much doubt if USADA wants any of its witnesses talking in the press while the process is still ongoing, with some of the accused awaiting arbitration hearings.

 

[The Hitch]

Alistair fotheringham cycling writer for the Independent brought onto bbc radio five life, and man what a let down. They had some fanboy reading all the Fabiani point and then ask this guardian writer for a rebuttal and he just said that its complicated and everyone has already made up their mind.

Grow some ****ing balls.

 

[The Hitch]

Found 1 interview with on the internet (bbc so only available in uk) with a guy called John Hoberman who was introduced as a sports historian but in 5 minutes went into very impressive detail as to the history of doping in cycling, and doping today.

Anyone come accross him before. He really knew his stuff.

Also said he comes into evidence that top cyclists and.athletes.today are still doping, and didnt sound like he was talking about Frank Schleck and Yohann Ofredo.

 

[Cloxxki]

I asked Bart Brentjens to make a statement (since other Trek affiliated cycling legends got away just fine with seaking out). Not sure he responded, I am so green when it comes to Twitter.

 

[Benotti69]

Found 1 interview with on the internet (bbc so only available in uk) with a guy called John Hoberman who was introduced as a sports historian but went in 5 minutes went into very impressive detail as to the history of doping in cycling, and doping today.

Anyone come accross him before. He really knew his stuff.

Also said he comes into evidence that top cyclists today are still doping, and didnt sound like he was talking about Frank Schleck and Yohann Ofredo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hoberman

This the guy?

 

[TubularBills]

Found 1 interview with on the internet (bbc so only available in uk) with a guy called John Hoberman who was introduced as a sports historian but went in 5 minutes went into very impressive detail as to the history of doping in cycling, and doping today.

Anyone come accross him before. He really knew his stuff.

Also said he comes into evidence that top cyclists today are still doping, and didnt sound like he was talking about Frank Schleck and Yohann Ofredo.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18451131

"This is not a prescription for drug-free sport," says John Hoberman, a historian at the University of Texas who has written extensively about doping in sport.

"The activity itself has become pharma-dependent. And the idea that the best-intentioned people at the World Anti-doping Agency are going to make this go away is a dream."

 

[M Sport]

Count me as another person who doesn't have time to wade through all these pages to see if what I have is already linked. I didn't see it in the 1st few pages - and every link I have is CN.

Phil Anderson: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/anderson-maintains-support-for-armstrong

A direct contradiction to Stephen Swart who was at Motorola with Anderson and went on record in 2006 saying Armstrong and himself took EPO and that Armstrong pushed it on to riders. Either Anderson had his head in the sand or he gets the benefit of the one season difference (1994 to 1995, Swart's allegations were about 1995).

 

[The Hitch]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18451131

"This is not a prescription for drug-free sport," says John Hoberman, a historian at the University of Texas who has written extensively about doping in sport.

"The activity itself has become pharma-dependent. And the idea that the best-intentioned people at the World Anti-doping Agency are going to make this go away is a dream."

thanks for that article. Brilliant. never thought id see something like that come out of the bbc.

 

[Hugh Januss]

What we are seeing here is selective blindness. All these guys, from Eddy M. to Axel M. to everyone else on the inside can not say anything because they would be exposing themselves.
In brief; any pro from the last 35+ years who is not pizzed off by the proof of Lances' fraud was doing the same thing, and thought he was doing it as well. Maybe when they see how much Lance was in bed with the UCI they will get mad.....who knows?