Pereiro - laughable story

wicklow200 said:

First of all that sentence "possible winner of the 2006 Tour". Ive heard of riders being marked down as possible future tour winners, but this.... What a sport!

And second, look how Pereiro, just like many another rider, including many a doper no doubt, can become moral authorities at the drop of a hat: "And if so [disqualification from the Tour], I believe that would be a sufficient punishment ..." Yes, sure, Oscar Pereiro knows better than the authorities. And he goes for leniency with Landis because if/when he himself fails a drugs test he'd expect the guys to circle the wagons for him too.

I wouldn't be so harsh. Firstly Landis tested positive, and if it is concluded that he cheated at the Tour, he will be disqualified. So Pereiro is indeed the 'possible' winner, pending the Landis investigation.

Secondly I see Pereiro as a real dog fighter, and I've enjoyed his aggressive riding style, particularly in the '05 Tour, he really livened it up with his constant attacks. I think he is good for the sport. He was given an opportunity with his 30min break away at this years Tour and with the sniff of yellow he got, he jumped on it. He turned himself inside out and rode with new wings, his final time trail was world class, from a rider not known for his tt ability. The opportunity to take the title of which every cyclist dreams about pushed him to new limits. I personally thought it was great how he hanged in there against the odds.

Finally Pereiro did ride with Landis at Phonak and they were / are supposedly good friends. It could be that Pereiro's 'punishment' is biased due to that friendship, rather than because he is a doper.

Well the rumour mill says: Oscar is Urco and Urco is number 9 of the Fuentes list. Ofcourse, as with most other Puerto names, it's all specultation but the theory comes from here:

Urco is mythological the dog of Pontevedra during the Spanish carnival and Pontevedera is the birthplace of Pereiro. I am still working on the book and getting more and more bits and parts.

cyclingheroes said:

Urco is mythological the dog of Pontevedra during the Spanish carnival and Pontevedera is the birthplace of Pereiro. I am still working on the book and getting more and more bits and parts.

Urco is an all black immortal dog!

DiabloScott said:

Urco is an all black immortal dog!

But.. I did not said I believe this is true, I said the rumour mill...

WADA should purchase "Crufts Guide to Cannine Pedigrees" - Basso's dog, Perreiro's alleged name after a dog, Tugboat R.I.P, drug "mule" chimera dog.......

It's a dogs life!

Landis failed a drug test. Pereiro didn't. Unless Landis can prove it was in error, or one of Pereiro's samples from the Tour suddenly turn positive, Pereiro is your 2006 TdF champ. End of story, and good on him if he's crowned as such.

Leafer said:

Landis failed a drug test. Pereiro didn't. Unless Landis can prove it was in error, or one of Pereiro's samples from the Tour suddenly turn positive, Pereiro is your 2006 TdF champ. End of story, and good on him if he's crowned as such.

Yes but I was trying to make a point about the the absurdity of professsional cycling right now - there is hardly another sport in existence that cannot name the winner of its blue riband event , 6 months after the fact.

Athletics comes a close second I guess.

wicklow200 said:

Yes but I was trying to make a point about the the absurdity of professsional cycling right now - there is hardly another sport in existence that cannot name the winner of its blue riband event , 6 months after the fact.

I couldn't agree more. It's to the point now where it's not only about winnning, it's about winning without getting caught for using whatever PEDs the athlete is using.

I'm not saying Landis doesn't deserve to be stripped of the win. But to strip Landis and hand it to Pereiro? And then exepct fans to embrace Pereiro as the TdF champ? We're to believe that Pereiro was clean because he didn't get caught and he's therefore more deserving? BWAAAAHAHAHAHA! Gimme a break! 🙄

Tha whole thing is a joke!

I hear ya, Meehs.

I'd love to know why Landis did what he did.
I was always neutral in terms of Landis and his results.
He was a strong rider throughout - and I had the preception that he was an ethical type of guy.
I wonder why he felt compelled to take testosterone?
maybe he felt that it was an insurance policy given that he was in contention?

Leafer said:

Landis failed a drug test. Pereiro didn't. Unless Landis can prove it was in error, or one of Pereiro's samples from the Tour suddenly turn positive, Pereiro is your 2006 TdF champ. End of story, and good on him if he's crowned as such.

Yes but if Oscar is found to be linked to OP he should at least (along with Valverde) suffer as much as Basso and Jan has to date.

Interesting how Spaniards linked to the OP documents have more or less been let off without sanction (if they raced for Spanish teams). Hmm .....

There you go again Lim, talking with such certainty verging on omniscience ...

Serafino said:

There you go again Lim, talking with such certainty verging on omniscience ...

.........err, wha?

limerickman said:

.........err, wha?

I mean their is no room for "doubt", "error", etc., in your convictions as to who doped, when and how. Its almost as it you were in the room holding the needle 🙂

I prefer to take the Socratic approach 😄

Serafino said:

I mean their is no room for "doubt", "error", etc., in your convictions as to who doped, when and how. Its almost as it you were in the room holding the needle 🙂

I prefer to take the Socratic approach 😄

I don't see where 4:1 ratio could leave any possible doubt for cheating.

limerickman said:

I hear ya, Meehs.

I'd love to know why Landis did what he did.
I was always neutral in terms of Landis and his results.
He was a strong rider throughout - and I had the preception that he was an ethical type of guy.
I wonder why he felt compelled to take testosterone?
maybe he felt that it was an insurance policy given that he was in contention?

I know what you mean. But I imagine that (unfortunately) it's all but impossible for a professional cyclist to resist the temptation to dope once they reach Landis's (Ullrich's, Basso's, Hamilton's, et al) level. Especially when they've got people telling them if you "prepare" properly and don't let the other guys gain an advantage on you in their "preparations", you can win the TdF. With the big victories comes the big money, etc... It's sad but true I'm afraid. Until some huge fundamental changes are made in the sport and the governing of the sport, that's the way it's going to be. Of course this is just my opinion.

My guess is that Landis and his "team" just made a mistake in his usual preparations that led to him being caught. They probably gave him a little something to give him a bit of an extra boost because of his previous day's performance and forgot to give him something to even the ratio. It's all just specualtion but that's my guess.

limerickman said:

WADA should purchase "Crufts Guide to Cannine Pedigrees" - Basso's dog, Perreiro's alleged name after a dog, Tugboat R.I.P, drug "mule" chimera dog.......

It's a dogs life!

I think the best thing for the UCI to do at this point is not allow pro riders to have dogs. This would clear a lot of things up.

As for Landis and why he did what he did: Greed and shortsightedness. He'd be a much bigger hero if he came back in 07 and won the tour after cracking in 06, but you know he thought that race was his.

I believe the chances of there being one clean rider on the pro tour are remote. There are guys doping for a lot less than a tour win or to ride for a pro tour team.

helmutRoole2 said:

I think the best thing for the UCI to do at this point is not allow pro riders to have dogs. This would clear a lot of things up.

As for Landis and why he did what he did: Greed and shortsightedness. He'd be a much bigger hero if he came back in 07 and won the tour after cracking in 06, but you know he thought that race was his.

I believe the chances of there being one clean rider on the pro tour are remote. There are guys doping for a lot less than a tour win or to ride for a pro tour team.

Or maybe they could let the dogs ride instead of the riders... be interesting to see how they organize a pee break on Ventoux, no trees up towards the top. There's always a convenient photographer...

Remember that the two big guns were out in 2006, so FL had a unique opportunity. Reason enough to push the envelope. I'm still a bit puzzled over why the A and B samples varied so much in the analysis, but if I were a gambler, I'd say that FL didn't use a test patch, but he was doing something he shouldn't have been doing. Maybe a transfusion from blood taken during training.

I'm not saying Landis didn't dope, but I can not in my wildest imagination think that he took Test one day and it helped him win that stage. It makes no sense at all. I agree with Meeths that he didn't take something to cover up that he was using Test and or the lab made errors. How else could a positive test happen one day and then test normal the next? Testosterone is not cleared that quickly

azdroptop said:

I'm not saying Landis didn't dope, but I can not in my wildest imagination think that he took Test one day and it helped him win that stage. It makes no sense at all. I agree with Meeths that he didn't take something to cover up that he was using Test and or the lab made errors. How else could a positive test happen one day and then test normal the next? Testosterone is not cleared that quickly

Yeah, I used to think that too, but I guess test prop, which is a short ester of testosterone, can help in the short run. I'm not an expert on the chemistry, but part of what testosterone does is create an unequal stasis on the outside of the muscle fiber membrane so nutrients, oxygen and all that are pushed across much faster. It also does something with protein synthesis so you're not catabolic, so, yes some kinds of testosterone do help in the short haul.

Now, the real question is, does he have dog and if so, what's the dog's name?

azdroptop said:

I'm not saying Landis didn't dope, but I can not in my wildest imagination think that he took Test one day and it helped him win that stage. It makes no sense at all. I agree with Meeths that he didn't take something to cover up that he was using Test and or the lab made errors. How else could a positive test happen one day and then test normal the next? Testosterone is not cleared that quickly

I was surprised at first to hear that it was test that Landis had taken as well, it didn't seem to make sense, but now having heard the testimonies of Millar and Gaumont, and Manzano earlier, ie that test patches were used routinely to aid in recovery, it no longer seems so odd - a basic product in the doping cyclist's toolkit.

Manzano in VN: First are patches, called AndroGel, which are applied during a light massage usually during the evening mealtime. Manzano said the patches had to be used less than two hours to not risk going above the T/E ratio threshold and risking a positive doping test. Manzano also said clandestine suppositories are used as well as intravenous injections, called Rastandol, taking about 20 minutes to 1 hour before competition.

I'm not saying that this is what Landis was doing, or what caused his positive, btw, just that the use of testosterone and test patches appears to be fairly routine.