The revenge of Rasmussen ...

Page 48 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
sniper said:
rasmussen in Dutch newspaper says asking cyclists to adhere to antidoping rules while Pat was in charge was a bit like asking Italians to pay taxes while Berlusconi was president.

one is constantly left wondering how the acclaimed culture change in cycling could ever have come about under Pat's watch...
Perhaps Rasmussen is pining for the glory days of Hein Verbruggen?
 
Dazed and Confused said:
sure, but why not rip a couple of jerseys off his back. Giro 2009 (clean era, lol) result:

1. RUS MENCHOV Denis RAB 86h03'11" 500
2. ITA PELLIZOTTI Franco LIQ 01'59" 375
3. ESP SASTRE CANDIL Carlos CTT 03'46" 315
4. ITA BASSO Ivan LIQ 03'59" 270
5. USA LEIPHEIMER Levi AST 05'28" 245
6. ITA GARZELLI Stefano ASA 08'43" 220
7. AUS ROGERS Michael THR 10'01" 195
8. SLO VALJAVEC Tadej ALM 11'13" 170
9. ITA BRUSEGHIN Marzio LAM 11'28" 155
10. ESP ARROYO DURAN David GCE 12'50" 140

Menchov whacked a pretty serious group of dopers here.
You forget the true contender of that Giro. The one and only Di Luca beaten by only 41 sec by Menchov who in typical style hit the deck in the decisive ITT. I think pellizotti was also stripped of his place. But I confess, I kind of liked Menchov while Di Luca was on a high-octane programme as Lance says.
 
Rollthedice said:
You forget the true contender of that Giro. The one and only Di Luca beaten by only 41 sec by Menchov who in typical style hit the deck in the decisive ITT. I think pellizotti was also stripped of his place. But I confess, I kind of liked Menchov while Di Luca was on a high-octane programme as Lance says.
As a serious doper Menchov was incredible dull.
 
May 19, 2010
1,899
0
0
Von Mises said:
Yes, thats what they always say that tests are joke, easy to beat, you have to be very stupid to get caught...and then...they are busted.
He was busted for CERA, something he didn't know they could test for. To get caught in a new test is always a risk, and probably he was stupid for not understanding there might be a test for CERA by July 2008, and he certainly was stupid for not taking into account that it wasn't UCI which sanctioned the 2008 TdF, it was the French. But the introduction of new tests doesn't happen often. It hasn't been since 2008 that so many were caught for something "new", and Pat made sure UCI sanctioned the races after that bad mishap.
 
zlev11 said:
an underrated Menchov crash was when he fell going over a zebra crossing in (i think) the 2009 Tour. the silent killer, indeed.
remember it as it was today. it was the day grande danilo's test from the giro came out. when he crashed, our commentators said it was because he was afraid he will be the next on the news after il abruzzese:p:D
what a terrible day it was...
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
neineinei said:
He was busted for CERA, something he didn't know they could test for. To get caught in a new test is always a risk, and probably he was stupid for not understanding there might be a test for CERA by July 2008, and he certainly was stupid for not taking into account that it wasn't UCI which sanctioned the 2008 TdF, it was the French. But the introduction of new tests doesn't happen often. It hasn't been since 2008 that so many were caught for something "new", and Pat made sure UCI sanctioned the races after that bad mishap.
Yep, good thing those 2008 Giro tests have been retested.
 
Jan 11, 2010
12,582
0
0
sniper said:
rasmussen in Dutch newspaper says asking cyclists to adhere to antidoping rules while Pat was in charge was a bit like asking Italians to pay taxes while Berlusconi was president.

one is constantly left wondering how the acclaimed culture change in cycling could ever have come about under Pat's watch...
What does Rasmussen know about it? He's been a pariah in cycling for years. Oh, and he also says he believes cycling has become cleaner, which seems to contradict the quotation you posted. Then again, everything he ever says contradicts something he's said before.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
theyoungest said:
What does Rasmussen know about it? He's been a pariah in cycling for years. Oh, and he also says he believes cycling has become cleaner, which seems to contradict the quotation you posted. Then again, everything he ever says contradicts something he's said before.
And yet he kicked Froome's ar@e left right and centre in the 2011 Brixia Tour, well...
 
Jan 11, 2010
12,582
0
0
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
And yet he kicked Froome's ar@e left right and centre in the 2011 Brixia Tour, well...
So did the whole peloton. Great point.

Rasmussen might be right. Or not. The problem is finding out what he actually thinks, because it tends to change a lot, depending on the demands of his lawyer or his ghost writer.
 
You need to seperate Ras's facts from his opinions,

His facts will be solid, who he doped with etc

His opinions are just that opinions, some of his will be more solid than others of his, depending on how much info he has.

And then there is the grey area like all Rabo at 2007 tour doped, opinion or fact?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
del1962 said:
You need to seperate Ras's facts from his opinions,

His facts will be solid, who he doped with etc

His opinions are just that opinions, some of his will be more solid than others of his, depending on how much info he has.

And then there is the grey area like all Rabo at 2007 tour doped, opinion or fact?
+1
i agree with this.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Dear Wiggo said:
:confused:

How do you categorise "100% of Rabobank were on a doping program?"

Fact, or opinion?

I don't think it's anywhere near as simple as that.
i think that's fact (and do not agree on this very issue with del1962)

what i meant is: when rasmussen implicates other riders, for me that's fact.
when he says he thinks cycling is now cleaner, for me that's opinion.

same with Tyler. I don't doubt his words on who doped.
I doubt him when he says sky are clean.
 
sniper said:
i think that's fact (and do not agree on this very issue with del1962)

what i meant is: when rasmussen says something that I believe is true, for me that's fact.
when he says something I don't believe is true, for me that's opinion.

same with Tyler. I don't doubt his words on who doped.
I doubt him when he says sky are clean.
Fixed that for you.
 
Jan 11, 2010
12,582
0
0
del1962 said:
You need to seperate Ras's facts from his opinions,

His facts will be solid, who he doped with etc

His opinions are just that opinions, some of his will be more solid than others of his, depending on how much info he has.

And then there is the grey area like all Rabo at 2007 tour doped, opinion or fact?
How are we to know if his facts are solid?

Example: the writers of Blood Brothers have one unnamed source for the story that Leinders wanted to use blood of Michael Boogerd's brother for Michael himself. This unnamed source is most likely Rasmussen, as a lot of the book is based on Rasmussen's stories.

Now Rasmussen in his own bio says that Leinders suggested to him to use his father's blood, because Leinders had done it once with two brothers.

We get the impression that there are two sources for the blood brothers story, when in fact there's one, and it's Rasmussen himself. Very smartly done, and seemingly part of an elaborate slander campaign to win a few million euros in court.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
RownhamHill said:
Fixed that for you.
i realize it's not black and white.
my point is: when rasmussen says he saw rider X dope in 200X, there is not much doubt in my mind about the correctness of that statement.
when rasmussen says present-day cycling is cleaner, there are several shreds of doubt.
same with tyler.

(ex)cyclists are not in the habit of falsely accusing people.
i couldn't think of one such example.
look how difficult it was for lance to find anybody prepared to accuse lemond.
iow: when a cyclists accuses another cyclist of doping, in 99% of the cases that's correct.

on the other hand, when cyclists speak of clean riders/peloton, it has often enough been shown to be incorrect, so one should by default be skeptic there (which doesnt automatically mean such statements are false, of course)
 
theyoungest said:
We get the impression that there are two sources for the blood brothers story, when in fact there's one, and it's Rasmussen himself. Very smartly done, and seemingly part of an elaborate slander campaign to win a few million euros in court.
Except he lost that case.

There's no doubt Rasmussen is a smart guy. But, this kind of narrow, difficult effort to discredit him doesn't fit with a bigger narrative that the guy has gone on a confessional spree much more detailed and regretful than say Landis and Hamilton.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
DirtyWorks said:
Except he lost that case.

There's no doubt Rasmussen is a smart guy. But, this kind of narrow, difficult effort to discredit him doesn't fit with a bigger narrative that the guy has gone on a confessional spree much more detailed and regretful than say Landis and Hamilton.
I agree Rasmussen has given much more detailed information.

But he wants to stay in the sport, whereas Hamilton and Landis appear to accept they have no financial future in cycling.
 
DirtyWorks said:
Except he lost that case.

There's no doubt Rasmussen is a smart guy. But, this kind of narrow, difficult effort to discredit him doesn't fit with a bigger narrative that the guy has gone on a confessional spree much more detailed and regretful than say Landis and Hamilton.
:) Not really. But I agree with the rest of your post.
 
Aug 27, 2010
970
0
0
Rasmussen clarified and said it was his belief that all of rabobank doped, but he didn't witness every rider. Can't be much clearer than that...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS