Really?
Last Post 11/05/2013 09:10 AM by jacques anquetil. 47 Replies.
Author Messages
79pmooney

Posts:1156

--
10/30/2013 11:39 AM
Bjarne Riis had no idea Rasmussen was doping?

Much as I do not care for Rasmussen, his claim that the his team doctors sat down with UCI doctor to discuss his very low reticulocyte levels during the '05 Tour sounds very believable  The team's sponsor was Rabbobank, the biggest sponsor in the pro ranks.  It was decided to let those test results slide.

Rasmussen's claims againts Riis, UCI and others:  http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/15733/Rasmussen-makes-doping-claims-against-Hesjedal-Sorensen-Hj-and-others.aspx

Saxo Bank's endorsement of Riis given those claims:  http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/15736/Saxo-Bank-gives-its-backing-to-Riis-following-Rasmussen-allegations.aspx

Ben
stronz

Posts:307

--
10/30/2013 12:36 PM
I dunno -- I'm kind of tired of liars implicating others when they "come clean." Does anyone find anything Chicken says implausable? no. we know everyone who made any kind of noise in the pro ranks in the 90s and 2000's used something illegal at some point. Riis included -- as he himself fessed up. The sport was filthy dirty and to some extent still is undoubtedly. Still I find Rasmussen's ratting out others distasteful and easily ignored.
79pmooney

Posts:1156

--
10/30/2013 02:45 PM
It's not Rassmussen's accusations that caught my attention, it was the statement backing the team of Bjarne Riis by Saxo Bank. If he is indeed right, 1) shame on Saxo Bank and 2) the ONLY proper words coming out of those implicated's mouths beside confession are NO WORDS AT ALL. Anything else is a lie.

Ben
longslowdistance

Posts:694

--
10/30/2013 03:31 PM
What's Implausible?
What's implausible to me is that anyone anywhere near the front end of a pro race since the early 90s is clean. If the whole truth ever comes out, the purists won't have enough bonfires to burn all the evil doers.
Keith Richards

Posts:739

--
10/30/2013 03:49 PM
What is a "cycling purist"...a fan with no historical knowledge of the sport.
----- It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong.
stinkyhelmet

Posts:80

--
10/30/2013 04:05 PM
Looks like Ryder has come clean. http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/10/news/cycling-canada-concerned-about-hesjedal-doping-allegations_306627
longslowdistance

Posts:694

--
10/30/2013 04:28 PM
KR, I was referring to the *antidoping* purists, who see all forms of doping as equivalently wrong ("cheating is cheating"), and feel that all riders who doped should be equivalently punished (harshly).
jrt1045

Posts:361

--
10/30/2013 04:40 PM
just because they did it then doesn't make it "OK" now. Didn't your parents have this conversation with you long ago? It went a little something like this - If everyone else is jumping off a bridge it doesn't mean that you have to do it, too

bring me my torch and pitchfork. FWIW, this is just another partial confession with the details/timeline and whatnot manipulated just enough so as to best contain the damage. This convenient manipulating the facts is just as bad as the offense

as far as Barnie is concerned, they should ban him from the sport. Its funny how many trails run right back to him
Entheo

Posts:317

--
10/30/2013 10:13 PM
and in other news, water was discovered off the coast of hawaii.
stronz

Posts:307

--
10/31/2013 08:35 AM
evidence that criminal activity and extremely poor judgement is still rife in the peleton -- look no further. But be prepared to be mortified.


http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/gallery-pro-tour-pin-ups-calendar
Keith Richards

Posts:739

--
10/31/2013 12:12 PM
Well Ryder came "Stuey O'Grady" clean. Ahh, dinner and a show. I love it.

Link
Hesjedal admits to doping ten years ago, says he only did it once and didn't inhale.

Bjarne was on Gewiss with Berzin. I mean, everybody in the sport knows how they rolled. If the people in charge were going to keep him out of the sport, that chance went past LONG ago jrt1045.

I keep saying, you can enjoy the sport the same way American football fans enjoy theirs; warts and all or not. The choice is yours. But bike racing is what it is my brother.
----- It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong.
Dale

Posts:493

--
10/31/2013 12:48 PM
Gewiss/ Ballan… dope central, but dayum their kits were cool!
stinkyhelmet

Posts:80

--
10/31/2013 01:38 PM
Gewiss & Berzin! Remember the Fleche Wallone (1995?) when Berzin, Argentin, and someone else (all Gewiss) team trialed the last 50 km to finish 1-2-3? They rode with the strength of 10 men and were probably on those bada$$ Campy Shamals...all nice and shiny.
Dale

Posts:493

--
10/31/2013 02:11 PM
1994 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3rZphEtzSM
Cosmic Kid

Posts:1124

--
10/31/2013 02:52 PM
Actually, Keith, Ryder testified and confessed during the LA uSADA case. This is nothing like O'Grady's confession / retirement.

I see no reason why he had to make his confession public unless he chose to. The authorities knew about it already.

Also, IIRC, Vaughters outed him in one of his CN posts, along with some of the other Garmin guys.
Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
Keith Richards

Posts:739

--
10/31/2013 03:23 PM
CK, to me what is the same is the tired, "I only did it once, ten years ago" conveniently just outside of the statute of limitations. I don't believe he stopped ten years ago any more than I think Stuey did.

----- It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong.
Oldfart

Posts:484

--
10/31/2013 05:15 PM
If Ryder only did it the one time or only for a short time period, why did he stop? Answer that one for me please.
longslowdistance

Posts:694

--
10/31/2013 06:13 PM
Pangs of conscience! (Har!)
Orange Crush

Posts:1202

--
10/31/2013 08:43 PM
Posted By Andy Eunson on 10/31/2013 05:15 PM
If Ryder only did it the one time or only for a short time period, why did he stop? Answer that one for me please.


I downed a full bottle of Jagermeister only once in my life. Maybe he didn't like the taste or the hangover?
Ride On

Posts:441

--
11/01/2013 08:50 AM
He needs to play the get of jail free "Lance made me do it" card. Not my fault.
Keith Richards

Posts:739

--
11/01/2013 10:15 AM

“Personally I do not believe it at all, in the same way that Michael Barry said he stopped taking drugs in 2006. I do not believe it at all either,”

Link
Francois Parisien questions claims by Hesjedal and Barry that they stopped doping years ago

And he has a right to I suppose.

----- It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong.
Cosmic Kid

Posts:1124

--
11/01/2013 10:43 AM
@ KR - agreed. Amazing how they all manged to stop doping at the point iin time where, once they confessed, it is outside the statute of limitations.

But I will give Ryder props for coming forward on his own, as opposed to having been exposed and then "confessin'.
Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
BikeCzar

Posts:53

--
11/01/2013 10:58 AM
He didn't come forward on his own. He came forward after the chicken outed him and his buddies. The company he kept at the front of his notably exceptional Giro win says a lot about his use.

I find the relative silence and lack of outrage from the cycling circus over the "clean" team's practices deafening. They must be batting .500 or better on dirty riders past and present and with little to no consequence. A real clear double standard here. If this was a revelation about Armstrong or Ulrich or Pantani there would be 18 articles a day posted on each outlet about the depth of the corruption. Goose and gander.



Entheo

Posts:317

--
11/01/2013 11:25 AM
BC, if i read your implication correctly, we're to be outraged because vaughters is trying to run a clean team and he happens to have some guys on the team who transgressed previously because it was accepted and/or encouraged and/or required by the management of teams they were previously on?

you lost me on that one.
Cosmic Kid

Posts:1124

--
11/01/2013 11:56 AM
Posted By Bike Czar on 11/01/2013 10:58 AM
He didn't come forward on his own. He came forward after the chicken outed him and his buddies.


Wrong.. Here is what happened, which was confirmed by CCES.

According to his team, the Canadian had already given the information of his past doping offences, which took place in 2003, to the anti-doping agencies from the USA and Canada before the statements in Rasmussen's autobiography, which is being published this week, made the press.
Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
BikeCzar

Posts:53

--
11/01/2013 12:05 PM
"trying to", "happens to", "some guys", "transgressed previously", "teams they were previously on"

"zero tolerance"

Vaughters, Millar, VandeVelde, Danielson, Hesjadal, Zabriske, Dekker, Klier, Rasmussen, etc....

Please.

BikeCzar

Posts:53

--
11/01/2013 12:08 PM
Ok. He came forward publicly after being outed. He came forward previously after being forced to testify in a grand jury.

He didn't volunteer anything. And even if he had, it doesn't make it any better for the North American riders who he/they cheated out of big contracts, sponsor dollars and Olympic appearances.
Cosmic Kid

Posts:1124

--
11/01/2013 12:58 PM

He testified before USADA and CCES. He was not "forced to testify" before a grand jury.

But please, don't let facts get in the way of your rant....carry on.

As to the rant itself, it seems pretty clear you don't udnerstand what Vaughters is trying to accomplish. He never said that his riders would be have clean pasts or never have doped. His goal was to give riders an environment where they could compete without the pressure of having to dope.

Now, if / when a Garmin rider comes up dirty while on the team, you can start ranting about the "clean team's practices, if you want.....


Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
jrt1045

Posts:361

--
11/01/2013 02:08 PM
CK

interesting point, what is Vaughters really trying to accomplish? It is what BikeCzar and others realize all to well - pointy sideburns and hipster glasses automatically make you an expert on dealing with doping in cycling even if you are elbows deep in the mess

JV is just as bad as the rest of them, he is in a position where he doles out facts as needed and throws folks under the bus when it doesn't fit his needs - which is funding his team and lining his pockets. One would be a fool to listen too closely to someone with so much at stake.

I think BZ is right, if JV knew all about it why did he wait until chicken outed his rider - who just so happened to win the Giro last year. And why do all his riders that do confess parse out "facts" that are so conveinient and self serving? Damage control, pure and simple - this is a PR job worthy of -7. The sport would be better without him IMHO.

Here's a little note from Paul Willerton over on Tilford's blog for a little bit of context. This is what Vaughters is all about:
http://stevetilford.com/2013/10/31/remorseful-ryder-hesjedal/

"Tilford touches on how frustrating that time period was. It’s all kind of surreal to me. My ride at Haro was handed over to… surprise: Chris Sheppard, Seamus McGrath, and then Michael Rasmussen.

Don’t let anyone tell you different. It’s nothing short of thievery. As they look for ways to justify doping in their own minds, the fading images of themselves on podiums that were truly a ‘joke’ can only become less and less significant."
ElleSeven

Posts:48

--
11/01/2013 03:47 PM
Something that’s interesting to me is that the cycling public seem to be very interested in, and fickle about, how confessions are made.

The infraction is sometimes “worse,” you might say, for being long concealed. Sometimes it’s “worse” for being revealed immediately afterward. Sometimes the impact, or its moral weight, is reduced by ceremonies of remorse. On other occasions, such displays of remorse are vilified as self-serving and cynical. Sometimes it’s the borderline personality disorder (Armstrong, Ricco, Vinokurov, etc.), arguably the one thing that the rider may not be responsible for, that worsens his crimes. Sometimes brutal honesty after protracted denial results in a sort of absolution (Millar, Vande Velde, etc.); yet similar reversals just as often result in infamy (Leipheimer, Jaksche, Rasmussen, etc.).

Is there a correct way to do it?

I mean, I suspect that Leipheimer is taking a bigger hit than some others because his character is judged to be, what, unmanly or dreary or something. While Basso, sobbing under judicial pressure, returns to the peloton not only richer but beatified.
jmdirt

Posts:707

--
11/01/2013 04:24 PM
My point of reference: I was a mid field national dirt pro from 1995-99 (I kept a pro license until three years ago but I was barely a good local pro from 2001-2010) . In '96 and '97 I did the entire NORBA series, plus two regional series and a few world cups. My point is that I know a lot of people in the dirt world.

When the Canadian dirt racers (RG, RH, SM, CS, JK, KM...) started dominating the NORBA races more than a few eyebrows raised. When RG and RH started standing on the box at every world cup too a lot of speculation was flying.

If RH's dope use was short lived, how did his form stay with the top dopers all this time? Should we believe that he was clean like Jens? I just crapped myself typing that!

I had pretty much accepted that ~90% of pros and 100% of winners doped, then I read TH's book and I was no longer 'pretty much'. To think otherwise is naive/ignorant.
RNDDUDE

Posts:78

--
11/01/2013 04:42 PM
ElleSeven brings up a great question when she asks "Is there a correct way to do it?"

To the purists who say "cheating is cheating", it doesn't matter if you do it once, and admit it the next morning, or steadfastly deny until you are caught with the needle in your arm, or anything in between, it's all equally bad.

To the realistic cycling fans, they accept it at face value and say "so what, who of consequence didn't?"

To the fanboys, you support your guy no matter what, facts be damned.

To the pragmatists, you realize that change comes slowly, and judge the sport on where it seems to be going, as opposed to where it's been.

Athletes doing peds is akin to virgins being deflowered, once done you can never go back, and you either keep quiet about it, or confess and face the scorn.

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistant one. -Albert Einstein
Orange Crush

Posts:1202

--
11/01/2013 05:08 PM
Posted By Cosmic Kid on 11/01/2013 10:43 AM
But I will give Ryder props for coming forward on his own, as opposed to having been exposed and then "confessin'.


Parisien begs to differ and that is really all that should matter. Unanswerable questions being posed here.
Entheo

Posts:317

--
11/01/2013 05:08 PM
R&D, your astute observations indicate that you have far too many functioning brain cells at the end of a week, which raises the question...
jmdirt

Posts:707

--
11/01/2013 09:37 PM
RNDDUDE, I am a cheating is cheating guy. It doesn't matter if they do a T patch each day to improve recovery or if they are on a full on EPO/blood doping program, the intent is the same, they want to improve their results by artificial means. Is murder, murder? Does it matter if they use a .22 or a 50 cal. (dead is dead)? Does it matter if they are a serial killer or just kill one person (not to each individual/family). Let me be clear that I don't think that sports are anywhere as important as life (cheating does not equal murder).

The issue here isn't if they cheated, its their story when they do tell one. Most of the racers who have told a story "only did it once", "only did it for a short time", "quit in 2009"... The interesting part about that is that their performances didn't drop off after they were "clean" again. I'd rather they just keep quiet than make something up.

Interesting that Paul W. would have something to say since he and Steve L. created quite a buzz with their "out of this world" transitions from road to dirt.
longslowdistance

Posts:694

--
11/01/2013 10:53 PM
jmdirt, I have new-found respect for your point of view - coming from mtb during the 90s. My impression, perhaps incorrect, was that mtb blossomed in the US in what now looks like an age of innocence, followed by the international invasion and domination that likely was epo fueled. I think I get your point of view and your outrage as clean cycling did exist in your career.
jmdirt

Posts:707

--
11/02/2013 01:12 AM
LSD, no outrage here. Dirt racing was mostly clean in my 'serious' days. I'm realistic about things. Even if there was some dope sneaking in, it didn't have much if any impact on me personally...my 37th place would be 35th maybe.:-)
Entheo

Posts:317

--
11/02/2013 11:02 AM
good interview with vaughters; you be the judge...

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/11/news/his-clean-team-dirtied-vaughters-wouldnt-change-a-thing_306775
jrt1045

Posts:361

--
11/04/2013 08:34 AM
JV sounded annoyed that he got caught and is now trying to spin the whole thing away, -7 should be proud

Vaughters may have to apply the Garmin policy of firing prevaricators of the truth and pink slip himself for getting just a little too cute with the "facts" as they were. They only coughed up this info because Chicken, of all people, dimed them out. Vaughters knew forever and played coy with the info.

guess pointy sideburns and dressing like an English fop gets you a pass
Entheo

Posts:317

--
11/04/2013 09:35 AM
well it's death by a thousand cuts until a truth & rec commission gets approved...

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/11/news/commentary-truth-commission-could-spare-cycling-from-death-by-a-thousand-cuts_307022
Orange Crush

Posts:1202

--
11/04/2013 12:03 PM
T&C, a somewhat crassly borrowed term from a place where it was really needed, and a process that had in fact limited success.

Cookson would do well to instead put moneys/effort towards issues that may lead to renewed bleeding down the road. E.g., I don't expect Leinders to come out of closet about 2010-2012 if such a process were to be put in place. Does anyone?
Cosmic Kid

Posts:1124

--
11/04/2013 12:18 PM
Agreed re: the T&C name. They should just declare amnesty for anyone who comes forward, certify all results froom the early 90's to 2010 and label them as the "Blood Boosting Era". (and yes, that would include -7's results).

Anyone who admitted to it and is then caught again is immediately given a lifetime ban. Anyone who does not come forward and is subsequently found to have doped is also given a lifetime ban.

This pertains to team managers and doctors as well.
Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
longslowdistance

Posts:694

--
11/04/2013 02:47 PM
+1 CK
That makes so much sense it can't happen.
jrt1045

Posts:361

--
11/04/2013 04:58 PM
-7 could now be +7(*)
longslowdistance

Posts:694

--
11/04/2013 07:23 PM
7**
(double asterisk in this particular case)
Orange Crush

Posts:1202

--
11/04/2013 10:37 PM
Cookson should give all the moneys that will be wasted on T&R to the NSA to pay for some snooping on already gathered phone and email data; I am sure a lot more useful stuff could be learned that way.
jrt1045

Posts:361

--
11/05/2013 08:54 AM
The snooping would probably punch a huge hole in all those convenient timelines
jacques_anquetil

Posts:220

--
11/05/2013 09:10 AM
Holy $hit Dale! those three gewiss boys put 15 seconds into a big group on that second-last climb and gained probably double that by the finish. without even trying, apparently.


---
Active Forums 4.1