Vino bought the 2010 LBL?

[danjo007]

vino's an absolute tool anyway. never trust a LIAR - which he has already proven to be!

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

yeah I agree Francois

I find the most interesting thing about it, that Vino actually admitted to paying him the money - and tried to justify it (incredibly badly)

Interestingly, I was reading Robbie McKewens book earlier this year, and he talks about 'negotiating' with Baden Cooke over the green jersey.

He says he offered Baden Cooke 50k, and Cooke turned around and offered him 100k so they ended up fighting it out.

Is it better or no different if they make the offer and it isnt accepted?

like I said it happens in every race and I can't believe again hoiw naieve people are here. usually though the winner pays the loser in a breakaway and maybe kolobnev in race actually didn't fele he could beat vino and took the 100k and he asked vino to remove the emails

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

vino's an absolute tool anyway. never trust a LIAR - which he has already proven to be!

why don't you go back into your hole

 

[danjo007]

aw.. you poor thing. cry much?

 

[El Pistolero]

Two already tarnished riders caught in an act that the UCI are quite aware of and which has been going on ever since bike racing began?

Sounds like another ideal opportunity for another of Pat's cosmetic crusades.
Go after a soft target, which paints them as pro active, but actually allows them to maintain the status quo, indefinitely.

For once the forum seems in accord with the UCI, by focusing the spotlight on individuals, instead of the fundamental problem.

Interesting that the finale of the 2005 Giro has raised it's ugly head.
Another prime example of a race being bought, but where was all the righteous indignation then?

Debate the issue of race fixing in general, sure, but don't lay the blame solely on Vino's doorstep.

I don't see how it is any different than with doping?
So we shouldn't blame Vino for doping as well, but debate the general issue of doping in general? Come'on now! No one here is saying only Vino ever fixed a race, but that doesn't mean we have to accept things like this. And when there's hard proof a race has been bought than yes they should be punished. Perhaps then some cyclists will understand that buying races with cash is not acceptable anymore.

 

[Francois the Postman]

exactly. rarely ahev I sene more obvious example of a race bought for the whole world to see but when bruyneel does it appearantly it's no big deal but when vino supposedly does it and we have zero evidence still uci start investigate.

Your definition of "zero evidence" is an interesting one, unless you mean "no conclusive proof".

I think all cases of extreme suspicious behaviour should warrant an investigation,. Just because it didn't happen all the time is no reason to do it none of the time. If we stop looking into "Yeah, I just happen to loan him 100,000 within 24 hrs" we might as well pack up all rules and regulations, and just have a Dutch auction for 2012 instead. Kinda.

 

[El Pistolero]

like I said it happens in every race and I can't believe again hoiw naieve people are here. usually though the winner pays the loser in a breakaway and maybe kolobnev in race actually didn't fele he could beat vino and took the 100k and he asked vino to remove the emails

That didn't happen here, so stop bringing it up. Vino paid Kolobnev TO NOT WIN. It's in the mails. It seems like you guys are the only ones that want to talk about it in general. No, we like to talk about a specific case here and the case is Vino offering Kolobnev $100,000 to lose a race on purpose.

 

[just some guy]

Your definition of "zero evidence" is an interesting one, unless you mean "no conclusive proof".

I think all cases of suspicious behaviour should warrant an investigation,. Just because it didn't happen all the time is no reason to do it none of the time. If we stop looking into "Yeah, I just happen to loan him 100,000 within 24 hrs" we might as well pack up all rules and regulations, and just have a Dutch auction for 2012 instead. Kinda.

OR throw all rules out re cheating and allow the Clinics to be open and used.

Just because something has been happening for years does not make it right.

 

[ramjambunath]

If there was a CN forum in 2005, I'm sure people would have been critical of that as well. If he's proven guilty, Vinokourov has no right to play victim but till then he's innocent.

Francois- is accepting money from a counterpart and altering the outcome of the sporting event a criminal offence encompassed in the same law in the UK as accepting money from a bookie to fix the outcome of the event.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

That didn't happen here, so stop bringing it up. Vino paid Kolobnev TO NOT WIN. It's in the mails. It seems like you guys are the only ones that want to talk about it in general. No, we like to talk about a specific case here and the case is Vino offering Kolobnev $100,000 to lose a race on purpose.

the mails are no prove. could be anything if you can hack you can fix mails too

 

[craig1985]

Here is the Toto's take on it:

http://nyvelocity.com/toto

 

[Havetts]

Here is the Toto's take on it:

http://nyvelocity.com/toto

Haha thats golden.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Your definition of "zero evidence" is an interesting one, unless you mean "no conclusive proof".

I think all cases of extreme suspicious behaviour should warrant an investigation,. Just because it didn't happen all the time is no reason to do it none of the time. If we stop looking into "Yeah, I just happen to loan him 100,000 within 24 hrs" we might as well pack up all rules and regulations, and just have a Dutch auction for 2012 instead. Kinda.

Just to clarify - Vino did not pony up the 'loan' (hahaha) within 24 hours - its obvious from the email that Kolobnev was certainly left hanging for some time after, if he got paid at all.

Vinokourov did not reply until nearly two weeks later, saying he was busy with family and preparations for the Giro. “You have done everything properly, do not worry. As you say, the Earth is round and God sees everything ... So, again thank you. You, this year you will win the championship finally, I believe. Do not worry about the agreement, I will do it.”

the mails are no prove. could be anything if you can hack you can fix mails too

Vino has confirmed that he lends people money - so he didn't deny the emails content, just what the monies were for.
Hey if its a loan then he should be able to show the payments that he received back - I wonder what interest he charged?

 

[Francois the Postman]

the mails are no prove. could be anything if you can hack you can fix mails too

But we have the statement by Vino that he "loaned $100,000".

Which smells. Maybe unjustly so, but it does. Maybe it smells in the Big Bog of Eternal Stench, but it still smells.

I agree it is "no proof". But people tend to investigate to get enough solid evidence to come to a firm and fair conclusion. Your argument is "it smells, but so what? Since it isn't proven yet, or since it happens all the time, it should not be looked at".

That's akin to saying that the police should only investigate if they know who did it and how.

We disagree.

 

[Francois the Postman]

Just to clarify - Vino did not pony up the 'loan' (hahaha) within 24 hours - its obvious from the email that Kolobnev was certainly left hanging for some time after, if he got paid at all.

When I first read this story (elsewhere), it quoted Vino who admitted to the exchange of money, the loan, as he put it. From that point out the emails have been a side-show to me, I haven't read those. Sorry for getting confused.

Given the accusation and Vino's reply, I think it warrants a closer look, whatever the outcome is. Not expecting much, mind you. But it should trigger a period of discomfort, for everyone involved in this circus.

 

[just some guy]

When I first read this story (elsewhere), it quoted Vino who admitted to the exchange of money, the loan, as he put it. From that point out the emails have been a side-show to me, I haven't read those. Sorry for getting confused.

Given the accusation and Vino's reply, I think it warrants a closer look, whatever the outcome is. Not expecting much, mind you. But it should trigger a period of discomfort, for everyone involved in this circus.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-to-investigate-vinokourov-and-liege-bastogne-liege-charges

it is now what cover up by the UCI ?

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Just to clarify - Vino did not pony up the 'loan' (hahaha) within 24 hours - its obvious from the email that Kolobnev was certainly left hanging for some time after, if he got paid at all.




Vino has confirmed that he lends people money - so he didn't deny the emails content, just what the monies were for.
Hey if its a loan then he should be able to show the payments that he received back - I wonder what interest he charged?

it was dumb from vino to say that but if he loaned it out who says he already got it back? and of course it's no loan it's as i said vino paid kolobnev for his efforts. the winner pays the loser and if kolobnev was so strong he simply would've lost the "sprint" but he dropped inb beginning meters of ans it all sounds strange to me

 

[Dr. Maserati]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-to-investigate-vinokourov-and-liege-bastogne-liege-charges

it is now what cover up by the UCI ?

It will go nowhere - the magazine will not reveal who or where they got the information from. Vino will deny - the only way it can go further is if Kolobnev did not get the money. If he did he remains quiet, if he didn't there may be more correspondence suddenly appearing in the Swiss mag.

The UCI statement is well crafted:

..in a statement issued Wednesday, the UCI said that it “has asked that the magazine provide the UCI with any evidence which would allow the facts to be clearly established. Once the situation has been evaluated the UCI will decide, in accordance with the UCI Rules, whether any measures need to be taken.

“Until the conclusion of this phase of the investigation, the UCI will make no further comments on this matter.”

In other words we are not going to talk about this, ever - normal service has resumed.

 

[ramjambunath]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-to-investigate-vinokourov-and-liege-bastogne-liege-charges

it is now what cover up by the UCI ?

From what I've seen in match fixing scandals, the sport's governing body doesn't really do much in terms of investigation (an interest to develop the sport won't help in this). It's the police that has cracked such cases and hence my question about receiving payments from bookies being the only offence punishable by law or even money being traded among counterparts to adjust the outcome of the race.

 

[Francois the Postman]

The UCI statement is well crafted:

In other words we are not going to talk about this, ever - normal service has resumed.

Much as I dislike the UCI, that seems a fair comment by them.

But I agree on your optimistic outlook about the pit this marble is likely to disappear into.

 

[Franklin]

Has it?
Maybe - the only shocks for me in this case are that it was Vino buying out Kolobnev, I would have expected it to be the other way around - and unlike many here, I was surprised at how much Vino was prepared to offer.
(Although I think the price Basso was looking for off Simoni for a Giro stage was in €70,000)

As far as I understand this is often mutual. "One of us wins, the other gets this amount of cash". At that moment the race isn't thrown at all, it only makes it certain everyone does his/her share. Now if one of them starts to crack he still has reason to pull through.

Moral questionable? Yes.

But without these mechanisms this sport wouldn't be nearly as interesting. Buying help, tricking each other, breaking promises, I find it fantastic to watch. And I fully believe you still needs the legs to win!

 

[Franklin]

Contador for example gives away stages left and right. I don't think he does that because he's a nice guy, but because he counts on their support in later points of the race. As long as the overall classification in a stage race isn't rigged I can live with it.

But if it's actual money they're offering then I'd rather not see it happening.

Considering a stage is up to 70k (rumored Simoni/Basso spat), how exactly is this different?

It's buying support and yes, a win translates to a lot of cash.

Yes, Vino paid Kolobnev for helping him. newsflash, this happens almost every GT when a leader let's a lesser rider win.

I'm obviously in the minority here, but that is exactly what makes cycling so incredibly tactical.

 

[craig1985]

If cash isn't exchanged, you see it all the time in a two-man break where one guy can get the leader's jersey and he will let the other guy get the stage win, so ergo both guys will work and have an incentive to ride.

 

[ramjambunath]

Considering a stage is up to 70k (rumored Simoni/Basso spat), how exactly is this different?

It's buying support and yes, a win translates to a lot of cash.

Yes, Vino paid Kolobnev for helping him. newsflash, this happens almost every GT when a leader let's a lesser rider win.

I'm obviously in the minority here, but that is exactly what makes cycling so incredibly tactical.

You know that a rider can win a GT without a stage win. I think the difference between a GT or stage race and a classic is clear

If cash isn't exchanged, you see it all the time in a two-man break where one guy can get the leader's jersey and he will let the other guy get the stage win, so ergo both guys will work and have an incentive to ride.

I don't mind this situation but when money is exchanged and the outcome is decided, the credibility of the win crashes. If entertainment was the only criterion for sport (you didn't say this), Pakistan were extremely entertaining but their credibility in July/August last year= 0.

 

[ramjambunath]

If cash isn't exchanged, you see it all the time in a two-man break where one guy can get the leader's jersey and he will let the other guy get the stage win, so ergo both guys will work and have an incentive to ride.

I don't mind this situation but when money is exchanged the credibility of the win crashes. If entertainment was the only criterion for sport (you didn't say this), Pakistan were extremely entertaining but their credibility in July/August last year= 0.