There's more than "I was in Mexico" going on here...

On 27 jul, 03:34, "J Jones" wrote:
There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he was
in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other instances
of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to be more
evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders and
sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance of
his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
Jeff

Actually he missed three off season tests, two from the IFC (or
whatever they´re called) and one from the Danish National. Three
missed tests from the same organization is equal to a positive
testing. He technically didn´t have that, but it was enough for the
Danish National team to exclude him, most likely their strongest
cyclist. What I don´t understand is how this information was not known
by the larger cycling community, including the Tour organization. He
also lied about calling the Danish Org. and has been caught in
multiple les all in regards to his training locations, which all pro
riders must provide for off season random testing. It still seems
strange that all this came out so late in the game, but I guess it
takes time for a scandalous pot to come to the boil.

Something else that bothers me is how cycling is singled out as the
most doped up sport while every year there are as many or more
athletes with positive tests from all countries and dozens of sports,
many from national teams. Oh well.
ew

"Morten Reippuert Knudsen" a écrit dans le message de
news: ...
J Jones wrote:
There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he
was
in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
instances
of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to be more
evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders and
sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance of
his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
Jeff

They ditched him because of pressure from the ASO, and only after ASO
started applying pressure directly on the sponsor. Rabobank tried
saving him, but the the sponsor anallyzed press's response to tuesdays
pressconference and decided to dump him. The Casani testamoninal was
the perfect escapepod.

The main reason for the Rasmussen-case exploding durring TDF, was that
he turned ou to be the most convinient bullet yet in ASO's war against
UCI. CSC's pressagent today says to dansish newspaper poltikken, that
Rabobank did just about everyhing wrong in their attempt to contain
the story. He claims that if Rabobank had just held a pressconference
publicing the warnings and the exlusion from the dansih national team
there wouldn't have been a case. I tend to agree.

Saying that, i think that Rasmussen was in Italy working with a one of
Conconi's workbees from the Ferrara university - weather the team
knew about it i don't know.
Officialy the team has had rules tha prevent their riders to work with
other doctors than the official teamdoctors. Its an outcome of last
years TDF where young Thomas Dekker was heavyly criticied for working
with Luigi Ceccini. Back then Rabobank pulled him from the startlist
because of the Ceccini connection.

Funny enogh the ASO seem to turn their blind eye to the fact that
Evans and Leipheimer are still clients of Dr. Michele Ferrari, the most
prominent student of Francesco Conconi.

Could you pls understand that ASO is, with the peloton, the FIRST victim of
the war UCI (and others, I suspect) is/are fighting against ASO
1 - The TDF, (the main Cyclist competition) to be under the ASO organisation
is a problem for UCI.
2 - The war against dopping that the TDF is fighting is another problem for
UCI.
UCI, reluctantly, pretend to fight the dopping also, but they would like to
be the organizers. As FIFA is of the world cup, as all the others
federations are.
Why do think all this mess about the dopping ? because the TDF (and mainly
the public) don't want doppers anymore.
3 - If there is some one to blame, first blame Ras, then the Danish
Federation, then the UCI.

The TDF is close to explode because UCI mainly and the riders who don't
understand that the public don't accept the cheaters anymore.

To think that ASO whant the mess and/or is happy whis all the mess,
loosing sponsorts, loosing public, loosing TV midia is ridiculous


--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) http://blog.reippuert.dk

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

On Jul 27, 2:18 pm, Montesquiou wrote:
Could you pls understand that ASO is, with the peloton, the FIRST victim of
the war UCI (and others, I suspect) is/are fighting against ASO

*Cough* Bull**** mkay?

The butter on the head of the Aso is so thick it drips all over the
place. the Uci isnt a hair better... but to say that Aso fights for a
fair sport is laughable. They fight for themselves, but gladly
slamnder a man who stil hasn't proven to be guilty. Prudhomme is one
of the self-proclaimed Grand-inquisitors who are just looking how to
gain power.


1 - The TDF, (the main Cyclist competition) to be under the ASO organisation
is a problem for UCI.

Yeah... imagine that, a racing organisation wich doesn't want to work
with the International Cyling Organisation... imagine that giving
problems *rolls eyes*.

2 - The war against dopping that the TDF is fighting is another problem for
UCI.
UCI, reluctantly, pretend to fight the dopping also, but they would like to
be the organizers. As FIFA is of the world cup, as all the others
federations are.
Why do think all this mess about the dopping ? because the TDF (and mainly
the public) don't want doppers anymore.

Ahhh yes the TdF with its public Lynching and leaking of tests is the
epitome of Dope fighting. Thank you, I will pass.
3 - If there is some one to blame, first blame Ras, then the Danish
Federation, then the UCI.


And it is A-Okay if Prudhomme slags riders without proof. Or that
leaked tests circulate.

The TDF is close to explode because UCI mainly and the riders who don't
understand that the public don't accept the cheaters anymore.


The public isn't nearly as hypocritical as the Press, Uci and Aso.

To think that ASO whant the mess and/or is happy whis all the mess,
loosing sponsorts, loosing public, loosing TV midia is ridiculous


And the gain of wrecking the Uci certainly is not a goal for
Prudhomme, who is after all only doing his utmost for the image of
cycling. '

As a sidenote, I have a bridge to sell you.

Donald Munro wrote:
Morten Reippuert Knudsen wrote:
Funny enogh the ASO seem to turn their blind eye to the fact that
Evans and Leipheimer are still clients of Dr. Michele Ferrari, the most
prominent student of Francesco Conconi.

So now you have to pass a Conconi test before you can ride.

If UCI and ASO really wan't to fight doping among the top athletes
Conconi's Ferarra institute would be the place to start.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) http://blog.reippuert.dk

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

"J Jones" wrote in message
...
"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote in message
ink.net...
"J Jones" wrote in message
...
There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he
was in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
instances of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to
be more evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team
leaders and sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single
questionable instance of his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him
in Italy" comment.

So your guess is as good as proof?

Common sense. I'm offering no proof, just a common sense view of this
situation.

Jeff, this is the entire point - common sense is just a silly assumption on
your part. Perhaps you're right but the fact is that you're no Gypsy fortune
teller and there's no proof behind any of it. All of the what-ifs are really
screwing this sport up.

Here's the bottom line - you TEST people for drugs. If they're positive you
punish them. Otherwise you leave them alone.

"Simon Brooke" wrote in message
...
in message , J Jones
') wrote:

Common sense. I'm offering no proof, just a common sense view of this
situation. Hard to imagine someone getting canned for 1 single incident
of
their integrity coming into question. Especially, if it's based on
someone
else's comment that "hey, I saw him in Italy". It just doesn't make any
sense to me that his whereabouts would be enough to ****can him while
he's
leading the tour. Would that be enough for you to fire an employee who
was performing at the absolute top of his game?

Well, there isn't just "I saw him in Italy." There's also the shoebox
story

When did this "showbox story" supposedly occur?

Montesquiou wrote:


Correct !
It is what Patrice Clerc said yesterday.
http://jt.france2.fr/20h/index-fr.php?jt=0&start=493

http://jt.france2.fr/20h/index-fr.php?jt=0&start=603

No doubt that UCI want to take control of the TDF by discrediting ASO.
UCI was aware about Rasmussen Mexican (Italian or whatever) trip and the
no-control.

Speculating that the UCI/DCU knew Rasmussen was in Italy and not in
Mexico between 4th. juni and 12th of june as his whereabouts states is
just plain rediculous.

Sorry if I expressed in a wrong way : It is the fact that he "missed some
control" and not that he was in Italy.

It's a fact that he did recive warnings, but not sufficent warnings to
block him or charge him. Rules are roules either everybody plays by the
roules or they don't.

It's not a fact that he was in Itlay, at least not yet.

If ASO were aware of it (missing control), they whould have banned Ras.

No, they don't have the juristiction to do so, Rabobank and UCI would
have taken it to court and won.

Besides, the ASO's action by their seceltion of Astana for a wild
card clearly indicate that the ASO doesn't really care about doping
unless it's beeing disoverred.

UCI basicly sendt out a public warning against Astana becuase of the
ties to Operation Puerto, Vinokurov beeing a client with Dr. Michele
Ferrari, Kesselers positive _AND_ Coni's charge against Mazoleini.
In contrast to Rabobank, Astana did not have a legal claim to ride the
Tour. ASO invited Astana themselves.

Secondly ASO's persona non grate label on Bjarne Riis because he
admitted that he used EPO 11 years ago is rediuculous. Riis runs the
tightest antidoping program out there, even stricter than The French
and German federations and WADA and with complete /independant/ and
transperant control. If any team is doing what they can and spends a
huge amount of their resource trying to expose doping anno 2007
it's CSC.

As for the french teams; i aknowlegde that they truely seem to be doing
what they can to prevent their riders from doping - but do the ASO?
ASO don't even try...

According do Prudhomme the agreement between UCI and ASO is "a frank and
open contact, no one concealing any information". ASO complain that UCI
willfully concealed this information.

Never the less, acording to UCI rules Rasmussen was allowed to race,
and ASO was not allowed to deny Rabobank letting Rasmussen race.

Between 4th of june and 11th of june the UCI
asumed that Rasmussen was in Italy, rightfully, since they did't recive
Rasmussens changed scedule until 11th of june.

It's just as stupid as saying when ASO invited Astana they purpusly
disregarded UCI's public warnings against Astana (especially
against Vinokurov's connection to dr Ferrari in addition to the
connection to Fuentes and Saiz.)

Acording to current rules the ASO couldn't deny Unibet participating
in this years TDF. It's apperant that ASO are by the use of the press
trying to make the UCI cave in and bend the current UCI rulesset. It's
a powerstrugle between the two major orgazitions in cycling.

ASO explain it in the link I gave : He says that there is not DIRECT CONTACT
between Vino and Fuentes.

There was a known direct contact between Vinokurow and Dr. Michele
Ferrari, the most notorius "prepareteur" in pro cycling for more than
two decades. UCI even warned ASO about it!

If the name of Vino is in the process, it is not as Client of Fuentes.
Indeed I read here and there that the TDF don't follow any "présomption
d'innocence"... Now ASO must be accused of the opposit ?

No, they just have to face charges for applying doubble standarts.

Regarding doubble standarts: If Vincent Laveneu can have at team at
ASO races, there should be no reason why ASO would try to prevent Riis
form taking part. In the late 90's Vincent Lavenou's Casino team
practiced systematic doping only beeing superseeded by Festina.

I do _not_ suspect AGR2 to be a dirty team, on the contary i think
Lavenau runs one of the cleanst atcs i procycling and i do belive he
is sincere about his public stand against doping in procycling.

However welcomming Laneau and declaring Bjarne Riis persona non grata
is applying doubble standarts.

But THEY DID NOT SAID IT to ASO BEFORE. Why ????

ASO has no juristiction in doping controls, only WADA, UCI, national
federations and their corosponding antidoping agencies has. If an
athlete comply according to current rules UCI can't do anything,
Michal Rasmussen did comply.

See my answer above. ASO don't want any juridiction, just all the
informations on all the ridders in order to decide if they can (or cannot)
be invited in the TDF

I'm very well aware of what the ASO want's, but i also know what
they can't. As for protour teams, ASO doesn't have anything to say: If
a rider complies to UCI rules and he rides on a protour team, then ASO
just have to comply nad let him race.

ASO is just another race organizer, argualbly by far the welthiest and
most powerfull one - even big enough to take on the UCI, witch they've
proved by going for Rasmussens throat, denying the participation of
Unibet and supporting Astana.

The Danish federation (aware of it MONTH BEFORE) also said nothing
BEFORE.

Bull****, the danish federation contated UCI and Rabobank after
issuing their warning on jun 28th. By anyone the danish federation and
and the danish press has been Rasmussens most insistent critics.

They expected Ras to have the yellow for to declare " Oh guy, I forget to
tell you that he missed some control ...."
And now we are in this mess.

He didn't miss more controls than what's allowed under current UCI and
WADA rules.


The Danish federation attitude was unfair ( as the UCI). They had
informations on Ras they could have transmited to ASO also.

No those informatios are confidential, and since ASO does not have any
juristriction under WADA they can't access informations regarding
warnings - Plain and simple.

In fact DDA can expect a lawsuit for publicing confidential
information about Michael Rasmussen's warnings without Michael
Rasmussens concent.

If the ASO relley felt about it they would demand every rider in TDF
to share information about prior and standing warnings, and publicising
weather their national federations or UCI has done any out of
competition tests - However ASO haven't because they don't wan't
those informations.

Yes, I know, they were not obliged to do it. It is why I say it is unfair.
Plus the fact they expected Ras to be in yellow (mont after) for to inform
the press about it !!!
No doubt that it was on purpose

It's no secret in Denmark that Jesper Worre and Michael Rasmussen
arrent exacltly the best of friends. Worre has been criticiing
Rasmussen for years for not racing Danish Championship and DCU's own
HC1.1 race "Danmark Rundt".
Their friendship didn't improve last year when Michael Rasmussen agreed
to race "Danmark Rundt" and Rasmussen left durring the stage race in
order to ride a crit and Classica San Sebastain.

Worre was, while on vacation, asked if Rasmussen had any warnings and
if he had been excluded from the danish national team by a reporter
from DR (National non-commercial TV station). Worre answard the
questions.
Incidently it was also a DR reporter who found the Cassani story, DR
has a long reputation for exposing doping in danish cycling and
exposed systematic use of dpoing by Gewis Ballan back in 1997 and has
prduced features regarding the Ferrara institute and other
sportdoctors involved in amateur and pro cycling.

However knowning danish cycling it's unlikely that DCU planned to
publicice Rasmussens exclusion durring the TDF, or even that they
waited until he wore the Yellow jearsy. Denmark isn't excatly a banana
republic, in fact its proberbly the most law-abiding country in all of
Europe. Finally no one in danish cycling expected Rasmussen to wear the
Yellow og go for the GC.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) http://blog.reippuert.dk

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com writes:


Jeff, this is the entire point - common sense is just a silly assumption on
your part. Perhaps you're right but the fact is that you're no Gypsy fortune
teller and there's no proof behind any of it. All of the what-ifs are really
screwing this sport up.

Here's the bottom line - you TEST people for drugs. If they're positive you
punish them. Otherwise you leave them alone.

My sentiments entirely
--
Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:53:52 -0400, jyh wrote:

In article _ycqi.3098$zJ4.2506@trndny03,
"Tony S." wrote:

And, since when is a rider presumed totally guilty after the "A"
sample tests positive? The system is built with some safeguards, and one of
those is that the "B" sample must also test positive for a rider to be found
guilty. This protocol is now completely irrelevant, as Cristian Moreni was
pulled after only his "A" sample tested positive.

Cristian Moreni admitted doping and did not request testing of the B
sample. The protocol was respected in this case.

What protocol was respected, the test result was leaked to the press before the
rider or team had been notified.

Ron

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:59:41 +0100, Simon Brooke wrote:

in message _ycqi.3098$zJ4.2506@trndny03, Tony S.
') wrote:

Why? The doping situation appears to be in a state of hysteria, perhaps
for good reason, but the publicity and instant reaction over any little
thing is not a good thing. Rumor was enough to yank Basso and Ullrich
last year (which happened to be a good thing), but I think that set a
very bad precedent. And, since when is a rider presumed totally guilty
after the "A" sample tests positive? The system is built with some
safeguards, and one of those is that the "B" sample must also test
positive for a rider to be found guilty. This protocol is now completely
irrelevant, as Cristian Moreni was pulled after only his "A" sample
tested positive.

Not irrelevant. Moreni admitted guilt and did not ask for his B sample to
be tested. But Vino denies guilt and has asked for a B sample test.

This isn't simple. If Vino had been allowed to continue to race, it would
have affected tactics for everyone else. But it's tough on Kloeden
(assuming he wasn't also involved). And it very is tough in Vino if that
was a false positive.

Excluding a whole team because of one rider's doping seems harsh to me, but
pragmatically it also seems more likely to be effective than anything
else. It means the riders on a team are motivated to police one another,
and omerta should die.

So why didn't that apply to T-Mobile?

They had a positive result on the team, but unlike Astana or Cofidis were not
given the boot.

Ron