Forum menu
For cash my dear boy, for cash... Might be well paid, but I am sure there would be one willing to "bust the myth" that is LA.
Michelle Ferrari (who has been convicted) has had links with (from wikipedia):
All of team Gewiss-Ballan that took the entire podium in the 1994 edition of La Flèche Wallonne: Moreno Argentin, Giorgio Furlan and Eugeni Berzin
Lance Armstrong
Tyler Hamilton[5] : stated he worked with Ferrari for one year
Paolo Savoldelli
Mario Cipollini
Gianni Bugno
Giorgio Furlan
Pavel Tonkov
Cadel Evans
Tony Rominger
Abraham Olano
Ivan Gotti
Claudio Chiappucci
Filippo Simeoni: admitted to doping
Patrik Sinkewitz: suspended for positive out-of-competition test while preparing for 2007 Tour de France; admitted to doping
Eddy Mazzoleni
Floyd Landis: suspended for positive doping test at 2006 Tour de France; admitted to doping
Levi Leipheimer
Axel Merckx
Alexandre Vinokourov: suspended for positive doping test at 2007 Tour de France
Michael Rogers
Rumours (and thats all they are) put US postal payments to Ferrari at 15 million dollars.
thats for one rider / one team.
Any money he would get paid for busting LA would be peanuts copmpared to that, why bother? LA's legal team would be all over him
Best not use your camel back bladder to much, especially if you use sugary drinks. Puts more of the plastic into your system than water only. You sure tj, could that evidence be used in sports related drugs case. Correct, no is the answer.
Edit was spelling am trying to improve.
Mogrim - the plasticisers in Contadors blood being at a level that proves transfusion is a proven fact.
Go on then, find me an official test, or even an official statement from an accredited lab - so far all you've posted are newspaper / website reports.
mt - only because it is not accredited and you do not get the same levels from ingestion as from injection. Really - rather than trying to rubbish what I say read up on it. this will be an accredited test in the next year or two and there will be a level set above which folk are banned.
mogrim - Member
Mogrim - the plasticisers in Contadors blood being at a level that proves transfusion is a proven fact.
Go on then, find me an official test, or even an official statement from an accredited lab - so far all you've posted are newspaper / website reports.
What mogrim said. The bugger is still guilty, though his steak could have been wrapped in clingfilm, liquidised and injected.
Edit was because I'm crap at writting.
You can tell from thepresence of plasticisers that he had a blood transfusion and the reason for the blood transfusion? I haven't seen any cock and biull stories relating to the plasticisers, if thereare can you link. I haven't read to much of this but I understand he said he got tthe meat from a butcher in Irun, and everyone says its a cock and bull story but there is no cock and bull story aboput the placticisers????
We were just discussing this at work and wondering if he has to give the prize money back. As pro tour teams share the spoils amongst their entire staff, everybody would have to pay a bit back.
Also, sorry if this has been posted elsewhere but [url= http://www.radioshacknissantrek.com/news/andy-schleck-no-reason-be-happy ]here's[/url] Andy Schleck's response.
Meanwhile the 'winner' of the 2010 TdF, Andy Schleck has now been given the race but he did not get the chance to stand on the podium waving flowers etc. Probably lost out on some money as well, extra endorsements/crits etc but for people at this level it is not all about money. AC has cheated AS out of a big moment in his life.
I have read about plasticisers and understand, but you cannot find him guilty if that evidence is not allowed by the tribunal. It's as if it does not exist, just like the stuff on Armstrong.
Within no time there will be a plausable reason a high plasticiser in the blood after the first person is found positive on any new test.
I go back to butties and clingfilm, camelbacks, water bottles and to many packes of crisps.
mt - it can be used as a part of the evidence that he transfused. It can be used in that context.
Those things you mention will not give a high reading in the same why as transfusing is my understanding of the testing hence it needs a threshold.
Store the blood in non plastic containers. No Platicisation.
TandemJ - thanks
A good friend of mine and mtb'er ran various drug testing programmes, the testers are always one step behind and always will be 🙁
Probably the easiest way to level the field is to just simply allow doping.
I feel sorry for the winners of this years tour and the olympics, how would you feel about winning when the best isn't racing?
Where did you hear that Wiggins wasn't racing?
Meanwhile the 'winner' of the 2010 TdF, Andy Schleck has now been given the race but he did not get the chance to stand on the podium waving flowers etc. Probably lost out on some money as well, extra endorsements/crits etc but for people at this level it is not all about money. AC has cheated AS out of a big moment in his life.
I feel sorry for Andy Schleck - but even more sorry for Michele Scarponi. He lost the chance to stand on top of the podium when AC shouldn't even have been racing.
Meanwhile the 'winner' of the 2010 TdF, Andy Schleck has now been given the race but he did not get the chance to stand on the podium waving flowers etc. Probably lost out on some money as well, extra endorsements/crits etc but for people at this level it is not all about money. AC has cheated AS out of a big moment in his life.
This is the saddest part for me.
He lost the chance to stand on top of the podium when AC shouldn't even have been racing AND EVERYONE KNEW THIS WOULD HAPPEN
Shameful the whole thing , given toatl liability and his pathetic excuse this was aalways bound to happen - lets hope DS and the Spanish spill the beans on their "favourite son"
He was caught and banned thats fair enough but lets hope that they might now get round to taking Lance Armstrong to trail over it which they now can as the feds case againts him is closed.
Untill the UCI president Pat McQuald is still in his post that will never happen as he doesnt want LA to be charged and run the risk of his tours wins being taken off him.
I will say that the last multi TDF winner to win all his tours clean was Greg Lemond .
Another bad point of todays verdict is that Andy Schleck ( whos father is very good friends with Pat McQuald) is now the winner of the 2010 TDF please he was only second because of the his team mate got every one to slow down and more of less soft pedal stages because he and his brother ( who has been found with a positive drug sample)fell off there bikes and without this help you could argue the time lost there is no way he would have been 2nd.
tj - only mentioned the other plactic containers in jest, thought the bag of crisps was a give away.
Still maintain that a bit of plastic in the blood does not prove anything as long as it is not allowed to be used as evidence. It may soon be allowed but there will be alternatives. Can see it now reporters following cycle team staff to the bottle bank, was that a bottle of Newcastle Brown or Contador blood.
i dont trust any of them, but i really dont care that much, i just like to watch the TDF, im never going to be in it and wouldnt want to be, but when I get home and turn on the telly i like to watch it
I don't think the TDF will miss Contador at all in fact make it more exciting IMO, don't really like his riding style and the way he bobs about standing on the pedals. His team Boss Bjarne Riis was a drug cheat anyway so why is he allowed to manage a team is beyond me.
[url=
%5B/img%5D%5B/url%5D">
[url=
photo does not exist[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/kristoframon/ ]kristof ramon[/url], on Flickr
The Panel concluded that booth the meat contamination scenario and the blood transfusion
scenario were, in theory, posssible explanations for the adverse analytic cal findings, but were
however equally unlikely. In n the Panel’s opinion, on the basis of the eevidence adduced, the
presence of clenbuterol was s more likely caused by the ingestion of a contaminated food
supplement.
[url=
TAS-CAS.ORG TAS[/url]
TAS says that thge blood transfusion is as much cock and bull as the comtaminated meat story. It appears they don't have anyrhing except the contador admission of taking of a banned substance and no clear believable explanation. That knock the transfusion conspiraxcy on the head.
one thing i'd like to know is does this mean alberto should be dis-credited for any previous wins?
i mean he won the tdf in 07 and 09 did he not? are we to believe he 'suddenly' started doping in 2010?? and if so why should he need to given he has won it before? surely this only aids the fact that he and mostly all the other top riders have found a sly and cunning way of cheating over the years? im sure if contador is guilty then the majority of the others are indeed enhancing there chances of staying within reaching distance of him???
i genuinely think its just a sport that will and has always had such a problem since doctors etc found a way of enhancing the riders bodies and managing to cover it up....
if hes been found guilty and stripped of his 2010 tdf win, what about all his other wins? maybe no proof sure, but in my mind he didnt suddenly become useless the folling year at the 2010 tdf and decided to enhance his body....
i think its pretty safe and fair to say that if he has won titles like his in his lifetime then hes been enhanced along the way not just suddenly in 2010....
Tagger - thats not what its saying at all. They did not consider the evidence for the transfusion. 🙄 Contador managed to get he main witness and evidence not heard on this aspect.
on the basis of the [b]eevidence adduced[/b],
Perhaps you could explain to me what "The Panel concluded that both the meat contamination scenario and the blood transfusion
scenario were, in theory, possible explanations for the adverse analytical findings, but were however equally unlikely." means.
to me its says that both the theory of transfusion and meat contanmination were possible they are both unlikely and that the clembuterol entered the bloodsteam in another way. Perhaps they didn't consider the evidence because they, the experts, don't consider it to be likely. if they did consider it likely they would of sent a message to others about blood transfusions.
Because they did not consider the main evidence about the blood transfusions as contadors lawyers managed to persuade them not to - which almost caused WADA to walk away from the hearing. If you don't look at the evidence yo cannot rule on it.
Why do you want to defend this confirmed drug cheat?
At least they upheld the basic point that its strict liability - drugs in your system means a ban.
I don't I just read the article and didn't see any reference to thwe transfusion that you go on about sand thought I would ask the question. 🙄
i genuinely think its just a sport that will and has always had such a problem
I actually think it one of the few sports that has stood up and done something about drugs, look how football and particularly rugby just buries their heads in the sand and pretends there is no problem, cycling is 10 years ahead of the game by comparison.
ROAD.CC Probably the easiest way to level the field is to just simply allow doping.
Great, so where DO you draw the line? Pro-Tour? Pro-Continental? Domestic Cat 1? Go Race under 12's?
TJ thank you for posting that Michael Ashenden NY Velo piece. Very interesting reading.
Boris - all racing. At the lower levels the only drugs available are likely to be coke or speed off the street. Could result in some interesting cat 4 races.
Boris - all racing. At the lower levels the only drugs available are likely to be coke or speed off the street. Could result in some interesting cat 4 races.
I think you underestimate how easy it is to get hold of performance enhancing drugs.
I'm sure I do, I've never tried!
Anybody got any Vera's?
fill 'em full of coke in bike races and watch the heart attacks happen
Well no wonder you never made it, if you had got with the program, you could have been a contender!
fill 'em full of coke in bike races and watch the heart attacks happen
There's that story of riders in the 90's sleeping with HR monitors on, set up to alarm when their HR dropped below a certain level. Their blood was so thick from EPO they had to get on turbos in the middle of the night to get their hearts pumping again.That was before any sort of EPO testing, Pantani was the worst by all accounts...
And here's a 'clean' Lance Armstrong toying with the heavily juiced up best climber of his generation on Alpe D'Heuz. It's embarrassing.
Alpe D'Heuz. It's embarrassing
Yes it is - particularly as on my machine it looks rather like Mont Ventoux
Sorry 😉
warton it's embarrassing you are under the impression that video clip is on Alpe d'Huez.
Try Mont Ventoux.
LOL, so it is. I shall retreat quietly from this thread 😳
Great, so where DO you draw the line? Pro-Tour? Pro-Continental? Domestic Cat 1? Go Race under 12's?
I think the current system is fine, You do drugs you get caught, you win and theres no evidence you end up gathering attention from the conspiracy theorists. I find it sad that someone does well they instantly get hated.
I know a few people who have been through cancer and have found Lance Armstrong an inspiration. Also his work for charity is impeccable.
Also his work for charity is impeccable
I'm sorry, I should really let this go, but it's absolutely not. It's great that your friends got inspiration from him, and that is something he gives to people on a daily basis, but his 'charity' work is nothing more than a self promoting exercise. Livestrong pays him $200k every time he appears at a Livestrong event. Something like 45% of Livestrongs turnover is spent on his legal fees. HIS legal fees, not Livestrongs. thats money that should be getting spent on researching and fighting cancer, but it's not, it's being spent on HIS libel cases.
Livestrong pays him $200k every time he appears at a Livestrong event. Something like 45% of Livestrongs turnover is spent on his legal fees. HIS legal fees, not Livestrongs. thats money that should be getting spent on researching and fighting cancer, but it's not, it's being spent on HIS libel cases
Now I'm not going to say its right, BUT if its 55% of it turnover going on Cancer research its 55% of something rather than 55% of nothing. There is plenty of people in this world that could equal that contribution quiet easily but simply don't.
Now I'm not going to say its right, BUT if its 55% of it turnover going on Cancer research its 55% of something rather than 55% of nothing
Charity absolutely cannot work like that. Where do you draw the line?