Industrialized Cyclist Notepad


VeloNews hails Di Luca defeat as good for cycling

This strikes me as hypocritical and simple-minded stuff from Neal Rogers, cheering Di Luca’s getting caught by young unknown riders who have yet to be caught in any doping dragnets.

Garmin is packed full of “riders with controversial pasts.” Let’s see if he has the same venom for them as they defend their Giro title.

While his move was bold, that Di Luca was unable to hold his attack on Tuesday is encouraging.

The day when the pro peloton is clear of suspicion will likely never materialize. However, the day when the peloton is clear of riders with controversial pasts may be only a few years away.

via Commentary: Why Battaglin’s Giro stage win matters.

Translation: Di Luca’s defeat helps us pretend that they’re not all still doping.



‘prior to 2008′

This is what those ‘amnesty’ deals will look like for pro riders:

Under the pact, Dutch riders and staffers have until April 1 to come clean on their respective pasts [but not completely clean, of course]. Riders or staffers who confess to doping practices prior to 2008 will be issued six-month bans and fined two months’ wages. More severe bans of up to four years would be imposed for those who don’t confess during the amnesty window, but are later exposed.

And if anybody confesses to doping after 2008, the entire world will explode. So don’t do that, riders.

This whole thing is completely ridiculous. Stick a fork in it.

via Velonews: Boogerd’s confession causes stir in Dutch teams.



Oh, I forgot about boxing

On Tuesday, Fuentes openly admitted his client list included other sports beyond cycling, naming athletics, tennis, soccer and even boxing.

On Wednesday, Fuentes offered to name all of his clients, saying that he remembered every codename as well as indicating he had a ledger locked away in a safe back on the Canary Islands.

When attorneys representing WADA and CONI both pressed Fuentes for more names, the judge hit the brakes.

There was no anti-doping law on the books during the May 2006 raids and Spanish courts have refused to widen the legal net to anything beyond questions of endangering public health, which could result in minor fines, suspended jail terms and the suspension of medical licenses for Fuentes and his sister.

That interpretation has infuriated many who view the Puerto case as nothing more than a farce.

via VeloNews: Operacion Puerto judge restricting case to health issue.

But at least that cat’s out of the bag, which must make some people extremely uncomfortable: Doping exists in all high-level sports when it provides an advantage. Doping is the hallmark of industrialized sports, where the pursuit of big money and self-preservation of careers by those in the front office is placed far above any sort of integrity, and the health of individual athletes doesn’t even register as anything other than a business concern.

EDIT: Of course I understand that individual athletes choose (more or less) to use these substances for their own selfish reasons. But these athletes are just trying to make childhood dreams come true. And the athletes are the only individuals to suffer consequences from doping. The industry hiding behind them, the UCI officials, team coaches, owners, managers, and sponsors never seem to face any real consequences for the doping that they also profit upon (other than the occasional out of court settlement to a pissed off rider). The worst dopers are wearing suits, not lycra.



What a bust

Lance, instead of going all righteous scorched earth on the corrupt UCI and the peloton weasels who all claim to have magically sworn off EPO at the same time, joined his former friends in trying to convince the world that cycling suddenly flipped a 180 in 2005-2006 and entered a fresh n’ clean era of high integrity racing. Matt Beaudin at VeloNews doesn’t get it either:

Lance Armstrong this week fessed up to doping during his seven Tour de France wins, but it’s the things he didn’t say, the things he may have lied about still, that may haunt him yet…..

It was reported in the run-up to the interview that Armstrong considered outing friends and giving up the Union Cycliste Internationale. He did no such thing, and offered little meaningful assistance to a sport that’s suffering from an image problem, in large part due to the culture over which he presided, and helped further with aggressive pursuit of anyone even hinting at talking.

Over nearly three hours and two evenings, the fallen Tour de France star said more in a few words (all yeses, admitting to doping, and doping in every Tour win) than he had in a decade, but he left many scratching their heads, particularly at the notion that his comeback in 2009, during which he finished third at the Tour de France, was ridden on bread and water when blood data said otherwise.

“The last time I crossed that line was 2005,” Armstrong told Winfrey. On night two of a two-part interview, Armstrong said that in conversations with his former wife, Kristin, she made him promise not to use performance enhancing drugs if he were to return to the peloton.

“She said to me, ‘you can do it, under one condition: That you never cross that line again.’ And I said, ‘you got a deal.’ And I never would have betrayed that with her,” he said. “It’s a serious — it was a serious ask, it was a serious commitment.”

That commitment, however, has been refuted by math. In the 2009 Tour, Armstrong’s samples showed fewer red blood cells over a three-week stage race than would normally occur, indicating he was injecting supplemental blood.

Scientists noted that Armstrong’s blood has a less than one a million chance of naturally appearing in such a fashion. Nearly 40 samples were taken over the course of Armstrong’s comeback, providing a baseline for a biological passport.

“The sport was very clean,” Armstrong told Winfrey, citing the very biological passport that ensnared him. “I didn’t expect to get third. I expected to win, like I always expected. And at the end, I said to myself, ‘I just got beat by two guys who were better.’”

If he’s lying, the question is why. …

via Velonews.com: Zip the lips: After hours of TV, too many Armstrong questions remain.



Bike racing is creepy

Not necessarily a positive activity in which to involve oneself.

Bike riding, however, is still the best.



Millar is concerned about Armstrong’s Oprah interview

And Vaughters, TD, Levi, etc. All very concerned. I would be too. What if LA blows the lid off this “we all decided to quit doping and race clean in 2006″ nonsense? Could be trouble in the tangled web.

“My biggest concern is that it will be completely stage-managed, that he will just be ‘given the ball,’ and that it will all be about his emotions rather than concentrating on exactly what he did wrong,” said Millar.

via Millar leery of ‘stage-managed’ Armstrong interview with Winfrey.

When reading about supposed new leafs turned it’s important to keep in mind some things: THE SAME PEOPLE



Lance Armstrong wants to race triathlons, Vaughters reaches seventh level of weaseldom

He’s one of those triathlon guys when it’s all said and done.

…In the end, no matter how much Tygart and Armstrong had fought each other, they still needed each other. Armstrong, 41, would like to resume competing in triathlons and running events that are sanctioned by organizations that follow the World Anti-Doping Code. Tygart wants to know how Armstrong so skillfully eluded testing positive for banned drugs for nearly a decade.

[...]

“I think it’s very valuable to them to know exactly how Lance avoided getting caught and how tests were evaded,” said Jonathan Vaughters, a former Armstrong teammate, a vocal antidoping proponent and a current co-owner of the Garmin-Sharp professional cycling team. “They need someone on the inside to tell them how it was done, and not just anyone on the inside, someone on the inside who was very influential. Someone like Lance.”

via What Would Lance Armstrong and Usada Gain With Confession? – NYTimes.com.

Bunk-owski. Tygart knows exactly how Armstrong dunnit, because the other guys who had also “eluded positive tests for nearly a decade” testified all about it. And those guys are on Vaughters’ team. He reaches the seventh level of weasel in his quote above.

(After 6-month suspensions those fellas will be back racing and cashing in on their doping by next season. But of course, they all decided at exactly the same time not to do it any more, and race totes clean now. ALL CLEAN NOW. Go home.)

When reading or listening to Vaughters it’s important to keep in mind some things: THE SAME PEOPLE




Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 82 other followers