Valverde - my suspension is a great injustice

[rhubroma]

The browbeating, the hyper-moralizing, the uber self-righteous bloviating is seriously over the top given what we're talking about here.

Valverde has a point, whether any of you internet Cotton Mathers believe so or not. He is no different than anyone else accused of any type of violation or transgression. Regardless of innocence or guilt most people will attempt to mount a defense, as would any of you. So he is that much more reprehensible because his lawyers (not he, he's just a bike rider) tried to get him off on whatever technicality they could find?

And even if a rider like DiLuca confesses, that's still not enough? What's it going to take for you guys to happy? A pound of flesh is no longer enough?

Were any of you guys just as upset knowing Dr. Fuentes kept on working after getting busted in Spain in 2006?

Why no outrage at a system that places all the onus on the riders getting punished and not the doping system ran by so many of these backroom charlatans who never seem to receive any sanctions whatsoever?

"FREE ALEJANDRO VALVERDE!!!"

Nonsense. The only thing that Valverde's case demonstrates is that chronic lying, denial and the insulting of all human, feable though it may be, intelligence is still accepted praxis among the elite cycling establishment.

His so called defense didn't even mount the most specious of arguments, but rather was merely a ruse entirely based on legal posturing the sole aim of which was to avoid reprisal for his unquestionable guilt.

And there's nothing moral here agianst him. Disdain over the insulting attempts at trying to hoodwink all of us through a manipulative and instrumental usage of a court room stratagem yes, fatuous moralism absolutely not.

The quicker he fesses-up, the sooner he stops making himself look like a whining, adolescent, spoiled jacka$$ to the tifosi. In light of the serious doping problem the sport faces, Alejandro's legal and publicity attempts are simply reprehensible.

And Berzin, I'd have thought coming from someone who is obviously as intelligent as yourself: something more noble and intellectually honest in judgment than the base caving into sentimentality you have demonstrated above.

 

[sublimit]

Valverde should be banned permanently until he gives info on the situation he found himself in. Ie the fact he was doping. I have no sympathy for this person whatsoever.

 

[rhubroma]

Valverde got a lot of stick cos he was still riding, while people were happy to see the likes of Vino and Riccò back, cos they'd served their time. So Valverde was being treated as if he celebrated victories by punting babies in the head and waving depictions of the prophet Muhammad around, and they were treated as returning heroes because they entertained us. Why? Because Valverde was a) not stupid enough to test positive, and b) able to manipulate the system to his advantage to delay his ban. If any of you think that Vino, Riccò or anybody else wouldn't have done the same as Valverde if they had the chance to, you're crazy.

Should Valverde have been banned? Most definitely.

Should Valverde get treated worse than any other doper because he managed to keep himself on the road because he had a good legal team? No.

Should more of the Puerto guys have been pursued, especially considering for some it would have been their second offence (David Bernabéu for example) and others have continued to dope and have indeed tested positive since (Eladio Jiménez for example), so that it didn't seem like quite so much of a witchhunt? Yes.

Does making it a witchhunt make it an injustice that Valverde was banned? No, he still deserves to be banned because he still did something wrong. He has the right to say "why are you picking on me?" because they are, but they've still got him bang to rights.

Don't confuse what the others have gone through, or the fact that any one of them, had they been given the chance, would have manipulated the legal system for as long as and with the same insistence as Alejandro has done; with the Spaniard's continued denial, given all the irrefutable evidence to the contrary.

He was caught. Simple. By however means, but this doesn't change a thing. It's the Spaniards continued insistance of having been done an injustice that's intolerable in light of the facts.

Because of this, if it were up to me: I'd give him double-time just on the offense to intelligence that his continued arrogant posturing produces.

 

[Berzin]

And Berzin, I'd have thought coming from someone who is obviously as intelligent as yourself: something more noble and intellectually honest in judgment than the base caving into sentimentality you have demonstrated above.

I stand by my points, but my opinion in this case is colored by fanboy sentimentality.

Is this an unpardonable sin in the Clinic?

 

[Aguirre]

First January 2012 will be a great day for cycling. The day Valverde comes to embelish his (already) beautiful palmarés.

he will be until 2016 winning races!!!!!!!!! Can't wait.

 

[Aguirre]

Valverde should be banned permanently until he gives info on the situation he found himself in. Ie the fact he was doping. I have no sympathy for this person whatsoever.

you make me laugh!

 

[sniper]

Quote rhubroma:
Because of this, if it were up to me: I'd give him double-time just on the offense to intelligence that his continued arrogant posturing produces.

+1
I so much agree.

The whole idea of punishment is that the punished one understands he did something wrong and should either apologise or otherwise assure that he won't make the same mistake again.
So yeah, perhaps with a doubling of Valverde's suspension, some bells will finally start ringing, and Valverde'll start understanding that blooddoping is not yet accepted at all levels of society (inspite of serious attempts by the UCI to get blooddoping off the doping list), and that the 30.000 quid he donated to the Fuentes Foundation is now boomeranging him in the face.

 

[frenchfry]

Valverde got a lot of stick cos he was still riding, while people were happy to see the likes of Vino and Riccò back, cos they'd served their time. So Valverde was being treated as if he celebrated victories by punting babies in the head and waving depictions of the prophet Muhammad around, and they were treated as returning heroes because they entertained us. Why? Because Valverde was a) not stupid enough to test positive, and b) able to manipulate the system to his advantage to delay his ban. If any of you think that Vino, Riccò or anybody else wouldn't have done the same as Valverde if they had the chance to, you're crazy.

Should Valverde have been banned? Most definitely.

Should Valverde get treated worse than any other doper because he managed to keep himself on the road because he had a good legal team? No.

Should more of the Puerto guys have been pursued, especially considering for some it would have been their second offence (David Bernabéu for example) and others have continued to dope and have indeed tested positive since (Eladio Jiménez for example), so that it didn't seem like quite so much of a witchhunt? Yes.

Does making it a witchhunt make it an injustice that Valverde was banned? No, he still deserves to be banned because he still did something wrong. He has the right to say "why are you picking on me?" because they are, but they've still got him bang to rights.

Do you actually read posts about Vino and Ricco after their comebacks? I wouldn't exactly say they were treated as heros, overall it was quite the opposite.

 

[Kerbdog]

On the point of those who claim an injustice against Valverde for getting done over Operacion Puerto & it being a witchhunt, it should be pointed out that of all the bags of blood & info found by the Police there i think it was the stuff belonging to him which brought him down. What I mean is that his had the weakest code or cover up name. In all fairness when "Valv" & "Piti" were on incriminating evidence it wouldnt take long for someone to go "Hey Valverde's a cyclist & his dogs name is Piti". Then all it took was the Italians to apply some common sense & cunning & go after blood data from him when they had the chance. From what I remember of the rest they had better nicknames. I think Ullrich was "Son of Rudy" which would be tougher to nail down. But "Valv" on a bag is a lighthouse in the night & a huge givaway.
The remaining evidence was taken into custody & nobody has been able to get at it. The UCI in fairness have tried to get it so they can analyse it but theres not a hope due to legal implications & the redtape at the time surrounding it. Thats why not too many more were sanctioned.
The only injustice done to you was by whoever put the name on the blood bag Alejandro. It may have been your idea too.
We could actually start a game whereby we could post what we think would be cunning yet slightly giveaway code names for bloodbags. Id start but im out the door here now.

 

[sublimit]

you make me laugh!

Another satisfied customer..

 

[Anonymous]

Cancellara this morning claims he was tested 55 times last year, putting him in the running for the "worlds most tested athlete" as well. I think we can expect a glut of other riders claiming it themselves life of brian style.

 

[thehog]

Cancellara this morning claims he was tested 55 times last year, putting him in the running for the "worlds most tested athlete" as well. I think we can expect a glut of other riders claiming it themselves life of brian style.

We need a scorecard on the most tested. It's much more important than winning races. Almost as important as finding a cure for cancer.

 

[nobilis]

Valverde should be banned permanently until he gives info on the situation he found himself in. Ie the fact he was doping. I have no sympathy for this person whatsoever.

nonsense, bias, double standards

 

[frenchfry]

The browbeating, the hyper-moralizing, the uber self-righteous bloviating is seriously over the top given what we're talking about here.

Valverde has a point, whether any of you internet Cotton Mathers believe so or not. He is no different than anyone else accused of any type of violation or transgression. Regardless of innocence or guilt most people will attempt to mount a defense, as would any of you. So he is that much more reprehensible because his lawyers (not he, he's just a bike rider) tried to get him off on whatever technicality they could find?
And even if a rider like DiLuca confesses, that's still not enough? What's it going to take for you guys to happy? A pound of flesh is no longer enough?

Were any of you guys just as upset knowing Dr. Fuentes kept on working after getting busted in Spain in 2006?

Why no outrage at a system that places all the onus on the riders getting punished and not the doping system ran by so many of these backroom charlatans who never seem to receive any sanctions whatsoever?

"FREE ALEJANDRO VALVERDE!!!"

Yes, I think he is more reprehensible for dragging out his legal challenge as long as he did and taking us for imbeciles along the way with his ridiculous declarations of innocence while stealing numerous victories (from other dopers?) along the way. He broke the rules and didn't want to pay the price. No sympathy from me.

I just don't like Di Luca, and he too took us for a long ride with his arrogant lies and unrepentant doping even after being caught up in numerous scandals. As I said, his pseudo confession was too little too late for me.

I have made numerous posts (mostly at DPF) about the ridiculous fact that Fuentes hardly lost any time in continuing his activity after OP - aided and abetted by the Spanish authorities.

There has been lots of outrage about the doping facilitators and how they manage to continue in the sport, most recently about Gianetti.

In the end, one group can ultimately decide not to dope and that is the riders themselves - they have as a group decided not to facilitate change and prefer the current dope and deny system with only a few notable exceptions who are immediately outcast.

 

[nobilis]

Cancellara this morning claims he was tested 55 times last year, putting him in the running for the "worlds most tested athlete" as well. I think we can expect a glut of other riders claiming it themselves life of brian style.

Valverde, Cancellara, Contador, etc are all among the mos tested cyclists because they are winners. Testing is compulsory for the race or stage winners.

 

[pedaling squares]

Valverde should be banned permanently until he gives info on the situation he found himself in. Ie the fact he was doping. I have no sympathy for this person whatsoever.

Well that would be some perversion of most sports 'justice' systems. Extra time tacked on for not confessing one's sins. I say he serves a ban like the others and then is free to either change his ways or resume sinning.

I stand by my points, but my opinion in this case is colored by fanboy sentimentality.

Is this an unpardonable sin in the Clinic?

Credit given for being able to admit to a fanboy bias. 'cause that first post..... yikes.

First January 2012 will be a great day for cycling. The day Valverde comes to embelish his (already) beautiful palmarés.

he will be until 2016 winning races!!!!!!!!! Can't wait.

Embellish : to add ornamental or fictitious details. That's a pretty fitting description of what we can expect from Valv.Piti in 2012.

 

[hfer07]

Valverde, Cancellara, Contador, etc are all among the mos tested cyclists because they are winners. Testing is compulsory for the race or stage winners.

Along those lines- I remember Val-piti complaining in an Interview on how unfair the anti-doping system was operating on him- like clock work- since the OP affair uncovered his name.. what is amusing is that he seems to forget the large amount of races he's won while being investigated...

bottom line: he's already completed halfway of his punishment & by 2012 all this rubbish will be forgotten when he begins to win...

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Yes, I think he is more reprehensible for dragging out his legal challenge as long as he did and taking us for imbeciles along the way with his ridiculous declarations of innocence while stealing numerous victories (from other dopers?) along the way. He broke the rules and didn't want to pay the price. No sympathy from me.

None of them want to pay the price. Valverde had a chance to drag it out and avoid it, so he did. All of the others would have taken it given the chance.

On the thing with the double punishment? They've brought in something like that, extra years for extenuating circumstances. Matteo Priamo's doing four years for that reason. However, they can only try Valverde according to the rules at the time of the offence, so therefore they can't ban him more than two years. He's got his two years.

To whoever it was who was saying that it wasn't a witchhunt because the evidence was there and it was an easier codename than many... some of them were initials, not too hard. And either way, the fact that he was pursued for so long while others who were known to be dodgy were let go IS unjust - it's not the injustice Valverde claims, because it's TOTALLY just that he eventually got banned. It's unjust that other people AREN'T being pursued when they're just as guilty. That doesn't mean he should be whining that he's been wrongfully punished, because he was right to be punished.

And I read plenty of supportive posts about Riccò's return. He's a character who divides people. People were even saying that he had done the right thing in naming sources, like he was Emanuele Sella or something. No, Riccò had to go to the courts to get four months knocked off his ban because he only named already well-known doping names. Sella got a year off his ban and spat on by half the Italian péloton for his troubles.

Valverde dragged things out to try to wriggle out of a ban, or to try and keep earning as long as possible before the inevitable. Fair enough, most people in his position would, because by hook or by crook (with the Spanish system, especially by crook) he was able to. I don't blame him for stringing it out and trying to keep earning. I blame him for being in the position where he had to do it in the first place. You're acting like other dopers voluntarily come forward and take their bans while Valverde kicked and gnashed his teeth. No doper voluntarily comes forward except maybe Ludo Dierckxsens. They all get caught, either blatantly or indirectly. Valverde was caught indirectly (ie no positive test, via doping raids) and as such had more opportunity to run and hide than somebody like Riccò who failed a test. I don't see why that makes him a worse person, cos Riccò sure tried to worm his way to a smaller suspension too - it's just that, cos he'd failed a test, he wasn't still riding when he did it.

 

[Anonymous]

Valverde, Cancellara, Contador, etc are all among the mos tested cyclists because they are winners. Testing is compulsory for the race or stage winners.

I know. Hence boonen had about 60 tests over the course of 18 months. I think i was merely highlighting how stupid Armstrongs claim as the most tested is ridiculous. Both valverde, and Cancellara have more tests. Although, it does seem to be the line if you are doping, Marion Jones, Armstrong, valverde all used it.

To be honest, after 5 blood tests in a 4 week period (well five instances of testing, in total 16 different tests) I reckon I should claim it.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

The first time Valverde used the "most tested athlete" argument, I assumed it was a witty reference to Armstrong, since it was at the same time as the Landis allegations were starting, and thus I thought it was funny that he was using it as a kind of 'court of public opinion' defence. Why not? Enough people swallowed it hook, line and sinker from Lance, why shouldn't he try it?

If he's still using that defence seven months down the line, though, to hell with it.

 

[Angliru]

Any reason to believe Valverde quit blood doping after Puerto? His permances if anything, got better?

It seemed his Ardennes domination lessened, while his weeklong stage race results improved and ultimately so did his results in the Vuelta but one could easily attribute that to maturity and experience just as much to a continued program.

 

[rhubroma]

I stand by my points, but my opinion in this case is colored by fanboy sentimentality.

Is this an unpardonable sin in the Clinic?

Yes it is, though at least you are honest about it.

 

[Anonymous]

I stand by my points, but my opinion in this case is colored by fanboy sentimentality.

Is this an unpardonable sin in the Clinic?

Quite refreshing actually. I am so sick of the "I don't really care about rider X at all, but I am going to defend him with feigned objectivity every chance I get" people.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Quite refreshing actually. I am so sick of the "I don't really care about rider X at all, but I am going to defend him with feigned objectivity every chance I get" people.

I'm probably party to that, but I stand by my argument, which is that regardless of whether I like him or not (I do), Valverde is a doper and the ban is deserved, but the savaging he gets on this forum compared to a lot of other dopers is wrong and in many cases hypocritical. I don't see why he's worse than any other doper because he took advantage of every potential way to weasel out of his ban - considering others like Riccò and di Luca have tried to weasel their bans down in length - the only difference is Valverde was still riding when he was doing his weaselling, cos he hadn't failed a test.

It's the right thing that he's serving a ban right now, but when it comes to him, a lot of the posters on this forum are hypocrites, myself included.

 

[Berzin]

Well, I certainly don't expect nor deserve to be patted on the back for taking a seemingly morally ambiguous stance (some may sarcastically smirk that that would be putting it mildly), but I find it an injustice that Valverde got nailed and so many others involved with the same doctor were able to run free, especially those from other sports that are much more intent on sweeping their doping issues under the rug to protect their athletes.