Bravo [censored] Pound

Velo Reaper said:

Sounds like he let it all hang out in an op-ed piece bashing Floyd and
USADA. While many won't like the message, messenger or delivery, he's
right. He's speaking the cold hard truth about the current state of
affairs in cycling which he likens to "excrement".

Sing it brother.

Yep...nothing like doing everything you can to maintain the
impartiality of the process.

Excellent job.

"Velo Reaper" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Sounds like he let it all hang out in an op-ed piece bashing Floyd and
USADA. While many won't like the message, messenger or delivery, he's
right. He's speaking the cold hard truth about the current state of
affairs in cycling which he likens to "excrement".

Sing it brother.

Using [censored], Pound and Excrement together does not sound good.

"Tom_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Velo Reaper said:

Sounds like he let it all hang out in an op-ed piece bashing Floyd and
USADA. While many won't like the message, messenger or delivery, he's
right. He's speaking the cold hard truth about the current state of
affairs in cycling which he likens to "excrement".

Sing it brother.

Yep...nothing like doing everything you can to maintain the
impartiality of the process.

AFIK, Pound does not sit as a CAS arbitrator. I have to think his IOC
supporters have ok'ed his public polemics as part of his official functions.

And he's right about cycling having become like excrement fit to be flushed.

Quoted message said:

Excellent job.

B. Lafferty said:

"Tom_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Velo Reaper said:

Sounds like he let it all hang out in an op-ed piece bashing Floyd and
USADA. While many won't like the message, messenger or delivery, he's
right. He's speaking the cold hard truth about the current state of
affairs in cycling which he likens to "excrement".

Sing it brother.

Yep...nothing like doing everything you can to maintain the
impartiality of the process.

AFIK, Pound does not sit as a CAS arbitrator. I have to think his IOC
supporters have ok'ed his public polemics as part of his official functions.

And he's right about cycling having become like excrement fit to be flushed.

Quoted message said:

Excellent job.

Considering how many storms Pound has weathered over the past 6 years,
I'd say it is a fair bet that the IOC must have given him quite a bit
of free-reign to do and say what he wants. They must have quite a bit
of faith in him if they can ignore the NHL, Lance Armstrong, numerous
other sports organizations, etc.

Pound wins. He gets what he wants. Unfortunately, we're left with a
doping penalty process that no one but he respects.

B. Lafferty said:

AFIK, Pound does not sit as a CAS arbitrator. I have to think his IOC
supporters have ok'ed his public polemics as part of his official functions.

And he's right about cycling having become like excrement fit to be flushed.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Excellent job.

So is WADA going to be given power to arrest athletes and drag them
into these interrogations, Brian?

The "excrement" is the testing protocols that can't catch dopers.

But, you could wind up with the white socks, black shorts, and
sponsorless (national?) teams if Pound and his ilk can stir up enough
[censored]. And, just like amateur athletics everywhere, people will continue
do anything to win, even for a $20 plastic trophy. --D-y

Velo Reaper said:

Quoted message said:

Sing it brother.

coldbeer! said:

Using [censored], Pound and Excrement together does not sound good.

Sounds like one of those 'pick the one that doesn't match' questions.

Velo Reaper said:

Sounds like he let it all hang out in an op-ed piece bashing Floyd and
USADA. While many won't like the message, messenger or delivery, he's
right. He's speaking the cold hard truth about the current state of
affairs in cycling which he likens to "excrement".

Sing it brother.

What op-ed piece (exactly) did Pound let it all hang out in? URL
please.

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Velo Reaper said:

Sounds like he let it all hang out in an op-ed piece bashing Floyd and
USADA. While many won't like the message, messenger or delivery, he's
right. He's speaking the cold hard truth about the current state of
affairs in cycling which he likens to "excrement".

Sing it brother.

Because he is not close to busting a significant fraction
of these alleged dopers, I think [censored] Pound is
incompetent. Until he has cleaned up the peloton he can
put a sock in his pie hole.

--
Michael Press

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Donald Munro said:

Velo Reaper said:

Quoted message said:

Sing it brother.

coldbeer! said:

Using [censored], Pound and Excrement together does not sound good.

Sounds like one of those 'pick the one that doesn't match' questions.

[censored] is five pounds of excrement in a four pound bag.

--
Michael Press

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

"Tom_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Velo Reaper wrote:
> Sounds like he let it all hang out in an op-ed piece bashing Floyd and
> USADA. While many won't like the message, messenger or delivery, he's
> right. He's speaking the cold hard truth about the current state of
> affairs in cycling which he likens to "excrement".
>
> Sing it brother.
Yep...nothing like doing everything you can to maintain the
impartiality of the process.

AFIK, Pound does not sit as a CAS arbitrator. I have to think his IOC
supporters have ok'ed his public polemics as part of his official functions.

And he's right about cycling having become like excrement fit to be flushed.

Quoted message said:

Excellent job.

Considering how many storms Pound has weathered over the past 6 years,
I'd say it is a fair bet that the IOC must have given him quite a bit
of free-reign to do and say what he wants. They must have quite a bit
of faith in him if they can ignore the NHL, Lance Armstrong, numerous
other sports organizations, etc.

Pound wins. He gets what he wants. Unfortunately, we're left with a
doping penalty process that no one but he respects.

He's playing a role which the IOC needs. Imagine professional (olympic)
sports without a WADA which constantly plays the hardliner against doping.
2 times a year trainers, teams, athletes get busted by government
organizations. For the public professional sports as a whole (as opposed
to only, say, cycling) becomes synonymous with an organized criminal
underground occupied with producing, distributing and consuming illegal
substances.
All the actions of Pound, including the finger pointing against cycling,
fit perfectly to a strategy of damage control from the IOC. Being unable
to really solve the problem of doping endangering its position, they
have created a scenario where they at least can distance themselves from
doping as far as possible.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

AFIK, Pound does not sit as a CAS arbitrator. I have to think his IOC
supporters have ok'ed his public polemics as part of his official
functions.

And he's right about cycling having become like excrement fit to be
flushed.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Excellent job.

So is WADA going to be given power to arrest athletes and drag them
into these interrogations, Brian?

That is unlikely. However, national governments are stakeholders in WADA.
Closer cooperation between national police forces and WADA is a real and
openly discussed possibility.

Quoted message said:

The "excrement" is the testing protocols that can't catch dopers.

You're entitled to your opinion. We'll just have to disagree.

Quoted message said:

But, you could wind up with the white socks, black shorts, and
sponsorless (national?) teams if Pound and his ilk can stir up enough
[censored]. And, just like amateur athletics everywhere, people will continue
do anything to win, even for a $20 plastic trophy. --D-y

That wouldn't be all that bad. It was fun to race in the 1970s. And it's
difficult to pay for preparation as it exists today without the money in
professional sports. BTW, I don't think I've ever seen a plastic trophy at
a bicycle race that cost a much as $20.

"Ernst Noch" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

B. Lafferty said:

"Tom_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Velo Reaper wrote:
>> Sounds like he let it all hang out in an op-ed piece bashing Floyd and
>> USADA. While many won't like the message, messenger or delivery, he's
>> right. He's speaking the cold hard truth about the current state of
>> affairs in cycling which he likens to "excrement".
>>
>> Sing it brother.
> Yep...nothing like doing everything you can to maintain the
> impartiality of the process.
AFIK, Pound does not sit as a CAS arbitrator. I have to think his IOC
supporters have ok'ed his public polemics as part of his official
functions.

And he's right about cycling having become like excrement fit to be
flushed.

> Excellent job.
>

Considering how many storms Pound has weathered over the past 6 years,
I'd say it is a fair bet that the IOC must have given him quite a bit
of free-reign to do and say what he wants. They must have quite a bit
of faith in him if they can ignore the NHL, Lance Armstrong, numerous
other sports organizations, etc.

Pound wins. He gets what he wants. Unfortunately, we're left with a
doping penalty process that no one but he respects.

He's playing a role which the IOC needs. Imagine professional (olympic)
sports without a WADA which constantly plays the hardliner against doping.
2 times a year trainers, teams, athletes get busted by government
organizations. For the public professional sports as a whole (as opposed
to only, say, cycling) becomes synonymous with an organized criminal
underground occupied with producing, distributing and consuming illegal
substances.
All the actions of Pound, including the finger pointing against cycling,
fit perfectly to a strategy of damage control from the IOC. Being unable
to really solve the problem of doping endangering its position, they have
created a scenario where they at least can distance themselves from doping
as far as possible.

He is playing the role the IOC (or at least some of its leaders) think they
need. But those anti-doping hunters should try to be a little more lucid,
considering what's happening with cyclism, Cyclism is possibly the main
target for the anti-doping politics, with disastrous results. A necessary
condition for such a politics to be effective is that the risk of being
caught should be much higher than the possibility of taking advantage of it.
Of course that's not the case. I estimate that the percentage of
participants to the Tour de France who had used banned substances during or
just before the Tour and have been caught, about 1 % (although I might a bit
too optimistic). The only effective way to catch the so-called "dopers" are
apparently house searches, police-raids, etc. Quite possible that those
measures are becoming more frequent, because - as Leblanc noted in a recent
interview - providing of illicit products is more and more business of
organized crime - which of course is one an the inevitable results of the
anti-doping policies (have they never heard of the Prohibition?). And that
is not the only disastrous consequence. Another is that cycling seems to be
dominated by the theme doping. A racer cannot perform an outstanding feat
anymore without immediately coming under suspicion. An ex-pro told me not so
long ago - he is in his eighties - "Previously people came to see me to ask
about Coppi, Bartali or Bobet. Nowadays they only seem to be interested in
what kind of doping we were taking." Before the Festina scandal in 1998 the
UCI followed the only possible line. They didn't harbour the illusion that
doping could be eradicated, so they tolerated it up to a certain point.
Unfortunately, Verbruggen's successor seems to be a diehard. I can only hope
he is just pretending. Of course, compared to the IOC, the WADA, etc., the
UCI is almost powerless and unable to turn the tide. But they should at
least try to find a realistic solution to the problem. Joining the fanatics
and inciting the police to keep riders under surveillance is not part of it.
Neither is expelling riders to participate to the Tour, because they are
vaguely suspected.

Benjo

Quoted message said:

Velo Reaper said:

Sounds like he let it all hang out in an op-ed piece bashing Floyd and
USADA. While many won't like the message, messenger or delivery, he's
right. He's speaking the cold hard truth about the current state of
affairs in cycling which he likens to "excrement".

Sing it brother.

What op-ed piece (exactly) did Pound let it all hang out in? URL
please.

Poundage at:
<http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/opinion/story.html?id=c6740180-1345-4c77-8f32-1a2e3aa117ea>

Discussed in
<http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/aug06/aug14news3>

Pound's hypothetical that USADA could let Gatlin and Landis off
on some crazy conspiracy theory could be taken as purely a
hypothetical. But you have to wonder why he chose that hypothetical.
Maybe he's drunk as a skunk and is having a Mel Gibson moment
of saying what he _really_ thinks. If I were a USADA official I would
be pretty [censored] that [censored] Pound was hypothesizing about my
integrity and seemingly trying to pre-emptively influence my
treatment of a case. But of course, that attitude may be why I
personally am not qualified to be a dope cop.

This is [censored] Pound's "I had to destroy the village to save it"
moment.

B. Lafferty said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

But, you could wind up with the white socks, black shorts, and
sponsorless (national?) teams if Pound and his ilk can stir up enough
[censored]. And, just like amateur athletics everywhere, people will continue
do anything to win, even for a $20 plastic trophy. --D-y

That wouldn't be all that bad. It was fun to race in the 1970s. And it's
difficult to pay for preparation as it exists today without the money in
professional sports. BTW, I don't think I've ever seen a plastic trophy at
a bicycle race that cost a much as $20.

I think dustoyevsky fails to realize that what we all have right now is
not all that fantastic. I've seen my chosen sport go from pure
obscurity to having our TDF champion's name known by everyone in
America. When I tell people that I'm a participant in the sport, people
no longer ask "Do you really ride a bike 100 miles?", but rather
"What's all this stuff about drugs?".

I'd actually welcome the way it was 25 years ago. We all knew the East
Germans and Russians were dopers, and it was a special victory on the
days that we did beat them. It felt good. We existed just fine with
them. We looked up to their abailities too. But we knew they were
doing it with help.

Since reaching the million dollar salary ranks is so elusive to 99.9%
of cyclists, I do not feel obligated to support a system that enables
this for just a few guys. If big-dollar sponsorship started to go away
because the riders are all getting popped, then blame the dopers, not
us. I'll feel no real loss. I'd certainly miss the OLN coverage, but
I'd be satisfied with reading about it (like we used to do back in the
day).

dustoyevsky wants to employ the "sweep it under the rug" strategy that
the UCI had in the early 90's. Bust a few idiots every so often and
live life as if the sport was clean, all in the name of bigger
sponsorship dollars for the pro team ownership interests that control
the UCI.

Ironically, the UCI is acting with the same ultimate interest that
motivated them before, but instead of sponsorship acquisition, the goal
is now preservation. They weren't previously more aggressive because
if they busted too many too quickly, they risked a mass sponsor exodus.
I think they see another huge scandal as being a total death nail. It
appears as if they wish to punt and see what happens. It's going to
get very ugly for the dopers, Im afraid. It's be an interesting ride
the next 2-4 years.

B. Lafferty wrote:

(I asked):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So is WADA going to be given power to arrest athletes and drag them
into these interrogations, Brian?

That is unlikely. However, national governments are stakeholders in WADA.
Closer cooperation between national police forces and WADA is a real and
openly discussed possibility.

Like having private corporations running the red light camera scam?

Just because it's "openly discussed"...

So you're in favor of [censored] Pound being able to sic the pigs onto
whomever stands up to him? Because that's what is next.

Tell me he doesn't come off as being just a teensy-bit power mad?
("Marion Jones better watch her mouth or I'll take all her medals
away!"😉

An old question: When you are accused, which of your protections are
*you* willing to give up? Cool with you if you are penalized ("can't
ride the Tour"😉 or even jailed if your name, or code for what might be
your name, appears on some list allegedly found by a WADA operative who
drops the dime on you-- or has the power to force you into an
interrogation room?

(I posted):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The "excrement" is the testing protocols that can't catch dopers.

(response):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You're entitled to your opinion. We'll just have to disagree.

The [censored] protocols *create* the situation where a rider can never be
sure the guy next to him isn't doping. That's the foundation, right
there. I think you understand that but won't admit doping in sports to
be a problem without a solution (absent perfect testing).

Absent perfection, where is the humility? Not with WADA and Pound,
that's for sure.

(I wrote):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But, you could wind up with the white socks, black shorts, and
sponsorless (national?) teams if Pound and his ilk can stir up enough
[censored]. And, just like amateur athletics everywhere, people will continue
do anything to win, even for a $20 plastic trophy.

(response):

Quoted message said:

That wouldn't be all that bad. It was fun to race in the 1970s. And it's
difficult to pay for preparation as it exists today without the money in
professional sports. BTW, I don't think I've ever seen a plastic trophy at
a bicycle race that cost a much as $20.

Yup, destroy the sport while (as you noted earlier, approx.) WADA
drinks champagne.
The War on People continues.

BTW, I could show you a trophy that might have cost that $20 and more,
even in the early 80's <g>. --D-y

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

If big-dollar sponsorship started to go away
because the riders are all getting popped, then blame the dopers, not
us. I'll feel no real loss. I'd certainly miss the OLN coverage, but
I'd be satisfied with reading about it (like we used to do back in the
day).

It would be better given the World Wide Web. I read the
live updates before watching TV coverage; as reading them
is dramatic for me.

--
Michael Press

Quoted message said:

Yup, destroy the sport while (as you noted earlier, approx.) WADA
drinks champagne.
The War on People continues.

Ditto... From reading the WADA reports on the Tour, IMHO it sounds like
a
bunch of egotistical Dr.'s got a free trip to watch the Tour, complete
with pit passes. "Who cares what happens to the sport, at least we
got to party in France on someone elses dime".

It seems that people forget these guys have families and mortgages just
like everyone else. I would even go so far as to say that most Dr's
and
scientist are more corrupt and unethical than your average blue-collar
guy.

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted post said:

Quoted message said:

Velo Reaper said:

Sounds like he let it all hang out in an op-ed piece bashing Floyd and
USADA. While many won't like the message, messenger or delivery, he's
right. He's speaking the cold hard truth about the current state of
affairs in cycling which he likens to "excrement".

Sing it brother.

What op-ed piece (exactly) did Pound let it all hang out in? URL
please.

Poundage at:
<http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/opinion/story.html?id=c6740180-1345-4c77-8f32-1a2e3aa117ea>

Discussed in
<http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/aug06/aug14news3>

Pound's hypothetical that USADA could let Gatlin and Landis off
on some crazy conspiracy theory could be taken as purely a
hypothetical. But you have to wonder why he chose that hypothetical.
Maybe he's drunk as a skunk and is having a Mel Gibson moment
of saying what he _really_ thinks. If I were a USADA official I would
be pretty [censored] that [censored] Pound was hypothesizing about my
integrity and seemingly trying to pre-emptively influence my
treatment of a case. But of course, that attitude may be why I
personally am not qualified to be a dope cop.

This is [censored] Pound's "I had to destroy the village to save it"
moment.

Again speaking hypothetically, dismissing the charges
against Landis will take up the gauntlet, poke [censored] Pound
in the eye, and give Landis some kind of career in the
USA.

Until the governing bodies leave off selective
enforcement, and institute a consistent, fine mesh net for
identifying doping, their enforcement programs are worse
than useless. It looks like racers, their teams, and
physicians know how to evade showing positive results for
banned substances. WADA might as well publish their test
methods and the literature that forms their basis, since
they will not be telling the teams anything the teams do
not know. At least then they will give some evidence of
probity.

--
Michael Press

In article <[email hidden]>,

Michael Press said:

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Donald Munro said:

Velo Reaper said:

> Sing it brother.

coldbeer! said:

Using [censored], Pound and Excrement together does not sound good.

Sounds like one of those 'pick the one that doesn't match' questions.

[censored] is five pounds of excrement in a four pound bag.

A.K.A. a blivet. Though that's usually referring to "ten pounds of [censored] in a five
pound sack."

--
tanx,
Howard

Never take a tenant with a monkey.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?