Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[la_bicicleta]

So either it is "careless and open" or "more secret". These are not similar.

Will you please explain what a modern 2014 doping programme is, including costs etc. and all the logistics involved for those of us who have not been given the "word".

Thanks

P.S. perhaps send the details to the UCI as well to help them nail Team Sky!

If the past history of the sport is anything to go by, you can be absolutely certain that the
UCI has all the details of team SKY.

What is the cost of a brand new Sysmex machine in 2014? I have no idea about that.

The UCI interested in nailing SKY? mhahahahahaha

 

[Ventoux Boar]

Does that mean that we should close all Pantani threads in the clinic?

No.

Imaginative reply. Is it really so hard to have empathy for those associated with a death in the sport? How do rider tragedies fare? (Not that I've the stomach to look)

 

[The Hitch]

maybe, if and when they fall hard and fold, and untold truths will come out, I'll understand how wrong I was when I cheered for Swifty's podium in Sanremo or Stan's Omloop win...

Who said its wrong to cheer for those guys?

 

[Ferminal]

is that ag2r? no but they got peak generation now

massi,elli,hamburger back then. betancur,bardet and papy peraud now. lavenu coming with the pillows big time

Yeh that's what I mean, they certainly had their fair share of "interesting" characters and there never really was a broken chain. Paco 2006, Moreau 2007, Valjavec up until he got done. The Efimkins. So whilst you may have given them the benefit of the doubt with the good ole "clean French cycling", they don't really survive a more thorough inspection.

Gadret/Dupont were pretty transparent circa 2010/2011, for 2013 they signed two climbers out of Italy, and 2014 they sign two of Bernaudeau's boys. Not to mention if you judge teams on positive tests they are dodgier than all others, I don't think Georges/Hounard would be forgotten so easily if they rode for any of the high profile teams. It seems to me like Lavenu never really embraced they idea of trying to be competitive with clean riders.

For a while now I've been more of the opinion that the whole "clean French cycling" is some sort of joke that has been played on us.

 

[lllludo]

No.
Imaginative reply. Is it really so hard to have empathy for those associated with a death in the sport? How do rider tragedies fare? (Not that I've the stomach to look)

so Pantani's death could be discussed on this forum ? I don't follow your logic.

Either it's possible to refer to these tragedies, try to understand in order to avoid a repeat or the rule is to avoid mentionning anyone, be him Gonzalez, Pantani, Fignon or Simpson.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

so Pantani's death could be discussed on this forum ? I don't follow your logic.

Either it's possible to refer to these tragedies, try to understand in order to avoid a repeat or the rule is to avoid mentionning anyone, be him Gonzalez, Pantani, Fignon or Simpson.

Perhaps only deaths associated with Sky are anathema?

 

[martinvickers]

so Pantani's death could be discussed on this forum ? I don't follow your logic.

Either it's possible to refer to these tragedies, try to understand in order to avoid a repeat or the rule is to avoid mentionning anyone, be him Gonzalez, Pantani, Fignon or Simpson.

Yeah, because that's whats going on here with Gonzalez.

Sure it is.

 

[gooner]

Does that mean that we should close all Pantani threads in the clinic?

Entirely different and you know it. Don't be so disingenious.

This is innuendo with Txema's death.

Pantani was a doper and it's fair to discuss this within the context of the sport and what we know of knowledge to us.

EDIT: For instance if we were discussing about Pantani and his doping, there'd be no problem mentioning about his haematocrit of 60 at Milan-Turin in the 90s which was mentioned in Rendell's book.

 

[lllludo]

It seems to me like Lavenu never really embraced they idea of trying to be competitive with clean riders.

For a while now I've been more of the opinion that the whole "clean French cycling" is some sort of joke that has been played on us.

I agree with you: I don't understand how Lavenu is still in the business after so many doping stories in his team.
Bernaudeau is a bit the same story but with less damages. Cofidis and FDJeux seem to have cleaned their acts after troubled times.

But one thing is for sure the French riders living in France have been often blood tested by the AFLD for the last 10 years and the FFC have been monitoring a blood passport, even if they are riding for continental teams.
Of course they are not all clean (Houanard, Georges, Moreau had to abandon during a Tour de France for irregularities in his french blood passport) but they are controlled, cheaters are busted, they don't display incredible performances and so can be considered clean at least compared to some other "control free" environments.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Pantani was a doper.

Sure you have proof of this? A positive test and so on?

I know you do, because you are the one asking for proof all along, would be a shame if you didnt have a smoking gun here. Not nice for Pantani's parents et all...

 

[The Hitch]

Yeh that's what I mean, they certainly had their fair share of "interesting" characters and there never really was a broken chain. Paco 2006, Moreau 2007, Valjavec up until he got done. The Efimkins. So whilst you may have given them the benefit of the doubt with the good ole "clean French cycling", they don't really survive a more thorough inspection.

Gadret/Dupont were pretty transparent circa 2010/2011, for 2013 they signed two climbers out of Italy, and 2014 they sign two of Bernaudeau's boys. Not to mention if you judge teams on positive tests they are dodgier than all others, I don't think Georges/Hounard would be forgotten so easily if they rode for any of the high profile teams. It seems to me like Lavenu never really embraced they idea of trying to be competitive with clean riders.

For a while now I've been more of the opinion that the whole "clean French cycling" is some sort of joke that has been played on us.

Gadret AND Dupont riding away from Nibali scarponi Anton kreuziger et al on Grossglockner. Ha, up there with funny cycling moments.

 

[Ferminal]

Yeh don't forget we had Dupont down as the Giro winner after Trentino in 2012

 

[martinvickers]

Sure you have proof of this? A positive test and so on?

I know you do, because you are the one asking for proof all along, would be a shame if you didnt have a smoking gun here. Not nice for Pantani's parents et all...

This good enough, FGL?

http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Pantani-positive-1/

http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Pantani-positive-2/

http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Pantani-positive-3/

You're welcome.

 

[The Hitch]

I've no love for dw's txema conspiracy, he knows that. But he's on this war path and so long as what he posts is within the rules none of us can stop him.

What I find funny was that the topic was introduced by this new poster - Justin r. Who out of the blue after dw.mentioned not txemas death but brailsfords comments that they hired lienders because of txema, asked dw if txemas death was suspicious.

Leaving aside the coincidence of new to the forum Justin just happening to ask dw - The one poster who most strongly believes in the txema sky conspiracy, about the subject, it's clear on thus occasion it was introduced by the sky defender. Then dw posts his explanations, waiting in the wings, the usual suspects will soon try and blame the entire clinic for his postings.

Seems to me like dw was played.

 

[Netserk]

This good enough, FGL?

http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Pantani-positive-1/

http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Pantani-positive-2/

http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Pantani-positive-3/

You're welcome.

Where there any B-samples? Due process?

 

[The Hitch]

Yeh don't forget we had Dupont down as the Giro winner after Trentino in 2012

Both just disappeared since then.

Maybe the sport cleaned up

 

[Netserk]

I've no love for dw's txema conspiracy, he knows that. But he's on this war path and so long as what he posts is within the rules none of us can stop him.

What I find funny was that the topic was introduced by this new poster - Justin r. Who out of the blue after dw.mentioned not txemas death but brailsfords comments that they hired lienders because of txema, asked dw if txemas death was suspicious.

Leaving aside the coincidence of new to the forum Justin just happening to ask dw - The one poster who most strongly believes in the txema sky conspiracy, about the subject, it's clear on thus occasion it was introduced by the sky defender. Then dw posts his explanations, waiting in the wings, the usual suspects will soon try and blame the entire clinic for his postings.

Seems to me like dw was played.

Speaking of which, when I checked boardreader, I think he was the single most active poster in the clinic.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I've no love for dw's txema conspiracy, he knows that. But he's on this war path and so long as what he posts is within the rules none of us can stop him.

A mod saw fit to delete the posts, so it's all good. So much for rules and noone stopping me eh?

 

[martinvickers]

Where there any B-samples? Due process?

Seriously? This is your comeback?

ho-hum.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

A mod saw fit to delete the posts, so it's all good.

It would be much appreciated if the subject matter could be dropped now, please. It didn't really add anything to the debate other than unpleasantness.

Thank you.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

This good enough, FGL?

http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Pantani-positive-1/

http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Pantani-positive-2/

http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Pantani-positive-3/

You're welcome.

All SOL martinvickers, you are welcome. Lets keep to the facts is your narrative or not?

 

[Netserk]

It would be much appreciated if the subject matter could be dropped now, please. It didn't really add anything to the debate other than unpleasantness.

Thank you.

Why? If not in the team Sky thread, where should we discuss the death of Txema and the (perhaps doping) cause of it?

 

[Digger]

This whole thing is an important discussion on a broader sense...tom simpson good...Richard virenque bad in the eyes of sky...because one is dead?

 

[martinvickers]

All SOL martinvickers, you are welcome. Lets keep to the facts is your narrative or not?

Sorry, SOL? What's that got to do with anything? You seem to be mixing up whether there is a positive test (Yes) with whether his ghost should now face charges on the foot of that (clearly No)

But nobody's charging Pantani, or trying to.

You asked for the positives, rather disingenuously. You got them.

He had one suspension while alive, and three positive tests posthumously.

It can therefore be safely said, he was a doper. It's not conjecture or conspiracy theory whackiness.

For the record, we have positives and confessions from Fignon, and clear physical evidence of doping from Simpson.

If you can't see the difference, it's because you don't want to. Or pretending not to.

 

[Mellow Velo]

This whole thing is an important discussion on a broader sense...tom simpson good...Richard virenque bad in the eyes of sky...because one is dead?

I'm pretty sure you made that up...............again.
Unless you have a link, of course.