<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
On 16-Jul-2004, "B. Lafferty" <[email hidden]> wrote:
Ah, but you noted the TDF was a Farce because of the pall of suspicion
that
Quoted message said:LA was under and ....
Wrong. This is exactly what I wrote in labeling the Tour the Tour de Farce:
Where was the UCI on the first rest day when two riders under investigation
were thrown off the Tour?? Given all the drug revelations and unanswered
questions regarding the defending Tour "champion" of the past month and now
this, the Tour de France has lost all credibility as a sporting event and is
truly the Tour de Farce.
Quoted message said:The problem is that the suspicion presently lacks
credibility; if he came under official suspicion and was being seriously
investigated (as they found controlled substances in his possession or
other
Quoted message said:strong physical evidence) that I would conclude that his participating in
TDF is evidence it was a Farce. But until such time that the accusations
rise above the current level of drivel, his participation is not evidence
it
Quoted message said:is a farce.
Statements from his former soigneur of the nature that O'Reilly has made,
are far more credible on first blush than you are willing to recognize or
admit.
Quoted message said:Now as I understand it, LeBlanc tried to through them out but
UCI stepped in and said no. It was my understanding that a third
governing
Quoted message said:body would make the final decision not LeBlanc. If they decide against
him,
Quoted message said:he has no control. Does that make TDF a farce? I think not.
Not quite the full scenario.
LeBlanc had his rule on non-participation approved by the UCI prior to the
start of the Tour. That rule was used to bar Millar (who subsequently
confessed to EPO use while under judicial investigation) and DiLuca who is
under investigation but has not been found guilty, has not tested positive
and proclaims his innocence. To additional riders under investigation have
been thrown off the Tour. Two who are still under investigation have been
allowed, by the UCI to remain. ASO has had it's appeal to the CCP denied by
it's president Vittoro Adorni. This, IMO, makes for a farce that could
result in riders like DiLuca suing the UCI and ASO for damages. BTW,
LeBlanc has some economic control as they have threatened to pull out of the
UCI's (Verbruggen's) Pro Tour. Time will tell who caves in. Meanwhile,
it's unfair and unequal as to treatment of the riders this impacts
negatively on the sporting aspect of the Topur.
Quoted message said:
As to Riis, while I have heard claims that his crit tested at 60%, I have
not heard that that was from an official source and if not then it is an
unsubstantiated rumor. If it was an official medical confirmed test (and
not simply rumor), than the only reasonable explanation is that he was
suffering from some serious illness or was using EPO (the more likely
explanation). If on the other hand you and others are simply operating on
an unsubstantiated rumor, then it is Mr. Maybe He Tested 60% But We Are
Going to Damn Him without Any Evidence Anyway Riss.
It has been widly reported in the cycling press that the pro riders' nick
name for Barn was Mr.60%. That's not a made up tag from the press corps.
And Pantani, during the same era, had a similar hematocrit when hospitalized
when his leg was shattered by a car during a race. Pantani never tested
positive for EPO. They're all clean as a whistle. (sarcasm on)
Quoted message said:
Didn't Ivan Basso win the best young rider a couple of years back? Geez,
do
Quoted message said:you think that Aggazi, Clemens, Nolan Ryan and any number of older
athletes
Quoted message said:that had surges at the end of their career were all using.
That's the first I've hear that Andre, Clemmens and Ryan were cyclists. You
see the illogic of your analogy, right?
Quoted message said:Are you
suggesting that all great performance of older athletes are do to
cheating?
I've never said that only older athletes cheat or are more prone to
cheating. The doping problems that have been uncovered amongst U-23 and
amateur riders in Italy, as but one example, indicate the opposite.
Quoted message said:A more reasonable explanation is that Riis is a gifted coach who knows how
to get the most out of his rider.
It's those Outward Bound style bonding sessions in January that make the
difference. (sarcasm on)
Quoted message said:So are you so illogical to now suggest
that Hamilton was using last year and look when he stopped he lost time?
Ullrich was clearly juicing, but thought better of it. Heras must have
been
Quoted message said:using on Postal but so the light and quite using this year. Based on your
illogic logic that is the best explanation for the performances.
The mounting evidence of drug use in cycling causes the shadow of suspicion
to fall over all riders in the peloton. Sad, but now undeniably true. But
do consider that riders often have a bad day, particularly the first day of
significant climbing.
If you
Quoted message said:insist in going down that road, you have to carry it to its logical
conclusion: if you perform well you are using, if you suffered you are
clean. Physiology does not work that neatly.
That's not the logical conclusion. If you perform well, you will be
suspect. Ask David Millar.
The reality is some riders
Quoted message said:who use will actually not make the time limit and some riders who do not
juice will actually win.
And some who don't probably will. That's all beside the point.
Quoted message said:
Maybe you should not write more clearly.
I think I write quite clearly. Try reading for comprehension and thinking
critically.
