Wiggins speaks about drugs

[bobbins]

Eh? What am I supposed to have more proof for? Doping or being clean?

being clean

 

[Anonymous]

being clean

Ah, ok. Boardman was well known for being fastidious about what he took to ensure there was nothing mucky in anything. Ok, I can't prove it (how can you prove innocence on this?), but I was involved in the GB set-up around that time and there was never any doubt about him whatsoever. There's as much chance of Armstrong admitting guilt and returning all his money to relevent persons than there is of Boardman having doped.

 

[Colm.Murphy]

I believe this as well. Boardman was just a different guy. Apart from barely being able to ride rubber-side down, he could pedal as well as anyone but never had the gross performances that some others did.

 

[bobbins]

Ah, ok. Boardman was well known for being fastidious about what he took to ensure there was nothing mucky in anything. Ok, I can't prove it (how can you prove innocence on this?), but I was involved in the GB set-up around that time and there was never any doubt about him whatsoever. There's as much chance of Armstrong admitting guilt and returning all his money to relevent persons than there is of Boardman having doped.

So if you were involved in the GB setup at the time you'd know all about it then wouldn't you


Proving innocence is harder than proving guilt on these boards!!!

 

[pmcg76]

Ah, ok. Boardman was well known for being fastidious about what he took to ensure there was nothing mucky in anything. Ok, I can't prove it (how can you prove innocence on this?), but I was involved in the GB set-up around that time and there was never any doubt about him whatsoever. There's as much chance of Armstrong admitting guilt and returning all his money to relevent persons than there is of Boardman having doped.

I have never heard anything suspect about Boardman, on the contrary it was thought that if Boardman had doped, he would have been a Tour contender.

Boardmans former team-mate Nicolas Aubier talked about doping in the pro peloton in 1996, I think it was. He said he believed everybody on the Top 50 in the World rankings was doping apart from Boardman. He said he roomed with Boardman many times and seen nothing. This was in A Rough Ride by Paul Kimmage.

 

[python]

i challenge you to provide evidence against boardman

those who doubt boardman need to point to a single piece of evidence where his anti doping credibility has weaknesses or was undermined in anyway.

yes, one can not prove negative but the beliefs, one way or the other (unless it's a blind faith) should be based on something solid.


i welcome anything…positive tests, credible rumours, interviews, insider opinions, books, court testimony, reputable performance analysis, boardmans own inconsistency..anything.

until a single shred of evidence against boardman surfaced, he deserves full benefit of doubt.

the evidence against him should be easier than even in lemonds case because he competed in the midst of epo years covered by dozens of books, investigations, confessions, positive tests etc etc.

 

[pmcg76]

those who doubt boardman need to point to a single piece of evidence where his anti doping credibility has weaknesses or was undermined in anyway.

yes, one can not prove negative but the beliefs, one way or the other (unless it's a blind faith) should be based on something solid.


i welcome anything…positive tests, credible rumours, interviews, insider opinions, books, court testimony, reputable performance analysis, boardmans own inconsistency..anything.

until a single shred of evidence against boardman surfaced, he deserves full benefit of doubt.

the evidence against him should be easier than even in lemonds case because he competed in the midst of epo years covered by dozens of books, investigations, confessions, positive tests etc etc.

I wasnt a fan of Boardman, I thought he was incredibly arrogant after he abandoned his first Tour and said he would come back the following year and try to win. He was always talking about watts, power etc like a doctor which I found irritating.

I laughed when he failed miserably in the mountains but after what happened in 98 and the fact that he was considered a clean athlete, I developed a new level of respect for him. I think he had an outstanding career in the EPO era and definitely could have been a Tour contender if there was a clean playing field.

As for pointing to evidence, all some people on here need is the fact he set a world record hour and hammered a load of EPO dopers in the 94/97/98 Tour prologues. Of course he had to be doping.

 

[bobbins]

those who doubt boardman need to point to a single piece of evidence where his anti doping credibility has weaknesses or was undermined in anyway.

yes, one can not prove negative but the beliefs, one way or the other (unless it's a blind faith) should be based on something solid.


i welcome anything…positive tests, credible rumours, interviews, insider opinions, books, court testimony, reputable performance analysis, boardmans own inconsistency..anything.

until a single shred of evidence against boardman surfaced, he deserves full benefit of doubt.

the evidence against him should be easier than even in lemonds case because he competed in the midst of epo years covered by dozens of books, investigations, confessions, positive tests etc etc.

Remove the word Boardman and insert the word Wiggins or other current cyclist of choice.

There are credible rumours about lots of riders, Boardman included but it's all old, old news and not worth bringing up. These guys all deserve the benefit of the doubt. There is more the good performances than taking drugs.

 

[BroDeal]

Remove the word Boardman and insert the word Wiggins or other current cyclist of choice.

There are credible rumours about lots of riders, Boardman included but it's all old, old news and not worth bringing up. These guys all deserve the benefit of the doubt. There is more the good performances than taking drugs.

Pro cyclists deserve about as much benefit of doubt that they are clean as members of the mafia deserve doubt that they have committed criminal acts.

 

[Escarabajo]

Boardman was definitely clean, ...

So:

1. Boardman clearly came this close to doping, even though it was explained to him as correcting a hormone deficiency; and

2. If he had doped for recovery purposes, we may well have had a Brit on the GC podium before now.*

Edit * Which in a way is a shame that he missed out by being honest in the dirtiest era in memory.

I don't think hormone balance alone would have done the trick in that age. He probably needed more than that.

 

[Escarabajo]

Pro cyclists deserve about as much benefit of doubt that they are clean as members of the mafia deserve doubt that they have committed criminal acts.

(Off topic)
What is the reason for that new Avatar????

 

[blackcat]

Pro cyclists deserve about as much benefit of doubt that they are clean as members of the mafia deserve doubt that they have committed criminal acts.

Bro, this is getting absurd (not you btw, big fan), because, this thread is about Wigans and speculation about (Boardman) a plausibly clean athlete, takes the heat off Wigans. Wigans is, a doper who professes innocence and puts on he is clean, but, he does deserve the opportunities the rest of the peloton avail themselves with. He should compete on the same playing field, no problem with that. I want him to do well. Think he will podium. My gripe is GB and Sky doing the Garmin spin and putting on they have a different ethic, and saying at the same time, they wish to win the Tour. And McQuaid backing it up, with his Anglophone bigotry at continental doperz. Gees, one wishes the Blimeys were still occupying the Paddys just cos of PM.

 

[luckyboy]

(Off topic)
What is the reason for that new Avatar????

He's the opposite to blackcat?

 

[bobbins]

Bro, this is getting absurd (not you btw, big fan), because, this thread is about Wigans and speculation about (Boardman) a plausibly clean athlete, takes the heat off Wigans. Wigans is, a doper who professes innocence and puts on he is clean, but, he does deserve the opportunities the rest of the peloton avail themselves with. He should compete on the same playing field, no problem with that. I want him to do well. Think he will podium. My gripe is GB and Sky doing the Garmin spin and putting on they have a different ethic, and saying at the same time, they wish to win the Tour. And McQuaid backing it up, with his Anglophone bigotry at continental doperz. Gees, one wishes the Blimeys were still occupying the Paddys just cos of PM.

Where's the proof that Wiggins is a doper?

 

[blackcat]

self evident, his hemoglobin jumps to nigh on 16, he rides into the top 4, he has never got out of the autobus, he could not even finish top 30 on the first mtn finish in the Giro.

His performance was manifestly implausible. If you think there is no evidence, you will quickly suffocate with your head in the sand.

 

[TheGame]

Where's the proof that Wiggins is a doper?

Real hard proof? Solid evidence? Or is it acceptable to make things up?

 

[blackcat]

yeah, cos your hemoglobin jumping to 16 2 weeks into a GT, then going back down is not proof.

For the "proofers", they luv the plausible explainability (sic), plausible deniability.

hypothetical doping plan:
1. Rent an apartment in the city of a finish in the weeks 2 or 3. It needs to be a stage finish, that is two or three days before a decisive stage, because the transfusions only reach their potential if the body can adjust over a few days. Apartment preferably has underground parking, so you may enter anonymously.
2. Buy a fridge, and a generator, and some device that if the mains power goes off, the electricity switches to the generator.
3. You buy transfusion equipment like Kohl, Rasmussen, and Matschiner did.
4. Arrive at said apartment in offseason on a few occasions. Deposit blood. If cannot add preservatives, will need to cycle this blood, in and out, so you have fresh blood for the Tour. IE. Blood in, and blood out, at the same time. Effectively, not depositing or withdrawing, just have fresh blood in the fridge for July.
5. During Tour stage, you finish, then make your way to apartment for transfusion, in non-team car.

Blood parameters are not too divergent from StrongArm and Wigans.

Plausible deniability.

Fanbois to the rescue!

 

[BroDeal]

(Off topic)
What is the reason for that new Avatar????

I don't know. I just wanted a change. It is my evil wet cat avatar.

He's the opposite to blackcat?

I had not thought of that. Clever.

 

[Ferminal]

I don't know. I just wanted a change. It is my evil wet cat avatar.



I had not thought of that. Clever.

I thought it was the infamous 17 year old cat.

 

[Escarabajo]

yeah, cos your hemoglobin jumping to 16 2 weeks into a GT, then going back down is not proof.

For the "proofers", they luv the plausible explainability (sic), plausible deniability.

hypothetical doping plan:
1. Rent an apartment in the city of a finish in the weeks 2 or 3. It needs to be a stage finish, that is two or three days before a decisive stage, because the transfusions only reach their potential if the body can adjust over a few days. Apartment preferably has underground parking, so you may enter anonymously.
2. Buy a fridge, and a generator, and some device that if the mains power goes off, the electricity switches to the generator.
3. You buy transfusion equipment like Kohl, Rasmussen, and Matschiner did.
4. Arrive at said apartment in offseason on a few occasions. Deposit blood. If cannot add preservatives, will need to cycle this blood, in and out, so you have fresh blood for the Tour. IE. Blood in, and blood out, at the same time. Effectively, not depositing or withdrawing, just have fresh blood in the fridge for July.
5. During Tour stage, you finish, then make your way to apartment for transfusion, in non-team car.

Blood parameters are not too divergent from StrongArm and Wigans.

Plausible deniability.

Fanbois to the rescue!

No way. He needs professional help. Way too risky to do it alone.

 

[Escarabajo]

Real hard proof? Solid evidence? Or is it acceptable to make things up?

No solid evidence, but I want anybody on this forum to tell me the name of only one rider in history pre-91 Tour who used to arrive in the autubus and then became a Tour contender, only one?

I am interested also.

 

[blackcat]

No solid evidence, but I want anybody on this forum to tell me the name of only one rider in history pre-91 Tour who used to arrive in the autubus and then became a Tour contender, only one?

I am interested also.

StrongArm would have a few stages in the autobus.

We need to qualify "the autobus". There are good reasons for switching off, and saving your bullets for another day. If you are outside the top 20, and cannot win the stage, there is no reason if you are not gonna be a team helper in the Alps. For a chrono rider, it is best to reserve energy, so he can go au bloc in the chronos.

We are really slinging a bit of mud to justify our premise on Wigans charging. There are good reasons why a rider will not kill himself in the mtns. But, if a rider can earn one million GBP per, riding for GC, he will always ride for GC. Wigans has enormous talent, no denying that. I am just denying his own refutal, cos Wigans has a good potion no doubt.

 

[blackcat]

No way. He needs professional help. Way too risky to do it alone.

implicit was there would be one or two others. Basically, Matschiner did it himself. But, you need to keep the degrees of separation to a minimum, unless you are protected like StrongArm and Bruyneel. The error for Matschiner/Kohl may have occured when he got his assistant to fly over, and attempt the last transfusion of Kohl, that never worked. Kohl reckoned he could have won the Tour if he had that last transfusion in him, instead of it coagulating in the bag or the tube.

If Kohl wins the Tour. They don't bust Kohl for the CERA. As Cedric Vasseur has been saying off the record to colleagues, CSC and High Road were all on CERA too. Only busted were Schumacher, Kohl, Ricco, Piepoli, I think however Gomez Marchante dodged a Russian roulette (tortured metaphor sic).

 

[Colm.Murphy]

self evident, his hemoglobin jumps to nigh on 16, he rides into the top 4, he has never got out of the autobus, he could not even finish top 30 on the first mtn finish in the Giro.

His performance was manifestly implausible. If you think there is no evidence, you will quickly suffocate with your head in the sand.

It is really self-evident to call his performance done clean as HIGHLY suspect.

Not that I think the others clean but narrowing in on the ugly brit here, he's not in the range for years then brings it out like that? nah. it seems it is a done up.

Like when Schumacher is leading the group over pass after pass...

 

[Wallace]

As Cedric Vasseur has been saying off the record to colleagues, CSC and High Road were all on CERA too. Only busted were Schumacher, Kohl, Ricco, Piepoli.

I don't know about High Road, but the claim about CSC makes absolutely no sense at all, because the ASO was spending a lot of time testing that team--remember all the rumors about Cancellara, which turned out to be just that--rumors--the stopping and searching of Pere Schleck's car, etc.? I thought the accepted wisdom was that CERA was a risk only riders on teams without good doping programs needed to take. That is, if CSC riders were doping, they were on a program a whole lot more sophisticated that what the busted guys got busted for being on. This explanation makes a whole lot more sense to me than a conspiracy theory were certain riders are excepted for internal reasons. The more money you have, the better doctors and drugs you can have, the farther ahead of the testers you stay, the more races you win, the more and better drugs you can afford, and the wheel spins around and around and around... Now how's that for a metaphor?