A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Racing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Is anyone clean?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old June 6th 06, 11:35 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is anyone clean?


"Andre" wrote in message
ups.com...

Tom Kunich wrote:
B. Lafferty wrote:
"Tom Kunich" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
Watched the prologue to the Dauphine yesterday after having been too
busy to follow pro cycling for a few months. Almost the entire
broadcast seemed to be taken up with who was out of the race for
doping, who was allowed in even though they're suspected, which
teams
are gone, which might be gone for the TDF this year. It was unreal.
Maybe I haven't been following the pro cycling long enough so I'm a
naive wide-eyed idealist, but it was insane to listen to an hour and
a
half of OLN basically explaining who has and hasn't been caught
doping,
more or less.

When you have Armstrong's former right hand man (Haras), a former
teammate (Hamilton), an entire team undera cloud (Phonak) and on
and
on and on it's hard not to wonder if it's not time just to cancel
the
TDF and wait until there is real testing in place.

And please don't give me the (baseball players use steroids)
argument.
I don't watch baseball. I stopped watching long ago. And I'll stop
watching cycling if every race is a jig-saw puzzle of who got caught
and who didn't. Not so much because it screws with the integrity of
the
sport (although it does destroy what little integrity is left), but
more because it's boring to watch a sport where half of the
discussion
and drama is about cheating.

There is cheating in professional sports! Isn't that a surprise?
Cyclnig has its fair share of the cheaters since endurance sports are
most likely to be enhanced by undetectable or nearly so drugs.
Surprised?

But the MAJORITY of riders do not use illegal performance enhancing
drugs. I'm sort of remaining neutral on the blood packing stuff.

You've been writing here since at least 1994 that there is no serious
doping
problem in cycling. Hundreds of positives have put the lie to that
Kunich
absurdity. Add some 200 blood doping riders to your "minority." And
that
was only one operation in Spain. There are others.

I'm
wondering what an "honest" rider does to defend himself against
undetectable drugs that boost hematocrit to the legal limit.

Simpleton. You just don't get it. The blood dopers inject the blood
before
racing but after the vampires might strike. They don't get blood
tested
after the race and can rehydrate/dilute the crit by dawn. You don't
need
drugs like EPO anymore. EPO by microdose is for the poorer members of
the
peloton at this point.


Autologous blood transfusions are probably as safe a preparation as
you
can make. I don't like them but legalizing them would certainly put a
kink in the EPO traffikers.

There can be adverse reactions to autologus transfusions from a number
of
causes, including improper storage and transport. Hopefully, there will
be a
test for autologous transfusions in the next year. Do you think that
might
have been the underlying cause of Basso's problems in last year's Giro?


There's the old Brian we all know and laugh at.

You really believe that more drugs = more wins so there's really no
reason for you to have any interest in racing nor in attending this
group save your belief that we all MUST be convinced that racing is
tainted.

I hate to point this out, but there might just as likely be adverse
reactions to simple vitamin injections as to autologous transfusions
but then you probably already know that and this is simply your way of
shaking the grass hut.

But just out of curiosity - do you actually believe that anyone pays
the slightest attention to anything you have to say anymore?



I like Lafferty, he seems honest in his beliefs; I like Tom Kunich
cause he answers my questions; I like trg cause everything is
"candyass" although he has horrible taste in women (just kidding..une
blague); I like that Gorilla guy cause he's just crazy, And the
"dumbass" guy is funny and witty. Bob Martin is ok too, but all that
math scares me. But my question is for Lafferty, cause he appears to be
into the drug scandal pretty deep:
A while ago it came out that Lance had invested some money into a
lab that tests for drugs in cyclists, I don't know all the details, but
do you think he did it to cover himself or so that other riders would
not be able to use the drugs themselves and thus out-perform him?


This was discussed here a while ago. IMO, it represents a clear conflict of
interest for the UCI to accept such a gift. As to Armstrong's intentions in
making the gift, best ask Armstrong.



Andre



Ads
  #22  
Old June 6th 06, 12:55 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is anyone clean?


"Tuschinski" wrote in message
ups.com...

But the MAJORITY of riders do not use illegal performance enhancing
drugs.


Tom, besides the huge scandals (wich have a scary tendency to
return..), riders as Rooks, Ducrot and Winnen stated that (almost)
everyone used. Especially Rooks has a "Palmares" that would make
envy/grudge unlikely. What is also very disconcerting that people as
Manzano seem to have been telling the truth, though EVERYONE denied it.


See:
The Spanish cycling federation (RFEC) has condemned Manzano but said it will
launch an investigation into his claims, though it will be limited because
Manzano does not currently hold a licence. The RFEC called on the media not
to assume "these prohibited practices are generally carried out within
cycling."
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...ar04/mar25news

Following the damaging confessions of Jesus Manzano, who offered detailed
allegations of systematic doping within his former Kelme team, the Union
Cycliste Internationale (UCI) issued its own statement aimed less at the
doping practices mentioned than at the allegations themselves. Referring to
Manzano's accusations as "a day of massacre", the international cycling
federation once more found itself on the defensive concerning notions of
widespread doping in the peloton.

"Since the beginning of the year, cycling has been the focus of numerous
attacks which have severely prejudiced the image of our sport and the honour
of its participants," said a UCI statement, quoted in l'Equipe.

Calling Manzano a rider "not beyond reproach," the UCI regretted the
continued practice of doping in the peloton but asserted that the majority
of riders are clean, citing a figure that blood tests show more than 90% of
the peloton to be clean.

"The UCI will react against anyone who tarnishes the image of cycling and
the riders," the statement continued, adding that the UCI is prepared to
take legal action against "all who, by their actions, do such damage to
cycling's image."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...r04/mar25news2

Eufemiano Fuentes, a doctor who worked with the Kelme team and Jesus
Manzano, has denied giving the cyclist any illegal substances. "If Jesus
Manzano did these things it was hidden from the team," Fuentes was quoted by
El Diario Vasco as saying. "We have no knowledge of what Manzano has said
goes on within the team."

However, a close friend of Manzano's, José Luis Montoya, called Fuentes a
"hypocrite" on the Spanish Antenna 3 TV station. "When I read this in the
newspaper, it has particularly incensed me," he told AS. "In the first
place, that this gentleman says that Manzano hid all this from the team, is
a total lie. This man is a hypocrite. He was not hiding it, far from it. I
took Jesus Manzano from here (Zarzalejos) to a hotel in Torrejon de Ardoz to
see this gentleman. There I found myself with cyclists from all over Spain
who were there doing exactly the same thing. He gave us a prescription, we
went to a certain pharmacy in Madrid to get certain medical products. I have
spoken to Jesus and asked him if he still had the prescriptions Eufemiano
gave him. He still has them in the gentleman's own handwriting and with his
signature."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...ar04/mar29news

Verbruggen commented on the Jesus Manzano case, saying, "What Manzano has
said has had a great deal of repercussions and I lament and deplore [what
has happened]. I don't know if what he says is true, I expect not, but the
fact is that he has spoken out and there is an investigation in motion that
will clarify things. But when the press starts to pay for these type of
statements always there will always be riders willing to tell 'their'
stories, and we cannot do anything about that."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...pr04/apr22news








  #23  
Old June 6th 06, 02:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is anyone clean?

On 6 Jun 2006 02:40:22 -0700, "Tuschinski" wrote:

Consider this: I am a clean Pro. Someone beats me and it comes out that
he has been using Dope. I would sue him to kingdom come! He stole my
victory! Yet this doesn't happen at all.... Why?


I assume that if this was a sanctioned race and a rider was to test
positive, he would be disqualified.
  #24  
Old June 6th 06, 02:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is anyone clean?


"Simon Brooke" wrote in message news:ep0gl3-


In Britain I believe more people die of accidents in their beds each year
than die cycling. Furthermore, 17% of heart attacks are said to be
caused by sex. All in all, you're /much/ safer out on your bike
(although sex on your bike probably isn't that safe).


95 percent of the facts that you read in newsgroups are made up.


  #25  
Old June 6th 06, 02:31 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is anyone clean?

On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 11:08:14 +0100, Simon Brooke
wrote:

The bedroom and the living room are the
most common locations for accidents in general."


When I was young I had a serious accident in bed. His name is David.
  #26  
Old June 6th 06, 03:14 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is anyone clean?

On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 06:28:48 -0700, "Frank Drackman"
wrote:

95 percent of the facts that you read in newsgroups are made up.


Yet I am fully prepared to believe the 5% I agree with are 100%
true...

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
"The simple truth is too much for us; we don't like those who unmask
our illusions." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
  #27  
Old June 6th 06, 04:30 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is anyone clean?

B. Lafferty wrote:
"Andre" wrote in message
ups.com...

Tom Kunich wrote:
B. Lafferty wrote:
"Tom Kunich" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
Watched the prologue to the Dauphine yesterday after having been too
busy to follow pro cycling for a few months. Almost the entire
broadcast seemed to be taken up with who was out of the race for
doping, who was allowed in even though they're suspected, which
teams
are gone, which might be gone for the TDF this year. It was unreal.
Maybe I haven't been following the pro cycling long enough so I'm a
naive wide-eyed idealist, but it was insane to listen to an hour and
a
half of OLN basically explaining who has and hasn't been caught
doping,
more or less.

When you have Armstrong's former right hand man (Haras), a former
teammate (Hamilton), an entire team undera cloud (Phonak) and on
and
on and on it's hard not to wonder if it's not time just to cancel
the
TDF and wait until there is real testing in place.

And please don't give me the (baseball players use steroids)
argument.
I don't watch baseball. I stopped watching long ago. And I'll stop
watching cycling if every race is a jig-saw puzzle of who got caught
and who didn't. Not so much because it screws with the integrity of
the
sport (although it does destroy what little integrity is left), but
more because it's boring to watch a sport where half of the
discussion
and drama is about cheating.

There is cheating in professional sports! Isn't that a surprise?
Cyclnig has its fair share of the cheaters since endurance sports are
most likely to be enhanced by undetectable or nearly so drugs.
Surprised?

But the MAJORITY of riders do not use illegal performance enhancing
drugs. I'm sort of remaining neutral on the blood packing stuff.

You've been writing here since at least 1994 that there is no serious
doping
problem in cycling. Hundreds of positives have put the lie to that
Kunich
absurdity. Add some 200 blood doping riders to your "minority." And
that
was only one operation in Spain. There are others.

I'm
wondering what an "honest" rider does to defend himself against
undetectable drugs that boost hematocrit to the legal limit.

Simpleton. You just don't get it. The blood dopers inject the blood
before
racing but after the vampires might strike. They don't get blood
tested
after the race and can rehydrate/dilute the crit by dawn. You don't
need
drugs like EPO anymore. EPO by microdose is for the poorer members of
the
peloton at this point.


Autologous blood transfusions are probably as safe a preparation as
you
can make. I don't like them but legalizing them would certainly put a
kink in the EPO traffikers.

There can be adverse reactions to autologus transfusions from a number
of
causes, including improper storage and transport. Hopefully, there will
be a
test for autologous transfusions in the next year. Do you think that
might
have been the underlying cause of Basso's problems in last year's Giro?

There's the old Brian we all know and laugh at.

You really believe that more drugs = more wins so there's really no
reason for you to have any interest in racing nor in attending this
group save your belief that we all MUST be convinced that racing is
tainted.

I hate to point this out, but there might just as likely be adverse
reactions to simple vitamin injections as to autologous transfusions
but then you probably already know that and this is simply your way of
shaking the grass hut.

But just out of curiosity - do you actually believe that anyone pays
the slightest attention to anything you have to say anymore?



I like Lafferty, he seems honest in his beliefs; I like Tom Kunich
cause he answers my questions; I like trg cause everything is
"candyass" although he has horrible taste in women (just kidding..une
blague); I like that Gorilla guy cause he's just crazy, And the
"dumbass" guy is funny and witty. Bob Martin is ok too, but all that
math scares me. But my question is for Lafferty, cause he appears to be
into the drug scandal pretty deep:
A while ago it came out that Lance had invested some money into a
lab that tests for drugs in cyclists, I don't know all the details, but
do you think he did it to cover himself or so that other riders would
not be able to use the drugs themselves and thus out-perform him?


This was discussed here a while ago. IMO, it represents a clear conflict of
interest for the UCI to accept such a gift. As to Armstrong's intentions in
making the gift, best ask Armstrong.


Brian at his comedic best. Lance bought MODERN detection equipment for
the UCI so that they could detect much smaller doses. Obviously having
greater detecting power is a conflict of interest to a lawyer.

  #28  
Old June 6th 06, 04:43 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is anyone clean?

Tuschinski wrote:
But the MAJORITY of riders do not use illegal performance enhancing
drugs.


Tom, besides the huge scandals (wich have a scary tendency to
return..), riders as Rooks, Ducrot and Winnen stated that (almost)
everyone used. Especially Rooks has a "Palmares" that would make
envy/grudge unlikely. What is also very disconcerting that people as
Manzano seem to have been telling the truth, though EVERYONE denied it.


Consider this: I am a clean Pro. Someone beats me and it comes out that
he has been using Dope. I would sue him to kingdom come! He stole my
victory! Yet this doesn't happen at all.... Why?

These are indications that there is a "MAJORITY" using (blood)dope.

Autologous blood transfusions are probably as safe a preparation as you
can make.


If done in a LAB, yes. If done uncontrolled maybe less so?

I don't like them but legalizing them would certainly put a
kink in the EPO traffikers.


Legalizing would probably make it safer.


Let's remember that Rooks pal Jan-Gert Theunisse looked like a monster
and was obviously using large amounts of steroids. Steven himself never
took on that look but nevertheless if he was using he had plenty of
reasons to claim it as self defense wouldn't you think?

The ONLY reason I would support blood packing is because thwarting EPO
use is more important. Since they've set the limit on Hct everyone
seems to be right on the limit. But it's even more important to
understand that those who are smartest wouldn't be on the limit at all
since it is purely the NUMBER of red blood cells that are in the body
which is critical and not the density in the blood. Simply transfusing
a pint of your own would increase your ability to transfer oxygen and
no one would be the wiser.

And no one would be able to detect it either regardless of the dumb
things you see printed by UCI.

  #29  
Old June 6th 06, 05:29 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is anyone clean?


"Tom Kunich" wrote in message
ups.com...
B. Lafferty wrote:
"Andre" wrote in message
ups.com...

Tom Kunich wrote:
B. Lafferty wrote:
"Tom Kunich" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
Watched the prologue to the Dauphine yesterday after having been
too
busy to follow pro cycling for a few months. Almost the entire
broadcast seemed to be taken up with who was out of the race for
doping, who was allowed in even though they're suspected, which
teams
are gone, which might be gone for the TDF this year. It was
unreal.
Maybe I haven't been following the pro cycling long enough so I'm
a
naive wide-eyed idealist, but it was insane to listen to an hour
and
a
half of OLN basically explaining who has and hasn't been caught
doping,
more or less.

When you have Armstrong's former right hand man (Haras), a former
teammate (Hamilton), an entire team undera cloud (Phonak) and on
and
on and on it's hard not to wonder if it's not time just to cancel
the
TDF and wait until there is real testing in place.

And please don't give me the (baseball players use steroids)
argument.
I don't watch baseball. I stopped watching long ago. And I'll
stop
watching cycling if every race is a jig-saw puzzle of who got
caught
and who didn't. Not so much because it screws with the integrity
of
the
sport (although it does destroy what little integrity is left),
but
more because it's boring to watch a sport where half of the
discussion
and drama is about cheating.

There is cheating in professional sports! Isn't that a surprise?
Cyclnig has its fair share of the cheaters since endurance sports
are
most likely to be enhanced by undetectable or nearly so drugs.
Surprised?

But the MAJORITY of riders do not use illegal performance
enhancing
drugs. I'm sort of remaining neutral on the blood packing stuff.

You've been writing here since at least 1994 that there is no
serious
doping
problem in cycling. Hundreds of positives have put the lie to that
Kunich
absurdity. Add some 200 blood doping riders to your "minority."
And
that
was only one operation in Spain. There are others.

I'm
wondering what an "honest" rider does to defend himself against
undetectable drugs that boost hematocrit to the legal limit.

Simpleton. You just don't get it. The blood dopers inject the
blood
before
racing but after the vampires might strike. They don't get blood
tested
after the race and can rehydrate/dilute the crit by dawn. You don't
need
drugs like EPO anymore. EPO by microdose is for the poorer members
of
the
peloton at this point.


Autologous blood transfusions are probably as safe a preparation
as
you
can make. I don't like them but legalizing them would certainly
put a
kink in the EPO traffikers.

There can be adverse reactions to autologus transfusions from a
number
of
causes, including improper storage and transport. Hopefully, there
will
be a
test for autologous transfusions in the next year. Do you think
that
might
have been the underlying cause of Basso's problems in last year's
Giro?

There's the old Brian we all know and laugh at.

You really believe that more drugs = more wins so there's really no
reason for you to have any interest in racing nor in attending this
group save your belief that we all MUST be convinced that racing is
tainted.

I hate to point this out, but there might just as likely be adverse
reactions to simple vitamin injections as to autologous transfusions
but then you probably already know that and this is simply your way of
shaking the grass hut.

But just out of curiosity - do you actually believe that anyone pays
the slightest attention to anything you have to say anymore?


I like Lafferty, he seems honest in his beliefs; I like Tom Kunich
cause he answers my questions; I like trg cause everything is
"candyass" although he has horrible taste in women (just kidding..une
blague); I like that Gorilla guy cause he's just crazy, And the
"dumbass" guy is funny and witty. Bob Martin is ok too, but all that
math scares me. But my question is for Lafferty, cause he appears to be
into the drug scandal pretty deep:
A while ago it came out that Lance had invested some money into a
lab that tests for drugs in cyclists, I don't know all the details, but
do you think he did it to cover himself or so that other riders would
not be able to use the drugs themselves and thus out-perform him?


This was discussed here a while ago. IMO, it represents a clear conflict
of
interest for the UCI to accept such a gift. As to Armstrong's intentions
in
making the gift, best ask Armstrong.


Brian at his comedic best. Lance bought MODERN detection equipment for
the UCI so that they could detect much smaller doses. Obviously having
greater detecting power is a conflict of interest to a lawyer.

Armstrong's UCI contributions are disturbing
Editor:
Learning that Lance Armstrong has donated money to the UCI for drug-testing
research was disturbing (See Thursday's Eurofile). It seems like too much of
a conflict of interest. I am not surprised that he wanted to keep it quiet,
seeing as it is analogous to Al Capone donating money to Chicago's police
force.

An ethical governing body should not be accepting donations from those that
they intend to fairly and impartially govern over. Tyler, you should have
also been taking notes on Lance's strategies off the bike while you were on
USPS.

Steve McDonnell
West Lafayette, Indiana

Contributions smack of payoffs
Editor:
The title of Andrew Hood's article, "Armstrong aids in anti-doping effort,"
is an absolute joke. Any athlete who "contributes" money to the governing
body that oversees that athlete's drug testing is improper. Can you spell
p-a-y-o-f-f, VeloNews? Is it any wonder the UCI let him have a back-dated
prescription when he tested positive in 1999? Coincidental? Use your brain.
If Barry Bonds gave money to MLB would you look at it as a wonderful aid or
covering his ass? I forgot, Barry Bonds didn't survive cancer.

Danica Nittolo
Boston, Massachusetts

Looks like a conflict of interest
Editor:
The UCI is accepting under-the-table monies from parties they are
responsible for overseeing. Shouldn't this raise serious integrity and
conflict-of-interest issues for the UCI? Isn't this action illegal?
Shouldn't all race results achieved by Lance Armstrong since the date the
monies traded hands be forfeited? Shouldn't all recent UCI actions
(especially the Hamilton fiasco) be put under the microscope in light of
this news?

Derek Parchinski
St. Marys, Georgia

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/7918.0.html (no indication that the letter
writers are lawyers)




  #30  
Old June 6th 06, 06:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is anyone clean?

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
wrote:
.

And please don't give me the (baseball players use steroids) argument.
I don't watch baseball. I stopped watching long ago. And I'll stop
watching cycling if every race is a jig-saw puzzle of who got caught
and who didn't.




snip



Newbie -


Please take your own advice and stop watching. Take your
holier-than-thou attitude and go away. You will be happier and so will
we.


?????

thank you very much for your cooperation,

K. Gringioni.


I don't cooperate. Hate to disappoint. I'm sorry if you think I'm a
"rube" for wanting to watch a sport where athletes don't cheat. I mean,
minus the invective, your point is probably the most accurate. If
everyone cheats, then what's the point in watching? Across the board?

Some of us enjoy sports not just to see who wins or loses, but because
sports on an individual level mean something about pushing yourself and
we like to watch others do the same, but at a much higher level. The
cheating taints it for us. So yeah, maybe I should stop watching. But
lose the invective, because while you might think my attitude is holier
than thou, at least I have a moral compass beyond just wanting to watch
the gladiators joust for my enjoyment. I want more out of sport than
that.

If that makes me a newb, so be it.

Preston

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Spring clean elyob UK 6 February 18th 06 11:06 AM
how do you clean tandem timing chains? [email protected] Techniques 12 October 5th 05 06:28 PM
How can there be clean riders in the top 20, 30 places? [email protected] Racing 7 August 26th 05 06:29 AM
RR: I take it all back.. CLEAN YOUR BIKE! hippy Australia 23 February 24th 05 11:03 PM
Rec.Bicycles Frequently Asked Questions Posting Part 1/5 Mike Iglesias General 4 October 29th 04 07:11 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.