Jan juicin' since 2003

Same information,different day!

I am shocked!
DER KAISER? DER JAN?

Lets see, ou of shape every year, 10 kilos ovrweight each April, then magically gets better by the TdF each year, and often gets better after the first mountain stages, read after rest/transfusion day.
Suddenly much closer to Lance since 2003.

Yep all makes perfect sense to me.
Funny, after all the shoutin about Lance, turns out the real doper was Jan.
Sad.

bobke said:

Funny, after all the shoutin about Lance, turns out the real doper was Jan.
Sad.

I know. You'd think he'd have the good sense, like Lance, not to get caught. Shameful.

Nothing can be decided until Martin Jackson gives his evidence.Until then Jan is entitled to the presumption of innocence.

well he won the '97 Tour so i have to think he was using before '03.

SaintAndrew said:

well he won the '97 Tour so i have to think he was using before '03.

So by that logic Armstrong has been doping since 1999. Please save me the rebutal.
Proof of all or none.
Get off the bull [censored] train!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I hate damn bull [censored] slingers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I accept all as plausibly clean, at least until charged!
A good bunch of you guy have a heavy prejudice toward one side or another.
Get past your your momma stopping you from breast feeding it's a" rejection complex" , grow up.
Life will go on and you someday will have sex with real women,not real pretty women but maybe they will have nice personalities.

jhuskey said:

So by that logic Armstrong has been doping since 1999,

Actually he started in 1995. We have his teammates testimony on that.

No one has won the Tour without doping since at least 1990.

Bro Deal said:

No one has won the Tour without doping since at least 1990.

Indurain was so superior that he didn't neet EPO to destroy the field.

sopas said:

Indurain was so superior that he didn't neet EPO to destroy the field.

Uh, huh. I am sure Dr. Conconi had nothing to do with it.

Bro Deal said:

Actually he started in 1995. We have his teammates testimony on that.

No one has won the Tour without doping since at least 1990.

What about the greg strock case??? 4 junior riders got daily injections of corticoids.....including a certain armstrong!!!

3 got sick, one (armstrong) beat cancer and the rest is history....

That was allready in 1990......

velonews.com79.0.htmlOpen ↗

cbsnews.commain284958.shtmlOpen ↗

velonews.com9763.0.htmlOpen ↗

SaintAndrew said:

well he won the '97 Tour so i have to think he was using before '03.

Yes, he was the last rider to win the TdF pre-festina.
Case closed.

Another media tsunami, i spoke with the pressofficer (Fred Apostel) of the state prosecution in Bonn myself yesterday. They asked for more information of the Spanish authorities to verify that the person behind the codename is really Jan....

helmutRoole2 said:

German prosecutors charge Ullrich has doped since 2003
By Agence France Presse
This report filed September 8, 2006

German prosecutors charged Friday that former Tour de France winner Jan Ullrich has been taking banned substances since 2003.

Ullrich was sacked by his T-Mobile team and kicked off the Tour this year after being implicated in a doping probe launched in Spain.

In July, German officials took up the investigation, which linked Ullrich to tainted Spanish doctor Eufemiano Fuentes, and now they seem convinced that Ullrich, who continues to protest his innocence, is guilty.

"Since 2003 unauthorized products were bought by Ullrich," said a spokesperson for Bonn prosecutors. "These are not conclusions we have come to ourselves: they are supported by reports from the Spanish police in response to our inquiries into the investigation. We requested collaboration from the Spanish police to verify these findings."

Bonn prosecutors are also investigating Ullrich's former teammate Oscar Sevilla and sporting director Rudy Pevenage, both of whom were also sacked by T-Mobile and kicked off the Tour after implication in the Operacion Puerto probe.

velonews.com10834.0.htmlOpen ↗

Really no big surprise. Probably using before 03 as well.

azdroptop said:

Really no big surprise. Probably using before 03 as well.

Of course. But he's not Lance Armstrong. So it's excusable and no one cares.

meehs said:

Of course. But he's not Lance Armstrong. So it's excusable and no one cares.

Exactly. Funny how that works on here.

azdroptop said:

Exactly. Funny how that works on here.

Diference:

here in the forum someone say that LA used PED. Some how the messages we see in his defence apear allways the same old excuses.
-never failed a dopping test.
-he had cancer
-he trained hard so he didn´t had to use PED
-the french are against him.

Someone say that JU used PED. Do you hear someone saying he didn´t used?

This is funny...

acpinto said:

Diference:

here in the forum someone say that LA used PED. Some how the messages we see in his defence apear allways the same old excuses.
-never failed a dopping test.
-he had cancer
-he trained hard so he didn´t had to use PED
-the french are against him.

Someone say that JU used PED. Do you hear someone saying he didn´t used?

This is funny...

Good call.

acpinto said:

Diference:

here in the forum someone say that LA used PED. Some how the messages we see in his defence apear allways the same old excuses.
-never failed a dopping test.
-he had cancer
-he trained hard so he didn´t had to use PED
-the french are against him.

Someone say that JU used PED. Do you hear someone saying he didn´t used?

This is funny...

The difference is that Armstrong's explanation for his "improvement" in results (pre 1996 compared to post -1996) was always disputed.

As early as March 1999, journalists (rightly) were raising questions about Armstrong's "improvement".
Former riders, former team mates, and eventually the tests showed that Armstrong doped.
Writing his books and stating that he never, ever took PED's didn't help Armstrong either.

If he had kept his mouth shut - he might have managed to get away with it.

Time to move the subject on, folks.

limerickman said:

The difference is that Armstrong's explanation for his "improvement" in results (pre 1996 compared to post -1996) was always disputed.

As early as March 1999, journalists (rightly) were raising questions about Armstrong's "improvement".
Former riders, former team mates, and eventually the tests showed that Armstrong doped.
Writing his books and stating that he never, ever took PED's didn't help Armstrong either.

If he had kept his mouth shut - he might have managed to get away with it.

Time to move the subject on, folks.

Yep. And he didn't get away with it. If it's all down to dope, we now know the reason for both LA's and JU's success in the sport.