UCI corruption

[mwbyrd]

Snip Tinfoil hat ON!

Interesting, 5 yrs later and we are talking about Floyd being innocent of what he was charged with....AGAIN....

And just to be fair, I'm in the Tin-hat gang. Too many things don't add up re: the testosterone tests.

 

[Fausto's Schnauzer]

Interesting, 5 yrs later and we are talking about Floyd being innocent of what he was charged with....AGAIN....

And just to be fair, I'm in the Tin-hat gang. Too many things don't add up re: the testosterone tests.

"Tin-hat." That's just silly. Everybody knows that only aluminum foil really blocks out the gamma rays and the thought readers. Geez!

 

[sniper]

Honestly, I don’t know what to make of it. But a few scenarios come to mind.

Maybe Eddy had inside info on something going on behind the scenes--Floyd was going to come out swinging, maybe some teams would “let” him go, etc. Why they would do this is part of a bigger question. But maybe Eddy just saw a chance to cash in on Floyd, with great odds against him at that point, regardless of any nefarious intentions of others. He was a long shot at that point. Big payout.

HOWEVER...here’s another take entirely.

Maybe Floyd was spiked TO FAIL ON STAGE 16! Negatively spiked, if you will. Maybe gamblers, officials, whoever, didn’t want Floyd to win a Tour that was pretty much his for the taking by Stage 16.

Then all of sudden the angry Mennonite-on-a-mission goes ballistic, with no extra "T", against an already decimated peloton! He would’ve infuriated an awful lot of people that perhaps weren’t counting on that!

Tinfoil hat ON!

A relevant question for any betting theory to stand is about those who made big bucks with this betting deal: did they get to keep their money after Floyd's disqualification?

I mean, a betting/fixing deal seems to discard the UCI/Lance-spiking-Floyd-hypothesis, right?

 

[Darryl Webster]

.


Tinfoil hat ON!

Great thread peeps..nice to see so much thinking out the box.

Remember truth is often stranger than fiction.

Maybe we need a "TIn Foil" thread for the most "out there" connections of dots!

Im not pc savvy enough but It would be nice to see the "big picture"..IOC/ UCI...down to the athletes as a "Family tree.". type diagram and make the conflicts of interest and callusions of interst more visable to those still finding it hard to grasp.
At top Trough it`s a rarified table....but the web snares all in Omarta. Right down to the mechanics and bus drivers.

 

[sartain]

Thank you. And BTW, Race Radio, Hog and Colm... These three guys absolutely rock. The CIA should be throwing money at them (trying to recruit them). They're superb.

This might not be the most popular place to congregate, but I look at it as the Charlie Rose show of doping discussions. The people that matter read this and post here.

I had to stop watching Charlie Rose a number of years ago, BB, when LA was on his show - in fact it was after the Tour where he chased down FS.

Charlie was discussing it with him, and LA was working him like a two bit *****. Charlie was to stupid to know he was being fed a line of BS, and just sucked up to him and never really asked any probing questions.

I never watched him agin after that and lost all respect for him as an interviewer. I wonder what he thinks of LA now after all of this news has come out? And if he got to interview today, would he ask the tough questions, or just be so afaird of him like many are.

 

[BotanyBay]

RR is a good guy to bounce ideas off of. A couple of thoughts I've had this afternoon. They oppose each other, BTW, which means I'm not yet prepared to attach my tinfoil hat with crazy glue yet:

1) FL might be doing a bit of "selective disclosure" about how things have gone down. If the truth "ain't the whole truth", then it really screws things up, and it gets people revved-up on goose chases. God I hope he's telling the truth now.

2) If we're dealing with facts, what about the possibility that he was a "sacrificial lamb" on that stage? Perhaps more than a few people knew that that year's Tour winner was gonna fall. Remember, this theory is that there was an organized plot to devalue the race. Hein DOES have a few friends in the peloton. I mean, that gap was pretty friggin BIG. C'mon "I was too tired"? Seriously. There's no crying in Baseball.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

There's no crying in cycling! A few riders I've managed may have differing opinions on that...

I'm still right.

 

[BotanyBay]

There's no crying in cycling! A few riders I've managed may have differing opinions on that...

I'm still right.

Can you imagine Hog or the late Peter Post reacting to "No can do Boss, I'm too tired"?

 

[Beech Mtn]

On the day that even the Freiburg boys were suffering Floyd was flying. It really does put it all in perspective.

It was hot as hell that Tour. I seem to recall reading somewhere that guys were having trouble with getting the blood bags transferred without the blood getting too hot and "going bad." That could be part of the reason some weren't riding well on Stage 17. Can't remember where I read it - maybe from Kohl confessions or something similar? Will go have a look for the link.

Also re. Floyd being spiked by his masseur, etc. -
Consider the timeline. They would've had to apply the testosterone to him before he took back the yellow jersey the final time. They couldn't know they were spiking the Tour winner if he was spiked after stage 16 and before stage 17. Somebody would have been framing Floyd personally, not necessarily framing the maillot jaune.

---
Back on thread topic of ways the UCI appears corrupt-
I can't believe no one has mentioned yet the UCI's completely UNtransparent points system for ranking teams and giving PT licenses. Which system was apparently implemented after the 2010 season was basically over and there was nothing teams could do to improve their placings. It affected the GT invites too. And still no one how the system works.

Why does Contador get sanctioned but Saxo gets to keep AC's points even if he loses the TdF title? More points system craziness.

 

[Kender]

The betting aspect to all this is interesting too. I remember when I first read that Eddy Merckx had placed money of Floyd to win the Tour, after his collapse on Stage 16. Alarm bells went off in my head. The specifics of that story have changed a bit over time, but it was just an angle I hadn't considered up that point. Not implicating Eddy, it just opened up a whole other avenue.

I remember Phil or Paul (can't remember which) commenting about this bet during the stage 18 (i think) commentary.

here's a quote from Robbie Hunter, then a team mate of Eddy's son and Landis taken from a CN article

Here is a funny story," he wrote on his website http://www.robbiehunter.net. "Eddy Merckx has spent a bit of time with us over the past weeks because of his attachment to the team. Today we found out that last night after Floyd lost the jersey and 8 minutes to the leader, he [Eddy] went to the bookies in Belgium and bet 100 euro that Floyd would win the Tour anyways. The odds were 75 to 1 and he is laughing so hard, now that the possibility is really there. The way Floyd raced today [Thursday's 17th stage] was like the way Eddy used to race in the old days; he said it was the best race he has seen!"

i remember thinking when the positive came out that maybe Eddy knew something was going to happen.

 

[barn yard]

Why does Contador get sanctioned but Saxo gets to keep AC's points even if he loses the TdF title? More points system craziness.

and why are astana not excluded from the tour in 2011? see 'let levi ride' etc.

 

[Granville57]

The Hog likes to pretend that he predicts everything but the fact is Floyd told 1/2 the Peloton that when the flag dropped it was going to be on like Donkey Kong

LOL! Race, I just realized that I totally misread your post. I thought you were confusing me for, or comparing me to, this HOG. Suggesting that I was somehow pretending or claiming something.

When obviously you were referring to this HOG!

Now I'm clear. It all gets so confusing around here sometimes.

 

[Granville57]

I mean, a betting/fixing deal seems to discard the UCI/Lance-spiking-Floyd-hypothesis, right?

Not necessarily. There could've been an awful lot of hands in that cookie jar. Could be a combination. Sometimes it's hard to draw the lines.

Then again, something dirty and conniving could've gone on regardless of who was behind it. Different scenarios offer different possibilities, but with any given plot the cast and director might change but the script remains the same otherwise.

Just ask Woodward and Bernstein.

So to keep with the thread, let's focus on the UCI. The betting angle is interesting but attempting to unravel it would likely lead us deep into the rabbit hole. (Not that that should stop us on a different thread )

 

[Granville57]

It was hot as hell that Tour. I seem to recall reading somewhere that guys were having trouble with getting the blood bags transferred without the blood getting too hot and "going bad." That could be part of the reason some weren't riding well on Stage 17. Can't remember where I read it - maybe from Kohl confessions or something similar? Will go have a look for the link.

Yup.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_European_heat_wave
2006 European Heat Wave

High temperatures in France destroyed many crops, just days before the harvest period, while French officials said at least 40 people were confirmed to have been killed by the heat wave directly. Temperatures as high as 37 °C (99 °F) were recorded in Paris during the heatwave. July 2006 was in many regions the warmest July ever recorded (and often the second warmest month after August 2003). In many regions weather was particularly stormy. In Nice, the all time high temperature record was beaten with a 37.7 °C (99.9 °F) recorded on 1 August.

Also re. Floyd being spiked by his masseur, etc. -
Consider the timeline. They would've had to apply the testosterone to him before he took back the yellow jersey the final time. They couldn't know they were spiking the Tour winner if he was spiked after stage 16 and before stage 17. Somebody would have been framing Floyd personally, not necessarily framing the maillot jaune.

That makes me think. What if the idea was to take down Floyd (retribution for his belligerence towards Lance, Verbruggen, UCI, take your pick) once he appeared to be out of contention so that the whole thing wouldn't be too high profile, just personal? Then he goes and smokes the field an mucks the whole plan up!
Hey, we're speculating here, right?

 

[DirtyWorks]

Sanity Check

What's the likelihood there is an opportunity to meddle with results at the UCI? Empirically, the test data leaving WADA is supposed to be anonymous. But, somehow a clenbuterol positive is associated with Pharmador at WADA?

Both crazy questions suggests knowledge is very porous. This suggests there are opportunities for meddling on both sides of the doping story.

 

[scribe]

LOL! Race, I just realized that I totally misread your post. I thought you were confusing me for, or comparing me to, this HOG. Suggesting that I was somehow pretending or claiming something.

When obviously you were referring to this HOG!

Now I'm clear. It all gets so confusing around here sometimes.

Yes. Especially when this Hog starts talking to himself.

 

[Colm.Murphy]

It was hot as hell that Tour. I seem to recall reading somewhere that guys were having trouble with getting the blood bags transferred without the blood getting too hot and "going bad." That could be part of the reason some weren't riding well on Stage 17. Can't remember where I read it - maybe from Kohl confessions or something similar? Will go have a look for the link.

Also re. Floyd being spiked by his masseur, etc. -
Consider the timeline. They would've had to apply the testosterone to him before he took back the yellow jersey the final time. They couldn't know they were spiking the Tour winner if he was spiked after stage 16 and before stage 17. Somebody would have been framing Floyd personally, not necessarily framing the maillot jaune.

---
Back on thread topic of ways the UCI appears corrupt-
I can't believe no one has mentioned yet the UCI's completely UNtransparent points system for ranking teams and giving PT licenses. Which system was apparently implemented after the 2010 season was basically over and there was nothing teams could do to improve their placings. It affected the GT invites too. And still no one how the system works.

Why does Contador get sanctioned but Saxo gets to keep AC's points even if he loses the TdF title? More points system craziness.

Regarding the heat issue, and the excepts from the book by Granville57, it seems that much of the field had their "bad day" on Stage 17, whereas Floyd's was on Stage 16.

On the topic of spiking Landis with Test, it was clear he was a contender, already had been in yellow, so it might be there was simply an effort to trip him up, and it worked out in the best way possible if the goal was to devalue the ASO. As it turns out, Phonak team goes out the door but comes back as BMC, with Ochowicz, Lelangue and Viane... Was it a scheme to wrest Rhys and his big fortunes into the hands of Ochowicz? Mighty big account for the Weisel-employed Ochowicz to bag.

 

[Granville57]

Regarding the heat issue, and the excepts from the book by Granville57, it seems that much of the field had their "bad day" on Stage 17, whereas Floyd's was on Stage 16.

Yes, and Floyd has said that because he was so cooked on Stage 16, it actually was somewhat like a recovery ride, of sorts, for him. He bonked so therefore he couldn't push himself hard, making him all the more recovered the next day.

As it turns out, Phonak team goes out the door but comes back as BMC, with Ochowicz, Lelangue and Viane... Was it a scheme to wrest Rhys and his big fortunes into the hands of Ochowicz? Mighty big account for the Weisel-employed Ochowicz to bag.

Now you've raised another interesting point (will I get any sleep tonight? ).
If Floyd's transgressions had so tarnished the image of their beloved Tour, why would the head honchos be so welcoming to Lelangue and Rihs? They kept Astana out of the 2008 Tour supposedly because of the "association" with dopers. Well Floyd's debacle was supposed to have been such an enormous embarrassment to everyone, then why no extended culpability to the owner and director?

Oh! Here's a gem that I always love to share:
http://velonews.competitor.com/2006/07/news/a-conversation-with-phonaks-andy-rihs-cycling-sponsorship-pays-off-even-in-troubled-times_10522
Andy Rihs in his own words:

In a way I am glad that there is so much talk about doping in cycling, because it deters big corporations. If they would invest in cycling I wouldn’t be able to afford it anymore. And, let’s face it – in professional sports, where there is a lot of money involved, you need medical support.

Go figure!

 

[dbrower]

I think it's interesting to recall how much all of the old-boy network -- teams and the UCI -- hated Rihs and the new money he was bringining in. Phonak got no breaks from anybody. Based on what we knew Hein's attitude for Landis using a lawyer for pay was, the UCI must really have had it in when Phonak took legal action to keep its ProTour license.

What a coincidence that it is now a love fest for BMC now that the US branch of the connected, old-boy network is involved.

-dB

 

[Granville57]

I think it's interesting to recall how much all of the old-boy network -- teams and the UCI -- hated Rihs and the new money he was bringining in. Phonak got no breaks from anybody. Based on what we knew Hein's attitude for Landis using a lawyer for pay was, the UCI must really have had it in when Phonak took legal action to keep its ProTour license.

What a coincidence that it is now a love fest for BMC now that the US branch of the connected, old-boy network is involved.

-dB

And of course the big fish for them was Hincapie. He was the name the needed to get the attention of the American public. It is also interesting to think that Phonak got smacked down with Tyler, then Floyd. Was that a message to Rihs: Play it our way or no way? Tour winner or not, we will shut you out.

 

[PotentialPro]

Yup.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_European_heat_wave
2006 European Heat Wave




That makes me think. What if the idea was to take down Floyd (retribution for his belligerence towards Lance, Verbruggen, UCI, take your pick) once he appeared to be out of contention so that the whole thing wouldn't be too high profile, just personal? Then he goes and smokes the field an mucks the whole plan up!
Hey, we're speculating here, right?

So the idea was to deter his performance. That accomplished they thought they had it down. Then he smokes the field and they go on to plan b? Plan b being a positive sample no matter what?

After having read about other races where they collected samples, yet there was no testing at all, and the samples were all dumped down the drain, it makes me wonder. Perhaps the samples were spiked, but were purposely changed with known false samples to ensure a positive. In my logic, how do you spike a sample? Its not like you are going to just put a drop of Testosterone cypionate in there and its now a positive. They are testing for metabolites and other factors that are the byproduct of Testosterone. How do you spike with that specifically? I think a switched sample is more likely, perhaps a dna test would more appropriate?

 

[BotanyBay]

I have this gut feeling that many doping positives happen, and there is a mafia-like shakedown happening with each one at the UCI. Some are genuine positives, and some are strategic. I think they justify it to themselves ... well, let's use Floyd as an example. They know he dopes (as they all do), so if they either catch him red-handed, or they railroad him, it's OK, as they're just doing it to a thief anyway (no honor among them, right?).

To them, it's not unlike 1960's mobsters in New Jersey shaking-down and getting a cut of the thousands of mom&pop bookmaking (sports betting) operations. They're all thieves, so "no big deal". Even the cops were in on the shakedowns.

The anti-doping program isn't in existence to clean-up the sport (that's just what the fans and media want to believe). It's a way to line their own pockets. The UCI only has 90 employees. It is tightly controlled. It is not transparent in any way. The climate is ripe for extortion, blackmail and "protection" rackets.

 

[richardp]

Firstly, I think Race Radio's joining of the dots is very helpful for those of us without the in-depth knowledge of the history of the UCI. The linking of seemingly unconnected events, relationships blurred and hidden by the passage of time, seem to be a lot clearer to me at least now, and it it leaves a sickening feeling. Thanks RR.

So, as BotanyBay intimates, what comes next? Who will be the next fall guy? Whose talent and careers are going to be ruined?

I would like to know whether the UCI has an Ethics Committee and an Audit Committee. Having reviewed its Articles and its Annual Report, there is very little said about independant reviews of its dealings and business relationships there or elsewhere on its website. Who does the administration answer to? The voting delegates? Patronage seems to be endemic in its voting system, and if even if the delegates are independant, if they don't know what the administration is up to, how can they vote them out? With a 2/3rds majority required, even if the necessary evidence was presented to the delegates, would it happen?

 

[BotanyBay]

I would like to know whether the UCI has an Ethics Committee and an Audit Committee. Having reviewed its Articles and its Annual Report, there is very little said about independant reviews of its dealings and business relationships there or elsewhere on its website. Who does the administration answer to?

People assume the UCI is like this:

But it's really more like this:

This organization is not subject to any government oversight, and within the borders of Switzerland, it's virtually immune from having to share much of anything (with anyone).

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Firstly, I think Race Radio's joining of the dots is very helpful for those of us without the in-depth knowledge of the history of the UCI. The linking of seemingly unconnected events, relationships blurred and hidden by the passage of time, seem to be a lot clearer to me at least now, and it it leaves a sickening feeling. Thanks RR.

So, as BotanyBay intimates, what comes next? Who will be the next fall guy? Whose talent and careers are going to be ruined?

I would like to know whether the UCI has an Ethics Committee and an Audit Committee. Having reviewed its Articles and its Annual Report, there is very little said about independant reviews of its dealings and business relationships there or elsewhere on its website. Who does the administration answer to? The voting delegates? Patronage seems to be endemic in its voting system, and if even if the delegates are independant, if they don't know what the administration is up to, how can they vote them out? With a 2/3rds majority required, even if the necessary evidence was presented to the delegates, would it happen?

Yes the UCI has an Ethics Committee - its called the UCI Ethics Commission it was set up in 2004, however one could question the ethics of its members......

Lisa Voight was one of its first members - she is a former CEO of USA Cycling, in May 2002 she handed in her resignation as she was due to have twins.
Yet the USAC rehired her immediatley at $100,000 p/a as a 'Senior Advisor for Olympic and International Relations'. Eventually the new CEO of USAC attempted to renegotiate her new contract and she resigned in November 2002.

Her husband is Craig Griffin who at the time worked as a coach in Carmichael Training Systems.