WhistleBlowers and Stoolies.

[Polish]

Why does Pro Cycling have sooo many Stoolies and so few WhistleBlowers?

stoolie
A noun
1 fink, snitch, snitcher, stoolpigeon, stoolie, sneak, sneaker, canary
someone acting as an informer or decoy for the police.

In Cycling, someone who begins to "sing" after they get busted,
and they do it for leniency or financial gain or fame. Picture Kohl or many others


whistleblower
A noun
1 whistle blower, whistle-blower, whistleblower
an informant who exposes wrongdoing within an organization in the hope of stopping it.

In Cycling, this would be a rider who comes forward while still riding professionally.

Simeoni is my favorite whistleblower so far. But just think how helpful it would
be if a clean rider like Mr Wiggins or Mr Evans came forward. Just like Frank Serpico.

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/news/2002/feb02/feb13news.php
.
.
.
.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Any active rider who started naming names and so on would have to be totally ready to hang up his bike and disappear, given the current climate in pro cycling.

 

[red_flanders]

It's happened several times already--see Manzano, Jascke, etc.

The person gets absolutely buried every time by the powers that be in the sport. You talk? Career over. It's that simple.

 

[Polish]

Serpico, Silkwood, Simeoni

Yes, being a WhistleBlower usually means losing your job or industry career.
That is not cycling specific.

But does that really explain the the scarcity of whistleblowers in Pro Cycling?

Maybe the riders feel that the cause is not important enough?
Is it important enough?
(Would any of us give up a mega-euro/dollar career to help bring down Cycle-Doping?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_whistleblowers
.
.
.
.

 

[red_flanders]

Yes, being a WhistleBlower usually means losing your job or industry career.
That is not cycling specific.

But does that really explain the the scarcity of whistleblowers in Pro Cycling?

Maybe the riders feel that the cause is not important enough?
Is it important enough?
(Would any of us give up a mega-euro/dollar career to help bring down Cycle-Doping?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_whistleblowers
.
.
.
.

Good point. However, can you explain why you think there is a scarcity in cycling? Seems plenty of people have blown the whistle. Seems to be a paucity of listeners, or action following the whistle-blowing...

 

[R.0.t.O]

Yes, being a WhistleBlower usually means losing your job or industry career.
That is not cycling specific.

But does that really explain the the scarcity of whistleblowers in Pro Cycling?

Maybe the riders feel that the cause is not important enough?
Is it important enough?
(Would any of us give up a mega-euro/dollar career to help bring down Cycle-Doping?)

Whistle-blowers are treated pretty poorly in all walks of life. In the UK recently we had a nurse dismissed for exposing poor practice on her hospital ward. The snitch is often treated worse than the actual wrong-doer; it's dangerous for most people to keep a snitch around the place because most of us are up to something, no matter how small, and we expect people to play the game and help each other along. It's especially true in pro cycling which has been corrupt to the core since day one, not just doping but backhanders, teams colluding, race-fixing, other mid-race deals. I doubt anyone in cycling is 'clean' in an ideal Olympian sense. So even a theoretical non-doping pro team wouldn't want snitches around the peloton because the next story that leaks out to a newspaper might be about a race that was bought or a backhander to make sure of a ProTour license.

 

[workingclasshero]

it all boils down to the fact that no one likes a grass. even when grassing is the right thing to do

 

[nickj12]

Retreat yoga

Retreat yoga is not a serious business but we are serious about what we do. With over forty years of combined experience, we \offer participants a seamless integration of wisdom and practice in a way that is both refreshing and deeply healing. We are genuine professionals in our field and passionate about what we teach. The YOSSUM Team creates a safe container for your journey.

 

[Beech Mtn]

I think, in cycling, doping is not a black/white issue for a lot of people. Think of it more as shades of gray along a continuum. Some products are used for legitimate recovery. Some products are used to treat legitimate diseases (e.g., asthma). Then you have "false" TUEs, guys who don't really have asthma but want the meds to enhance performance.

Then there is the whole issue of the grand tours, which are probably an unhealthy undertaking, if we are honest. You probably shouldn't really ride that many kms, climb that many mountains, that fast, without more rest days and some medical/recovery help. That's a pro-doping argument, but I think there is a grain of truth to it.

But then there is the fact that passive doping is highly unhealthy for all the clean guys trying to keep up with the jacked leaders. Where does it stop? You decide to take a few benign things for recovery, but where is the cutoff? Where is the line between allowing guys take enough testosterone to bring levels back up to a reasonably healthy minimum? Nobody is going to ride the grand tours on zero medical assistance. And therein lies the problem. It's all gray areas and each person figuring out where to draw his own personal line of morality.

ETA: What I meant is, guys have ambiguous moral issues with doping and reporting doping, even aside from the financial pressures.

 

[FKLance]

if by whistleblowing you mean accusing someone else doping or a whole team doping, you'll just end up in the courts with only your word and no proof.

Also I would imagine everyone would isolate you, call you publicly names, saying you're just a bad apple, a pathetic little loser! You'll even risk your life, and surely never get a job in cycling again!

 

[**Uru**]

Maybe the riders feel that the cause is not important enough?
Is it important enough?
(Would any of us give up a mega-euro/dollar career to help bring down Cycle-Doping?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_whistleblowers
.
.
.
.

This is probably the clearest reason why there will always be cheats seeking a little extra unnatural help in sport.

I doubt the issue of doping is that strong an issue for the riders themselves. They get paid a salary to ride a bike for a living. If riders on their team dope and are successful, the money flows to the rest of the riders on the team. If there is one bike rider in the sport that is hugely popular, money flows to all the teams in the form of sponsor money (like the Tiger effect in golf). It is in cycling's interest to put on a spectacle.

The sport runs into issues if a rider gets too greedy and makes it look too obvious that they are doping. Also, it certainly does not look good when a rider falls over and dies in a race because they are doping. So this is where the governing bodies, sponsors, and organizers get nervous and feel they need to put together testing programs. Personally, I believe the testing is only to catch the types like Vino and Ricco who like to ride off the front and make the rest of the peloton look bad. Also, to catch those riders who are abusing and possibly going to harm themselves. This would explain why a rider would be blackballed if they name names in an effort to clean up the sport.

The powers that be do not want the sport to be clean. They simply want it to appear clean.

 

[elizab]

The powers that be do not want the sport to be clean. They simply want it to appear clean.

You've hit the nail on the head.

 

[fatandfast]

They have no relief valve in the process. If the major feds said there is amnesty for information what good would that do? Different countries go after these guys with criminal charges even if their feds can't catch them. It's the French, Italian and Spanish police going through the garbage after the UCI vans pull out of town. All the other late blooming canaries in coal mines tell of all the doping adventures when they reach middle age and are writing a book. The whole catch me if you can thing looks like it will continue or a while, Should DiLuca have turned himself in? Should Jan have given his prize money back and said he felt bad about taking it? Whistleblowers ,Stoolies,Rats just another word in cycling for junkie. If you yourself or somebody you know is using there is no process to get help other than getting caught.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Good point. However, can you explain why you think there is a scarcity in cycling? Seems plenty of people have blown the whistle. Seems to be a paucity of listeners, or action following the whistle-blowing...

Good question.... and here is the answer.

The powers that be do not want the sport to be clean. They simply want it to appear clean.

The first true whistleblower was Paul Kimmage with Rough Ride in 1990.

For his troubles he was ostracized by the sport, spat at by former teammates, ridiculed in the media and labeled "bad for Cycling" by none other than Pat McQuaid.

Kimmage does not mention one single name - his aim was directly at the system and in particular the UCI and the antiquated anti-doping efforts.

Ultimately Kimmages story was confirmed by the 'Festina Affair' in 1998.
But with 52 positives this season alone, and from such a wide variation of ability Rough Ride is a testament to how little has changed and why 'blowing the whistle' within cycling is a pointless and thankless exercise.

 

[Polish]

Doper Like Me

A shrewd Doper should take good notes while doping in order to profit
editorially when he gets caught.

Heck, the $haul from a book/article may be greater than what
the doper made in the saddle.

Hey, writing books is another great reason for guys to dope

 

[Escarabajo]

You've hit the nail on the head.

Welcome back. Nice to have you here again.

 

[HoustonHammer]

Good question.... and here is the answer.
(snip)

But do you think there are relatively fewer whistleblowers in cycling than in other human activities? I don't think so.

I agree of course fear of ostracism and a complicit system deter people from speaking up, but there's more to it. In almost any context I can think of, social units that conduct nefarious activities will be structured so that whistle blowing will be mutually destructive. For example, if I'm a doper, the only people who will really know the details of my doping will be others who are also doping or are somehow direct participants in the offense; I will never let a clean rider know the extent of my illegal activities. In this way, only those with dirty hands will have the knowledge to bring me down, and they will have to bring themselves down as well to do it.

Nobody wants to voluntarily destroy their own career, so they are not going to come forward. If they get pinched and are told they can save themselves by talking (the 'stoolie' case) then the situation is much different. Then they have little to lose and much to gain by snitching on their erstwhile companions.

This is how cycling works. Just like the mafia, politics, corporate crime or just any other similar gang activity you can think of.

 

[Polish]

Omerta eeew I'm scared

I agree with you houston, although I think Omerta is not limited to "social units that conduct nefarious activities" as you put it.

Police Depts, Investment Banking, Doctors, Church Wardens, Bicycle Repairmen - they all have their own "Omerta" too.

The dreaded OMERTA that pervades Pro Cyling is a bunch of Dramatic Hooey.

On no I said it....now a bunch of well paid 130lb pure climbers are going to
visit the shop and slap me around yikes

 

[HoustonHammer]

I agree with you houston, although I think Omerta is not limited to "social units that conduct nefarious activities" as you put it.

Police Depts, Investment Banking, Doctors, Church Wardens, Bicycle Repairmen - they all have their own "Omerta" too.

The dreaded OMERTA that pervades Pro Cyling is a bunch of Dramatic Hooey.

On no I said it....now a bunch of well paid 130lb pure climbers are going to
visit the shop and slap me around yikes

Yeah, I think we're on the same page, but I would argue that the groups you listed are all engaged, if not necessarily as their primary function, in nefarious activities. Don't get me started on bicycle repairmen...

 

[Dr. Maserati]

But do you think there are relatively fewer whistleblowers in cycling than in other human activities? I don't think so.

I agree of course fear of ostracism and a complicit system deter people from speaking up, but there's more to it. In almost any context I can think of, social units that conduct nefarious activities will be structured so that whistle blowing will be mutually destructive. For example, if I'm a doper, the only people who will really know the details of my doping will be others who are also doping or are somehow direct participants in the offense; I will never let a clean rider know the extent of my illegal activities. In this way, only those with dirty hands will have the knowledge to bring me down, and they will have to bring themselves down as well to do it.

Nobody wants to voluntarily destroy their own career, so they are not going to come forward. If they get pinched and are told they can save themselves by talking (the 'stoolie' case) then the situation is much different. Then they have little to lose and much to gain by snitching on their erstwhile companions.

This is how cycling works. Just like the mafia, politics, corporate crime or just any other similar gang activity you can think of.

Interesting question - and by in large I agree with your points raised.

But in answering your question you have raised exactly what the difficulty is - some here argue that there is no Omerta, either it is a gross exaggeration or a conspiracy theory.

Of course it is human nature to protect ones own interests and in particular when one directly profits from the suppression of its true activities.

However when you have the authority that is charged for upholding the integrity of the system - in this case the UCI - also complicit in suppressing the truth and activities contrary to its own rules that you have a scenario which does not protect those that expose the truth.

 

[Polish]

Omertà and The Vampires

Sure there is corruption and greed and cover-up and collusion in
Pro Cycling.

Pro Cycling "Omerta", however, is so very far removed from the
original spirit and honor of the Omertà Code it is comical.

"Don't Spit in the Soup" seems more appropriate.
Or "Don't Spit in the Soup with shaven legs and tight lycra shorts".

If Pro Dopers and the Labs that supply them think they are following
some ancient Code of Honor - they are sadly mistaken boohoo. Losers!

 

[garciadb]

Good point. However, can you explain why you think there is a scarcity in cycling? Seems plenty of people have blown the whistle. Seems to be a paucity of listeners, or action following the whistle-blowing...

and by "listeners", do we mean the org. that runs pro cycling? The UCI??? Sorry but until UCI is there we can only dream of them listening or take action Oh yes, on second thought, they will "take action" and that is make sure the blower be blown to oblivion.

 

[joe_papp]

Like, duh...

Why does Pro Cycling have sooo many Stoolies and so few WhistleBlowers?...
.

Because no matter which route you go, you are isolated within your sport (or kicked out of it) and see relationships with your friends and teammates - who may have been like brothers to you - atomized from fear that you'll spill the beans on THEIR doping. Also financial loss, possible legal liability, etc.

Or at least that was my personal experience. Not to mention then having all of my results stripped away going back to 2001 despite having tested positive only in 2006 and having to endure three years of anonymous hate email and phone calls...etc.

Why would anyone subject themselves to that any sooner than they had to, if they were enjoying more than 50% of their life as an athlete (meaning as long as one considered a career as a doped athlete to be a net positive, why would one throw it away for some Pyrrhic victory? Even Manzano only outed Kelme because they were firing him.)

 

[red_flanders]

and by "listeners", do we mean the org. that runs pro cycling? The UCI??? Sorry but until UCI is there we can only dream of them listening or take action Oh yes, on second thought, they will "take action" and that is make sure the blower be blown to oblivion.

The UCI would be at the top of the list of those not listening, yes. I would also include a huge number of cycling fans, other riders, sponsors, team managers, doctors....

 

[Polish]

"It's only bicycling racing"

I do not remember the question, but I remember Floyd's answer...

"It's ONLY bicycle racing".

As a bike nerd, with mucho non-family time spent on bike related stuff,
that answer kind of BUGGED me! I mean, Bike Racing is awesome

****
So Joe, you "having to endure three years of anonymous hate email and phone calls...etc."
must have been just awful! I do not want to minimize that.

But if there was genuine Omertà in cycling, you would be "sleeping
with the fishes" and not blogging with your own successful business good job!
Yes, plenty of ex-dopers have had to re-invent themselves after leaving the sport.

***

red flanders, you say that

"The UCI would be at the top of the list of those not listening...also a huge number of cycling fans, other riders, sponsors, team managers, doctors"

I don't know Red - I would think the UCI ETC are on the top of the list of those listening
THE MOST! The other 99.999% of the earth's population are the one's not listening lol.

***

So I guess I do agree with Floyd after all - it IS only bicycle racing.
(Although I am REALLY looking forward to the Giro/AToC doubleheaders
& with my crispy Fall ride on Saturday morn)