Sassi and Riccò

[hektoren]

Sassi and Riccò

Sassi poses an interesting rhetorical question: “I know that with [Riccò] I would risk my reputation, but sometimes you have to step up for an important objective,” Sassi said in Geelong. “If somebody doesn’t do it and doesn’t believe in this sport, how can things change?”

Now, if the "important objective" is getting cycling to move in the right direction, how about throwing the dopeheads out of the sport for good? Stuffing a mongoose on amphetamine in Riccò's mailbox and wait for the outcome?

You have to qualify first if you want to ride the protours. Stating that PED's are an instant dis-qualifier, permanently, would show that you believe in the sport IMHO.

If, OTOH, the "important objective" is padding your wallet, generating headlines and corporate interest in Italy, signing Riccò would be just about right. If July 2011 is your deadline (no pun intended) you might actually leave quite a tidy sum for your family. Sod your reputation and epitaph, it won't feed your family. I think that's a fair reading of Sassi's statement.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Sassi is very ill. I don't understand his descision with ricco or basso for a matter of fact but maybe he feels he "can help save cycling" by helping these riders who went "off track".

 

[hrotha]

I'm not necessarily opposed to lifetime bans but they can't apply retroactively, that'd be preposterous from a legal point of view. Riccò is the same as any other dopers, it's just that on top of being a doper he's also a jerk, and both facets are very visible to the general public.

If you think all dopers should be banned forever AND that no past dopers can ride clean, say goodbye to 95% of the pro peloton. Which would be fine, as long as you're coherent and realize that's what you want.

 

[Lanark]

Maybe Sassi is a good Catholic and thinks people can change and deserve a second chance. In most parts of society that is seen as civilized behavior, but then again, this is the clinic.

 

[hektoren]

If you think all dopers should be banned forever AND that no past dopers can ride clean, say goodbye to 95% of the pro peloton. Which would be fine, as long as you're coherent and realize that's what you want.

I think your percentage is off by a good margin, and I fail to see why one should feel obligated to readmit dopeheads. An exclusion from the pro-peloton isn't a prison sentence, you're free to go wherever you want, and you're free to pursue any career other than pro cycling. It would just be cycling looking after itself and the image it wants to project.

At 18 I entered our Airforce Flight School, and I was eventually not picked out to go to the US as one of the lucky few that qualified for fighter-pilot training. Not because I lacked in flying skills, had a wonky eye or lacked in reflexes or perception, but eventually because I didn't shine my shoes to the highest standard. The selection-panel had an easy job. They had 60 "equally" qualified candidates to choose from, and they chose the ones that crossed all their t's and dotted all their i's. In part I'm sure it was also about the Air Force fighter pilots taking care of the image they want to project. I'm OK with that, and other avenues of life opened themselves. Big deal.
Now, why would pro cycling be any different, exactly? And why would pro cycling want to be any different, exactly?

 

[hector5950]

Now, why would pro cycling be any different, exactly?

Well for starts, they are just guys who ride their bikes around the countryside really fast for your entertainment. They aren't entrusted with multi-million dollar airplanes with the capabilities to drop enormous bombs.

Look, if you want to ban these clowns for life going forward, fine - hell, it might even be a good idea. But the problem with all the hand ringing over Ricco and all the other dopers is, under the current system, they served their suspensions and are now free to go back and ride their bikes. You cannot change the rules once the game has started.

 

[hektoren]

Well for starts, they are just guys who ride their bikes around the countryside really fast for your entertainment. They aren't entrusted with multi-million dollar airplanes with the capabilities to drop enormous bombs.

Look, if you want to ban these clowns for life going forward, fine - hell, it might even be a good idea. But the problem with all the hand ringing over Ricco and all the other dopers is, under the current system, they served their suspensions and are now free to go back and ride their bikes. You cannot change the rules once the game has started.

Tally up the tv-rights and the commercial side of procycling, and it's easily a multi-million dollar industry. That's beside the point, though, as I was referring to the principle of shutting people out of careers through a qualifying process. You won't find the right to ride in the pro peloton on the bill of human rights.

You're right, of course, that under the current system, Riccò is free to go back and ride his bike. My beef is with Sassi's assertion that taking him under his wings is in any way bringing cycling forward.

 

[hfer07]

The benefit of this kind of associating is great for cycling-IF Ricco is 100% committed & has the discipline to follow the program designed by Sassi. Obviously Sassi is aware of the rebellious/wild nature of Ricco , but I think he's looked beyond that & found a great raw talent that needs to be polished "the adequate way" to produce "credible" results.
I don't have any problem at all with that TBH

 

[Berzin]

This argument makes no sense because it is limited in scope and therefore, one-sided.

Sorry, but I'm tired of these "lifetime ban" advocates for riders.

What you, Hektoren, should be concerned with, and have for whatever reason left out, is the history of the man who is training Ricco.

Maybe if you clarify for us what Aldo Sassi has been involved with in his lifetime, then maybe you will see what really drives the doping in cycling.

The cyclists make for convenient scapegoats for the collective media and general public, but there is a gigantic distribution and administration network that is always working behind the scenes. These people never get banished, with the exception of those from the Festina scandal, who for whatever reason never came back to work in the pro peloton. They just get recycled and go on with their work of poisoning the sport.

How about lifetime bans for these characters? I think that would be more effective a deterrent.

 

[hector5950]

Tally up the tv-rights and the commercial side of procycling, and it's easily a multi-million dollar industry. That's beside the point, though, as I was referring to the principle of shutting people out of careers through a qualifying process. You won't find the right to ride in the pro peloton on the bill of human rights.

There is a qualifying process. Be a good bike racer.

 

[JPM London]

+1 Berzin... Or +10 million or so...

Also, in my mind there is so much more to show for Sassi by working with previous dopers than working with so called "clean" riders. First problem: How would you know they had been clean or not? However, somebody who we know doped and who probably himself believed it was a fact of cycling life to have to dope - that's something worth working on.

It's not about running around playing holier-than-thou. This is about making change. What about day-to-day criminals - don't they deserve a second chance when done?

 

[Benotti69]

what i would like to know what is it Sassi does with these guys that can beat dopers?

Basso does exactly what kind of training with Sassi to beat guys who train hard and dope? It has to be something special or another form of doping. I am inclined to believe the latter. Otherwise why is he not signed up by say a team like liquigas and get the whole team on his program? why only a select few?

for me they are using something, might not be on an IOC banned substance list and hence the select few to prevent it becoming well known to others and diminish his 'training regime' and it would also end up on a banned substance list. it might not be as potent as epo was but for me it's something more than 'training'....

 

[hektoren]

This argument makes no sense because it is limited in scope and therefore, one-sided.

Sorry, but I'm tired of these "lifetime ban" advocates for riders.

What you, Hektoren, should be concerned with, and have for whatever reason left out, is the history of the man who is training Ricco.

Maybe if you clarify for us what Aldo Sassi has been involved with in his lifetime, then maybe you will see what really drives the doping in cycling.

The cyclists make for convenient scapegoats for the collective media and general public, but there is a gigantic distribution and administration network that is always working behind the scenes. These people never get banished, with the exception of those from the Festina scandal, who for whatever reason never came back to work in the pro peloton. They just get recycled and go on with their work of poisoning the sport.

How about lifetime bans for these characters? I think that would be more effective a deterrent.

Oh, but I'm all for removing the movers and shakers as well. Nothing one-sided about it. Stripping doctors of their licences, introducing a licensing system for team management etc. etc. But the theme of THIS thread was Sassi's rhetorical question, and whether cyclists returning from a doping-suspension in any way can be construed as "bringing cycling forward".

As for Sassi's career, he helped train Francesco Moser at a time when Moser blood-doped under the regimen of Conconi. He trained Frank Vandenbroucke, trying to rehabilitate him for the umpteenth time before he died, he trained Basso after his suspension, he was team manager for Mapei when Stefano Garzelli was caught using probenecid. I'd say it's a mixed bag of blessings.

 

[hektoren]

+1 Berzin... Or +10 million or so...

It's not about running around playing holier-than-thou. This is about making change. What about day-to-day criminals - don't they deserve a second chance when done?

Why bring criminals into the debate at all? There's one BIG difference. Most criminal offenders serving less than a life-sentence in prison will return to society, and thus it is quite prudent to try to rehabilitate them. In a lot of cases, though, it's considered a parole violation, and the court-system will send you right back into prison, if you reconnect to your previous environment and partners in crime.

Cyclists don't, as a rule, serve anything like a prison-sentence. They're out and about, and have all other avenues of life open to them. Previous PED-offenders aren't the martyrs here. I mean, why would I re-invite a guy to dinner-parties, who earlier, even though he was sober, knowingly took a pi$$ in my soup-bowl, insulted my wife and humped my labrador? I say, let'im eat elsewhere, while you imply that he deserves a second chance?

 

[hfer07]

I am inclined to believe the latter. Otherwise why is he not signed up by say a team like liquigas and get the whole team on his program? why only a select few?

Money: a program like that is very expensive & the cost is coming directly from the rider's pocket-not from the team.Plus is also about liability & better managing over a small group than a dozen riders-each one with different objectives. I'm inclined to believe that "doctors" in sports-specially when they become "trainers" for elite athletes, are paid mostly to avoid their clients to test positive-otherwise they could simply go visit a regular doctor where available..

 

[JPM London]

Why bring criminals into the debate at all? There's one BIG difference. Most criminal offenders serving less than a life-sentence in prison will return to society, and thus it is quite prudent to try to rehabilitate them. In a lot of cases, though, it's considered a parole violation, and the court-system will send you right back into prison, if you reconnect to your previous environment and partners in crime.

Cyclists don't, as a rule, serve anything like a prison-sentence. They're out and about, and have all other avenues of life open to them.

So you're saying that once a doper there's no return?
If a doper is caught "on parole" he's not thrown out for life (or at least if he's not Di Luca)?
But I'm thinking maybe that a more criminalising angle to the doping issue is more efficient. No doubt in my mind it has festered for so many years is that it's never really been viewed as wrong within the peloton - a bit like crossing a red light. If more doped riders and facilitators had been dealt with like Festina was back in 98 it would have created a shift much faster.

Previous PED-offenders aren't the martyrs here. I mean, why would I re-invite a guy to dinner-parties, who earlier, even though he was sober, knowingly took a pi$$ in my soup-bowl, insulted my wife and humped my labrador? I say, let'im eat elsewhere, while you imply that he deserves a second chance?

Hey, I didn't bring LA into this - leave him out!

No worries, I don't think they're martyrs at all - however I don't condemn them for life either. It's easy to be a couch-rider and see the rights and wrongs - and I'm as far from a proper rider as I could be. If I had ever had the potential I'd like to think I'd done it clean, but you know what, I wouldn't stick my head out and say I'd never touch the bad stuff.

 

[hektoren]

Hey, I didn't bring LA into this - leave him out!

Good one, that...

 

[M Sport]

Sassi poses an interesting rhetorical question: “I know that with [Riccò] I would risk my reputation, but sometimes you have to step up for an important objective,” Sassi said in Geelong. “If somebody doesn’t do it and doesn’t believe in this sport, how can things change?

The way I read that statement is one very talented man trying to make a difference in a way he think he can. Whatever our opinions are on how clean his subjects are I think his intentions are pure, and maybe subjects like Basso really aren't willing to stray to the dark side again. If so then in his own way Sassi is making an impact. I don't like Ricco at all but I'd like to see him try and at least race clean.

Now, if the "important objective" is getting cycling to move in the right direction, how about throwing the dopeheads out of the sport for good? Stuffing a mongoose on amphetamine in Riccò's mailbox and wait for the outcome?

You have to qualify first if you want to ride the protours. Stating that PED's are an instant dis-qualifier, permanently, would show that you believe in the sport IMHO.

If, OTOH, the "important objective" is padding your wallet, generating headlines and corporate interest in Italy, signing Riccò would be just about right. If July 2011 is your deadline (no pun intended) you might actually leave quite a tidy sum for your family. Sod your reputation and epitaph, it won't feed your family. I think that's a fair reading of Sassi's statement.

I don't think your response fits the statement, I think you're expecting a bit much of one man to make the changes you want. I don't agree with teh changes you want in any case.

 

[auscyclefan94]

If people like sassi or people who were in charge of the sport had the attitudes of some posters on here then the sport will never recover.

 

[euanli]

Money: a program like that is very expensive & the cost is coming directly from the rider's pocket-not from the team.Plus is also about liability & better managing over a small group than a dozen riders-each one with different objectives. I'm inclined to believe that "doctors" in sports-specially when they become "trainers" for elite athletes, are paid mostly to avoid their clients to test positive-otherwise they could simply go visit a regular doctor where available..

Isn't this what Lampre have just done, signed a deal with Sassi and the Mapei Center?

 

[Stephen_M]

If, OTOH, the "important objective" is padding your wallet, generating headlines and corporate interest in Italy, signing Riccò would be just about right. If July 2011 is your deadline (no pun intended) you might actually leave quite a tidy sum for your family. Sod your reputation and epitaph, it won't feed your family. I think that's a fair reading of Sassi's statement.[/QUOTE]

I'm not entirely sure I understand what the upside for Sassi is here? He has a book which has been published in Italian (I don't think it's been translated), but as one (if not, THE most repsected?) of the most respected cycling coaches, I'm not seeing how coaching Ricco would boost sales of a pretty specialist training bible?

Sure, he'll generate headlines in the cycling press; but not gain any new clients (he has a cap of 10 clients) and not really generate much PR for the Mapei Centre.

I don't think there's any hidden angle on this one...

 

[Benotti69]

If people like sassi or people who were in charge of the sport had the attitudes of some posters on here then the sport will never recover.

so it is better to have attitudes like McQuaid, Verbruggen, ASO, Spanish cycling federation and the Tour Down Under to name but a few......