With Rebellin down let's kick him too!

ilpirata said:

Republica released two videos from 2001 that shows Rebellin and his wife in a room with doctor Enrico Lazzaro, (guilty of doping in the Guard of Finance inquiry that led to a blitz at San Remo in the 2001 Giro d'Italia), receiving a delivery of supplements, all ok, but then requesting of him banned materials including epo and testosterone boosting preparations. These videos were not admitted as evidence at the time because of procedural violations, which were not elaborated upon.

Well, for me this is stinky. Not that I am a fan of Rebellin, or that I believe he is clean. But that Repubblica has in it's possession this type of evidence and releases it 8 years later as a friggin scoop bothers me. What kind of surveillance is being done on athletes? don't they have any rights at all. Perhaps this is a way to fix outcomes of events as well. Get incriminating evidence on every athlete and then they can be manipulated at a moments notice, or destroyed if it sells news.

Yes it's shocking. The guy only stole an Olympic medal and told the world he is clean. Now it appears he spent his entire life as a drug addict and dragging his wife into dingy dark hotels to buy his fix. Whilst he was injecting [censored] into his blood he was more than happy to cheat his fellow riders out of victories, money and rip the legs and smash the hearts of clean riders. Yes it's shocking releasing this video. Are you farking blind ? If the media released more stuff like this then maybe some of these junkie riders will think twice about cheating.

WBT you miss my point. Why was the video withheld for 8 yrs?

I am not blind to doping. What I don't like is that once Italian media have a hit on one, then they make meal out of him, and they think that no one will notice that their methods are unethical and hypocritical. They want to pretend that this is a clean sport and that there are clean riders, (you believe in it as well it seems) and make a serious example of anyone caught (so that it looks like they are for clean competition and a beautiful giro).

Why do they take indict Pantani in 2001 for a syringe that has traces of insulin, found in room rented by his team, the day after they have left the room. A room that they are not even sure he was in. They never do a DNA test on the syringe , and 8 months later or so they drop the case for lack of evidence. They well know that it is not his syringe, but it is him they want suspended, and Pantani of course cannot ride because of the indictment.
In the meantime they have in there grasps real evidence against Rebellin!
who is not the target

YET!

whiteboytrash said:

Yes it's shocking. The guy only stole an Olympic medal and told the world he is clean. Now it appears he spent his entire life as a drug addict and dragging his wife into dingy dark hotels to buy his fix. Whilst he was injecting [censored] into his blood he was more than happy to cheat his fellow riders out of victories, money and rip the legs and smash the hearts of clean riders. Yes it's shocking releasing this video. Are you farking blind ? If the media released more stuff like this then maybe some of these junkie riders will think twice about cheating.

ilpirata said:

WBT you miss my point. Why was the video withheld for 8 yrs?

I am not blind to doping. What I don't like is that once Italian media have a hit on one, then they make meal out of him, and they think that no one will notice that their methods are unethical and hypocritical. They want to pretend that this is a clean sport and that there are clean riders, (you believe in it as well it seems) and make a serious example of anyone caught (so that it looks like they are for clean competition and a beautiful giro).

Why do they take indict Pantani in 2001 for a syringe that has traces of insulin, found in room rented by his team, the day after they have left the room. A room that they are not even sure he was in. They never do a DNA test on the syringe , and 8 months later or so they drop the case for lack of evidence. They well know that it is not his syringe, but it is him they want suspended, and Pantani of course cannot ride because of the indictment.
In the meantime they have in there grasps real evidence against Rebellin!
who is not the target

YET!

Listen, fanyboy fanboy, Pantani doped. His is the most tragic case in recent memory, but he achieved his victory through illicit means nonetheless.

must you put a y in the middle of every name? sort of like the mark of Zorro!

Anyway, why I bother to answer you I am not sure, because you present no argument for what you declare. Perhaps you feel that by pasting a label upon someone you can dismiss his arguments. Maybe that works in second grade, but if you want a discussion with a person in a forum , I suggest your next post have some substance.

jimmypop said:

Listen, fanyboy, Pantani doped. His is the most tragic case in recent memory, but he achieved his victory through illicit means nonetheless.

ilpirata said:

must you put a y in the middle of every name? sort of like the mark of Zorro!

Anyway, why I bother to answer you I am not sure, because you present no argument for what you declare. Perhaps you feel that by pasting a label upon someone you can dismiss his arguments. Maybe that works in second grade, but if you want a discussion with a person in a forum , I suggest your next post have some substance.

Marco Pantani, a great natural talent for sure (his amateur feats were unparalleled), but also the man with a 62% HCT. Yeah, he was clean as a whistle.

He'll go down as a martyr of the hypocrisy of cycling in its most despicable era ever.

If I am not mistaken this video was in the possession of the investigators years ago, when Rebellin was initially investigated.

Whether there is any reason to publish it is another matter.

[quote="jimmypop"]Marco Pantani, a great natural talent for sure (his amateur feats were unparalleled), but also the man with a 62% HCT. Yeah, he was clean as a whistle.

He'll go down as a martyr of the hypocrisy of cycling in its most despicable era ever.[/QUOTE

You have formed an opinion based on extrapolation and spin. The 62HCT you refer to was not a control but a reading taken at a hospital on man with serious internal bleeding and in critical condition. I have posted on this before if you are truly interested. Perhaps Mr. Rendall failed to mention that in his book? Other books have been written jimmy, though in your defence, the ones that might have changed this impression you've formed, are not in English.

He was reported to be at 52HCt at Madonna di Campiglio ,where he was kept from resuming the giro 1999 for the agreed upon health limit. This in no way was a positive, because it was on the result of single retain, and there was no test for epo. Later at the tribunal to which he was called, some of the procedural irregularities that occurred during that control were exposed. The other thing about that test is that his hemoglobin was well within the permissable range, that came out the following year , in other words, a year later he would not have been stopped. Though I am sure they would come up with something else. You can find other posts of mine that cover Campiglio test in more detail.
Interestingly Savoldelli upon his retirement last year made a point of saying that he believed something was wrong with the calibration of those hematocrit machines in 1999 where he was found to be two points higher than he knew he was. In other words the cyclists know exactly where they are, and are not likely to be surprised by hematocrit controls. Which is what Pantani had always said. He was at 48 before and 48 after.

ilpirata said:

WBT you miss my point. Why was the video withheld for 8 yrs?

I am not blind to doping. What I don't like is that once Italian media have a hit on one, then they make meal out of him, and they think that no one will notice that their methods are unethical and hypocritical. They want to pretend that this is a clean sport and that there are clean riders, (you believe in it as well it seems) and make a serious example of anyone caught (so that it looks like they are for clean competition and a beautiful giro).

Why do they take indict Pantani in 2001 for a syringe that has traces of insulin, found in room rented by his team, the day after they have left the room. A room that they are not even sure he was in. They never do a DNA test on the syringe , and 8 months later or so they drop the case for lack of evidence. They well know that it is not his syringe, but it is him they want suspended, and Pantani of course cannot ride because of the indictment.
In the meantime they have in there grasps real evidence against Rebellin!
who is not the target

YET!

just a question. what would have happened to the media outlet if they were to broadcast the films without this other "proof" of his doping having gone on? this may have just been a moment for the media to release these films without having to be worried about being dragged to court because of defamation statutes. just thinking.

There's a decent point at the centre of this: the cycling (and general sports) media will build people up, salute them as heroes and happily repeat all their lies without question, but once they get caught then the same media will dance on their graves and tell us that they were the devil incarnate. Why don't the press do their job and properly investigate the corruption in our sport? In Rebellin's case there was clearly plenty of evidence, so why didn't someone grow a pair, dig into it properly and get the story out there 8 years ago?

Mr Pirate
I'm interested to know exactly where you stand with regard to your eponymous hero.

Taking it as read that - regardless of his actual culpability - you think he has been unfairly stigmatised as a doper, do you think:-

a) In all probability he did dope but there was never any direct evidence to definitively implicate him. The charges against him are not supported by evidence and are therefore unfair.
a)He never doped.

[quote="ilpirata"]

jimmypop said:

Marco Pantani, a great natural talent for sure (his amateur feats were unparalleled), but also the man with a 62% HCT. Yeah, he was clean as a whistle.

He'll go down as a martyr of the hypocrisy of cycling in its most despicable era ever.[/QUOTE

You have formed an opinion based on extrapolation and spin. The 62HCT you refer to was not a control but a reading taken at a hospital on man with serious internal bleeding and in critical condition. I have posted on this before if you are truly interested. Perhaps Mr. Rendall failed to mention that in his book? Other books have been written jimmy, though in your defence, the ones that might have changed this impression you've formed, are not in English.

He was reported to be at 52HCt at Madonna di Campiglio ,where he was kept from resuming the giro 1999 for the agreed upon health limit. This in no way was a positive, because it was on the result of single retain, and there was no test for epo. Later at the tribunal to which he was called, some of the procedural irregularities that occurred during that control were exposed. The other thing about that test is that his hemoglobin was well within the permissable range, that came out the following year , in other words, a year later he would not have been stopped. Though I am sure they would come up with something else. You can find other posts of mine that cover Campiglio test in more detail.
Interestingly Savoldelli upon his retirement last year made a point of saying that he believed something was wrong with the calibration of those hematocrit machines in 1999 where he was found to be two points higher than he knew he was. In other words the cyclists know exactly where they are, and are not likely to be surprised by hematocrit controls. Which is what Pantani had always said. He was at 48 before and 48 after.

Gregers, I will be completely honest and say that I believe no cyclist of the last 15 years can be competive against blood doping and testosterone boosting competitors, unless they are doing it in some part themselves.
I do believe that the bigger teams have more cutting edge doping techniques, with very low probability of being caught by a control, because they have the resources, know the tests and test against the same tests. Remember Basso and Ullrich were not really caught by a control. Yes I believe the pirate was treated unjustly and in fact targeted. I believe that in a battle of equal arms, Pantani had no equals. He never had what could be called a great supporting cast. He won with attacks in mountain stages.

Gregers said:

Mr Pirate
I'm interested to know exactly where you stand with regard to your eponymous hero.

Taking it as read that - regardless of his actual culpability - you think he has been unfairly stigmatised as a doper, do you think:-

a) In all probability he did dope but there was never any direct evidence to definitively implicate him. The charges against him are not supported by evidence and are therefore unfair.
a)He never doped.

ilpirata said:

Yes I believe the pirate was treated unjustly and in fact targeted.

But you admit that he likely doped, right? right?

Doped or not (yes he doped), Pantani was awesome in the mountains. That we all agree on. Perhaps (arguably) the best climber in pro cycling of any era. But when the roads were flat and he's riding solo (ie ITT), he was useless. Pantani was really a one terrain wonder. Regardless, he was a doper on the playing field and in leisure time as well. Hero worship blinds reality.

Tech72 said:

Doped or not (yes he doped), Pantani was awesome in the mountains. That we all agree on. Perhaps (arguably) the best climber in pro cycling of any era. But when the roads were flat and he's riding solo (ie ITT), he was useless. Pantani was really a one terrain wonder. Regardless, he was a doper on the playing field and in leisure time as well. Hero worship blinds reality.

Pantani and other 60kg riders should be useless in comparison to an elite 70kg tester, thats just the way it is. The mistake many climbers make is they should just settle for winning mountain top finishes and not try for the GC. Trying for the GC IMO leads to trying to make massive gains in the mountains which really isn't possible at elite level.

He was the reason i took up cycling. He doped just like all the other GC contenders and i mean all GC contenders not just a few. To do the Alpe in 37mins and to actually witness it live is unbelievable. Which obviously without juice is impossible. It looked over the top at the time just like Armstrongs Hautacam effort.

Tech72 said:

Doped or not (yes he doped), Pantani was awesome in the mountains. That we all agree on. Perhaps (arguably) the best climber in pro cycling of any era. But when the roads were flat and he's riding solo (ie ITT), he was useless. Pantani was really a one terrain wonder. Regardless, he was a doper on the playing field and in leisure time as well. Hero worship blinds reality.

Throwing it in the big ring, hands in the drops, on a 7% grade after 4 or 5 hours of racing. Truly an awesome feat in its time, but disgusting in hindsight.

jimmypop said:

But you admit that he likely doped, right? right?

You call people names and still wish to have a conversation with them?
I admit to nothing. I believe he must have doped. That is what Mr. Gregers asked me, and respectfully I might add. How you don't see it within that post I don't know.
But you would like to project that the addiction to cocaine of a sinking and then retired athlete means that he used performance enhancing materials when he was riding well.

ilpirata said:

You call people names and still wish to have a conversation with them?
I admit to nothing. I believe he must have doped. That is what Mr. Gregers asked me, and respectfully I might add. How you don't see it within that post I don't know.
But you would like to project that the addiction to cocaine of a sinking and then retired athlete means that he used performance enhancing materials when he was riding well.

That's foolish. Clearly, you're not stupid. I'm not projecting back in time from the cocaine use; rather, I'm projecting forward from all the reports and evidence that he did dope.

Hero-worshippers make me ill. It's why I'm singling you out.

jimmypop said:

That's foolish. Clearly, you're not stupid. I'm not projecting back in time from the cocaine use; rather, I'm projecting forward from all the reports and evidence that he did dope.

Hero-worshippers make me ill. It's why I'm singling you out.

Since there is no valid evidence or report of Pantani ever being positive for doping, then why not project instead : That in competition he never doped?

And feel better please, I do not worship Pantani (I was always a fan for sure) but I choose to defend him against the lies and slander slung at him. Perhaps I waste my time.