Zajicek given life ban for doping

[Mrs John Murphy]

For me, the worst part is that he continued to race even when he knew he was going to face the music? How lame it that??

To be fair, he's no different to Contador in that respect. So he is in good company.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

To be fair, he's no different to Contador in that respect. So he is in good company.

Please stop comparing Contador with Zajicek. It's a false comparison and you know it. I realize some of you hate Contador, but comparing the two just makes zero sense.

Zajicek knew he was going to be banned forever. Contador still can, and likely will, be cleared.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

more or less garbage than vino, ricco, pantani, armstrong, ulrich, rumsas, khol, kloden, contador, andy and frank, menchov, evans, nibali, basso, indurain, fignon and lemond, hinault, poulidor, merckx, anquetil, bartali and coppi, etc? i mean, what's really the difference here that can make you a hero or garbage? the stupid and blind fans that one can get along the way? more ability to lie and drug as much as you can before dying?please explain.

and don't say "the ones that are garbage don't regret it.". I didn't\don't see merckx hinault coppi indurain armstrong etc etc regretting.

Horrendously stupid post. If you don't know why it's stupid, I feel sorry for you. Why people like you continue to draw such moronic analogies is beyond me. How is Lemond even remotely like PZ, for example? How many of those guys you listed have been banned for life?

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Please stop comparing Contador with Zajicek. It's a false comparison and you know it. I realize some of you hate Contador, but comparing the two just makes zero sense.

Zajicek knew he was going to be banned forever. Contador still can, and likely will, be cleared.

Not really no. No different from Piti, Contador, TV, Ricco. All people who continued to ride and cash in despite knowing that they were likely to have to face the music. It's only a false comparison in your book because you disagree with it.

 

[131313]

To be fair, he's no different to Contador in that respect. So he is in good company.

it's actually quite different. It would be more like if Contador had already gone through most of the appeal process, had been confronted with pictures of him holding a needle that said "clenbuterol" on it, and new he was going to lose his appeal....but still kept racing.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

With the exception of the photograph I don't see the difference. Dertie's gone through all but one of the appeals process, which he and his team have deliberately strung out in order to enable him to carry on riding.

 

[joe_papp]

Here's an interesting little photo I found on the internet-Georgie Porgie with the Pineda brothers and Wilson Vasquez, the Mengoni riders who terrorized the local scene in NYC back in the days.

Maybe Joe Papp can enlighten us on these cats...

Ha. What do you want to know?

Please stop comparing Contador with Zajicek. It's a false comparison and you know it. I realize some of you hate Contador, but comparing the two just makes zero sense.

Zajicek knew he was going to be banned forever. Contador still can, and likely will, be cleared.

I honestly don't think that Zajicek believed he was going to be banned forever - or sanctioned at all after he won at the AAA level. I think he thought that USADA wouldn't appeal and that he'd get away with it. And then when they appealed to CAS, I doubt he expected my testimony to be augmented by seriously incriminating evidence that wasn't available at the time of the expedited hearing last year.

And from the world of the ironic/foreshadowing photo, check out this gem:

(original link: http://twitpic.com/51rqiu)

What a joker-filled front row. I would hope you all would start lining-up jokes about the big-3, one on either side of me (lol)

 

[joe_papp]

Please stop comparing Contador with Zajicek. It's a false comparison and you know it. I realize some of you hate Contador, but comparing the two just makes zero sense.

Zajicek knew he was going to be banned forever. Contador still can, and likely will, be cleared.

I honestly don't think that Zajicek believed he was going to be banned forever - I think he thought that USADA wouldn't appeal and that he'd get away with it. And then when they appealed to CAS, I doubt he expected my testimony to be augmented by seriously incriminating evidence that wasn't available at the time of the expedited hearing last year.

 

[131313]

With the exception of the photograph I don't see the difference. Dertie's gone through all but one of the appeals process, which he and his team have deliberately strung out in order to enable him to carry on riding.

I think you're being a bit disingenuous. Contador has a reasonable chance of winning the CAS appeal, at least based on the information out there in the public domain, and the appeal has had to even be heard. If it's found out later to Contador was confronted with incontrovertible evidence prior to racing the Giro and the Tour, then I'll agree with you. I just don't think that's known yet.

 

[joe_papp]

Zajicek vs. Contador; that apology - lying has consequences

I think you're being a bit disingenuous. Contador has a reasonable chance of winning the CAS appeal, at least based on the information out there in the public domain, and the appeal has had to even be heard. If it's found out later to Contador was confronted with incontrovertible evidence prior to racing the Giro and the Tour, then I'll agree with you. I just don't think that's known yet.

I tend to agree with your view/interpretation and am inclined to reject a comparison b/w Zajieck and Contador at this point.

I do think that Zajicek really erred in that public statement and wonder if he wrote it himself or if it was produced for him by his legal team. B/c it certainly sees him leave cycling on the worst note possible, w/o displaying a shred of regret or shame for what he's finally exposed to have been doing for so long. Even if I didn't personally regret doping and helping others to dope (but I do!), I would still probably weigh the value of at least appearing to be contrite and chastened in public and would run with it. Oh well. Plus not even acknowledging the lying under oath, corrupting the anti-doping process and encouraging others to do the same...wow.

Watch for one of his now-former teammates to possibly face charges for said lying, too (a foreigner who was quite successful on the NRC circuit on Fly V in previous seasons).

 

[131313]

I honestly don't think that Zajicek believed he was going to be banned forever - or sanctioned at all after he won at the AAA level. I think he thought that USADA wouldn't appeal and that he'd get away with it. And then when they appealed to CAS, I doubt he expected my testimony to be augmented by seriously incriminating evidence that wasn't available at the time of the expedited hearing last year.

Problem is, my understanding is that he had already been confronted with the new evidence prior to Redlands. He continued to race though that and Gila, at least. I honestly can't remember though, since he was completely anonymous in those races. It just seems weird to me.

Of course, I know you see some other former customers of yours in the Redlands results, and a little higher up the results sheet. So Phil's not the only d-bag here. I just don't get how those guys are able to still race, particularly because in one case at least, the guy has told one of his teammates he isn't even going to fight it when the charges come down?

 

[joe_papp]

Problem is, my understanding is that he had already been confronted with the new evidence prior to Redlands. He continued to race though that and Gila, at least. I honestly can't remember though, since he was completely anonymous in those races. It just seems weird to me.

Of course, I know you see some other former customers of yours in the Redlands results, and a little higher up the results sheet. So Phil's not the only d-bag here. I just don't get how those guys are able to still race, particularly because in one case at least, the guy has told one of his teammates he isn't even going to fight it when the charges come down?

Honestly, can you blame him then for deciding to keep racing, IF that's how it played out (that he actually SAW the new evidence in-advance)? I mean, you've been a pro cyclist for all of your adult working life, it's as much a core component of your identity as it is a vocation, and you know you're to be exposed for having cheated systematically (even if quite a few other riders who are more famous than you against whom you raced just as doped still carry on) - it will mean the end of your career. You obviously aren't interested in being a moral beacon b/c if you were you would've owned-up to it immediately after being caught the second time and wouldn't have encouraged others to lie for you...in fact, maybe this mentality helps to explain the thinking that went into that "statement" he issued...

 

[131313]

Honestly, can you blame him then for deciding to keep racing, IF that's how it played out (that he actually SAW the new evidence in-advance)? I mean, you've been a pro cyclist for all of your adult working life, it's as much a core component of your identity as it is a vocation, and you know you're to be exposed for having cheated systematically (even if quite a few other riders who are more famous than you against whom you raced just as doped still carry on) - it will mean the end of your career. You obviously aren't interested in being a moral beacon b/c if you were you would've owned-up to it immediately after being caught the second time and wouldn't have encouraged others to lie for you...in fact, maybe this mentality helps to explain the thinking that went into that "statement" he issued...

I guess this makes sense. And I guess the fact that I'm not willing to dope also explains why his continuing to race is difficult for me to understand.

 

[MacRoadie]

more or less garbage than vino, ricco, pantani, armstrong, ulrich, rumsas, khol, kloden, contador, andy and frank, menchov, evans, nibali, basso, indurain, fignon and lemond, hinault, poulidor, merckx, anquetil, bartali and coppi, etc? i mean, what's really the difference here that can make you a hero or garbage? the stupid and blind fans that one can get along the way? more ability to lie and drug as much as you can before dying?please explain.

and don't say "the ones that are garbage don't regret it.". I didn't\don't see merckx hinault coppi indurain armstrong etc etc regretting.

At least we can check the "token mention of LeMond in every thread" box early on this one...

Aside from that, completely ridiculous post.

 

[joe_papp]

Please read and reply if you have any idea what I'm talking about.

I guess this makes sense. And I guess the fact that I'm not willing to dope also explains why his continuing to race is difficult for me to understand.

I can understand how his decision to ride-on would strike you as unconscionable if you had clarity and constancy in your moral vision, and thus viewed doping exclusively through the lens of ethical analysis.

Now the following might be the catalyst for a separate thread, and Mod(s), PLEASE cut and paste this into a new one if you think it necessary (and sustainable), so...

What I still don't have a firm grip on is an explanation for why so many "fans" of pro cycling who have no direct stake in the sport at the elite level and who aren't even adversely impacted in measurable ways in their amateur competitions by what happens "over there" make the decision to deeply personalize the doping problem and willingly identify themselves as its victims. I don't begrudge them their feelings and viewpoints, but I don't understand the headlong rush into the online world to act in ways that, at a glance, seem almost/sometimes pathological.

I'm NOT addressing this to you in particular or anyone in this forum in general, and there's no complaint that I want to make nor disrespect or mocking on my part. But all over the internet at countless virtual water coolers, and in real-life almost every time I interact with a fan or recreational rider I observe (based on my perceptions) that there is some degree of fascination with the act of talking about, lamenting, and chronicling the moral turpitude of pro cycling and its deleterious effects on the well-being of the speaker and his peers, cycling in general, the entire U23 talent pool, the global economy, entry fees at the next SoCal Cycling Cup GP parking-lot office park circuit criterium, UCI coffers and the price of tea in China.

Of course, I also don't understand why people who don't need to terminate a pregnancy take it upon themselves to invest time, energy, perhaps material or financial resources, + their spouse's/friend's/family's time, energy, material/financial resources in incredibly virulent campaigns to prevent women who do have a need or desire to terminate their pregnancy from exercising the right to do so here in the United States, while claiming that they are called-upon to do so by their "God" (in whom the pregnant woman might not even believe...). I see a massive disconnect there, and the only thing that anyone has ever said to me that seemed remotely plausible by way of an explanation was when my former-mentor Mike Fraysse somewhat mockingly compared the anti-abortion movement to pro sports team supporters who think they have nothing else in their lives with which to identify or define themselves other than pledging and showing their support to an organized, partisan band buoyed the communal cheers of a collective of similarly-disconnected yet rabid fans.

Actually, someone else to whom I'm close provided a brief explanation couched in psychological terms, which I'll have to look-up and share later.

Seriously, if anyone is interested in discussing this, I know I am and I would welcome the dialogue and any insight you can share, either here, directly via email or msg, Twitter, Facebook, etc.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

With the exception of the photograph I don't see the difference. Dertie's gone through all but one of the appeals process, which he and his team have deliberately strung out in order to enable him to carry on riding.

What are you talking about? The guy was cleared. The appeal was not made by Contador, but the UCI.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

He is still riding when many people think he shouldn't be. Hence all the comments about 'we don't know who won the Giro'.

The appeal might have been launched by WADA/UCI but it was delayed by his lawyers to enable him to ride in the TDF, Dertie is exploiting the situation to benefit himself.

But anyway, I don't want this to distract from the discussion, so we will have to agree to disagree about the parallels.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

He is still riding when many people think he shouldn't be. Hence all the comments about 'we don't know who won the Giro'.

The appeal might have been launched by WADA/UCI but it was delayed by his lawyers to enable him to ride in the TDF, Dertie is exploiting the situation to benefit himself.

But anyway, I don't want this to distract from the discussion, so we will have to agree to disagree about the parallels.

First, just because "many people" don't think he should, that doesn't mean he shouldn't ride. Many people DO think he should ride. And if he's not banned, then why shouldn't he? If he's cleared then what? He would have lost another year at the Tour for no reason.

Second, if the was presented with additional evidence, his lawyers have every right to examine it. Extensions are granted all the time in legal proceedings. Why would they extend the deadline just to have Contador ride if it it was clear he would be banned and have it taken away? It would be a waste of money, time, and effort. It is NO benefit to Contador, since he'd lose all these titles anyway.

 

[jonny testaronny]

I I still don't have a firm grip on is an explanation for why so many "fans" of pro cycling who have no direct stake in the sport at the elite level and who aren't even adversely impacted in measurable ways in their amateur competitions by what happens "over there" make the decision to deeply personalize the doping problem and willingly identify themselves as its victims. [/B]

I could well be wrong, but I believe that some on this forum--like 131313--race or have raced at the P/1/2 level "over here," so have a stake in whether guys like Zajicek dope/d. As for antagonism toward the Euro dopers, some fans just detest seeing cheats dominate the highest, best-publicized level of a sport they love, especially when they believe other riders are trying to do it clean. Few fans see themselves as "victims," or feel personally cheated, however, I would guess--unless they'd come to strongly identify with & support a rider who vowed he was clean & later got busted, like...well, fill in the blank. People do invest a lot of emotion in sports fandom, though it seems to me more intense in team sports where tribalism is a factor.

 

[pmcg76]

I can understand how his decision to ride-on would strike you as unconscionable if you had clarity and constancy in your moral vision, and thus viewed doping exclusively through the lens of ethical analysis.

Now the following might be the catalyst for a separate thread, and Mod(s), PLEASE cut and paste this into a new one if you think it necessary (and sustainable), so...

What I still don't have a firm grip on is an explanation for why so many "fans" of pro cycling who have no direct stake in the sport at the elite level and who aren't even adversely impacted in measurable ways in their amateur competitions by what happens "over there" make the decision to deeply personalize the doping problem and willingly identify themselves as its victims. I don't begrudge them their feelings and viewpoints, but I don't understand the headlong rush into the online world to act in ways that, at a glance, seem almost/sometimes pathological.

I'm NOT addressing this to you in particular or anyone in this forum in general, and there's no complaint that I want to make nor disrespect or mocking on my part. But all over the internet at countless virtual water coolers, and in real-life almost every time I interact with a fan or recreational rider I observe (based on my perceptions) that there is some degree of fascination with the act of talking about, lamenting, and chronicling the moral turpitude of pro cycling and its deleterious effects on the well-being of the speaker and his peers, cycling in general, the entire U23 talent pool, the global economy, entry fees at the next SoCal Cycling Cup GP parking-lot office park circuit criterium, UCI coffers and the price of tea in China.

Of course, I also don't understand why people who don't need to terminate a pregnancy take it upon themselves to invest time, energy, perhaps material or financial resources, + their spouse's/friend's/family's time, energy, material/financial resources in incredibly virulent campaigns to prevent women who do have a need or desire to terminate their pregnancy from exercising the right to do so here in the United States, while claiming that they are called-upon to do so by their "God" (in whom the pregnant woman might not even believe...). I see a massive disconnect there, and the only thing that anyone has ever said to me that seemed remotely plausible by way of an explanation was when my former-mentor Mike Fraysse somewhat mockingly compared the anti-abortion movement to pro sports team supporters who think they have nothing else in their lives with which to identify or define themselves other than pledging and showing their support to an organized, partisan band buoyed the communal cheers of a collective of similarly-disconnected yet rabid fans.

Actually, someone else to whom I'm close provided a brief explanation couched in psychological terms, which I'll have to look-up and share later.

Seriously, if anyone is interested in discussing this, I know I am and I would welcome the dialogue and any insight you can share, either here, directly via email or msg, Twitter, Facebook, etc.

I think it is more frustration at not being able to totally believe in what we watch. Normally I just take it as it comes but its still deeply frustrating. I posted this elsewhere before but I went to watch mountain stages at the Giro & Tour 08. The stages I witnessed were won by Sella x2, Pellizotti, Ricco & Piepoli. I cheered on all these guys as they went past me. How do you think people should feel after experinceing those winners?

 

[Captain_Cavman]

...

Seriously, if anyone is interested in discussing this, I know I am and I would welcome the dialogue and any insight you can share, either here, directly via email or msg, Twitter, Facebook, etc.

Not sure that you're going to get a meaningful dialogue going with people you: smear in para1, ridicule in para2 and compare with anti-abortion freaks in para3.

Good luck with the search for truth anyway.

 

[cyclelicious]

Smear or not, it's still a thought provoking question...or should be.

 

[joe_papp]

Not sure that you're going to get a meaningful dialogue going with people you: smear in para1, ridicule in para2 and compare with anti-abortion freaks in para3.

Good luck with the search for truth anyway.

I also point out that I don't think the people who I'm wondering about inhabit this forum, and why I don't address them directly.

I'm NOT addressing this to you in particular or anyone in this forum in general, and there's no complaint that I want to make nor disrespect or mocking on my part.

I'm not expecting a response from them here but rather, soliciting for input as to why a subset of the anti-doping cycling fan public willingly offer themselves up as victims to be "hurt" by a phenomena taking place at the pro level, when they must know by now that pro cycling is rife with doping and it's not an endeavour in which it makes sense to invest much emotional capital.

And yes, I do think that they are not entirely right in the head to willingly position themselves as victims in the first place!

Look, my friend with whom I discuss these issues often talks about the 'drama triangle'. People who are stressed or under pressure or damaged or simply emotionally underdeveloped for some reason in some area of their life will tend to step into one of three roles:

* persecutor
* victim
* rescuer

Sometimes they can flit very quickly between one and another. It's remarkable how consistently people will adopt these roles and how frequently. The likes of the type of anti-doping/cycling fan are victims (they feel personally affronted by the fact of someone else's rule-breaking in an area of their life that they consider to be important); persecutors (they vigorously attack the presumed source of their pain); and, occasionally resccuers (when leaping to each other's defense).

It seems however, that what they don't see is that they are caught up in a psychological drama that has its roots in something entirely unrelated to the issue at hand (which they identify as doping). The key to maturity in this instance would seem to be to step out of the triangle. It's remarkable what an enormous difference it can make to your life when you start recognizing that you are playing a role and just step out of it. Astonishing.

The likes of these folks seem to be so immersed in their role(s) that they can't see how false they are, how disproportionate their behavior is or how unrelated it is to the real source of drama in their lives (which they confuse with doping in pro cycling). They may be bright, witty, balanced people in many respects; but in this they seem to be emotionally stunted. I think it might even be futile to reason with them - in doing so you start to play a role, in this case as a rescuer, and you merely reinforce their sense of being involved in an important drama.

My friend says that stepping out of the triangle is absolutely the best thing to do, and he goes on to say that the fact that they may be effed up is not my responsibility; the fact that they respond in an over-the-top manner to small incidents that are unrelated to their lives is not my responsibility. He would conclude by saying that other people can, and should, take care of themselves.

But it's still interesting to me, since I'm often the target of their seemingly misdirected rage.

Thanks for adding to the discussion, however.

 

[Cloxxki]

I am not sure a stock trader having been caught with insider trading, would dare to keep trading any stocks, after learning of having been exposed.
Perhaps in cycling, other standards apply. There sure are many precendents, colleagues perpetrating the lowest of low acts of treason to the sport, and then squeezing the very last day out of their smudged careers.

 

[mitchman]

When a rider gets pop’d no matter the level it hurts the sport…I promote a small stage race (pro to am level) and the bigger the “black eye” bike racing receives the harder it is to raise money….it’s trickledown effect.

Now how would you like to run Fly-V and look for sponsors? It’s a tough sell…..I’ve got a arms length and still have to dance around those question.