Bye Lance

[Exit Stage Left]

In 1999 Lance wasn't a particularly hot property before the Tour. He was working cheap for US Postal, having lost a lucrative contract with Cofidis during his cancer. USPS were a 'wild card' entry at the Tour, and Bobby Julich was the US hope. USPS were so unfancied that they had no sponsorship from Shimano. As it became obvious Lance would win, the first time for a Shimano equipped bike, Shimano had to be nudged into securing branding rights. That was done by Lance using a Campagnolo aero bottle, which he continued to use in the final time trial, but with the logo covered in black tape. The bike was actually a Litespeed.



http://www.campyonly.com/lancebottle.html

Lance's treatment by the cycling establishment at that time motivated him, he was always a battler. Much of the Lance story evolves from the vacuum following the disastrous 1998 Tour, he filled the Patron shaped hole in the Peloton.

[Justin(e)]

Talk about placing a target on your own head.  The guy is asking to be shot down.

[Rhys W]

He's going to spend the next decade of his life in court, isn't he?

[henshaw11]

Bruyneel's got the hump

http://road.cc/content/news/69178-stunned-johan-bruyneel-slams-usada-publishing-evidence-ahead-arbitration-hearing

[Exit Stage Left]

Bruyneel's got the hump

http://road.cc/content/news/69178-stunned-johan-bruyneel-slams-usada-publishing-evidence-ahead-arbitration-hearing

I'm one of the many.

Irrespective of whether or not Bruyneel is guilty, some might argue he has a point. It's unusual that such a wealth of detail relating to specific allegations would come out ahead of an arbitration hearing, but then the US Postal scandal is far from a typical case.
 
USADA was under pressure to get its Reasoned Decision to the UCI. Given how central Bruyneel is alleged to have been to events, it would have been impossible to leave his name out, but many would feel he is justified in arguing that publication of the Reasoned Decision has prejudiced his case.

[Exit Stage Left]

There's been a notable silence from Bobby Julich, the fancied US rider from 1999, who now works for Sky, there might be a reason for that.
http://www.roadbikeaction.com/Latest-News/content/69/6063/Racy-Language-The-Shadows-of-Doper-Doubt.html

Julich was a coming man at the compromised Cofidis team, but crashed out in 1999. He was picked up by the 'clean' Credit Agricole and never featured much after that.

[citoyen]

I'm one of the many.

Irrespective of whether or not Bruyneel is guilty, some might argue he has a point. It's unusual that such a wealth of detail relating to specific allegations would come out ahead of an arbitration hearing, but then the US Postal scandal is far from a typical case.
 
USADA was under pressure to get its Reasoned Decision to the UCI. Given how central Bruyneel is alleged to have been to events, it would have been impossible to leave his name out, but many would feel he is justified in arguing that publication of the Reasoned Decision has prejudiced his case.

Bit of a no-win situation for the USADA - they were being put under pressure (by the UCI, among others) to publish the case against Lance, and they could hardly leave out Bruyneel's name from the document.

Anyway, it's a red herring - the argument might hold water if Bruyneel's case was going to court with a verdict provided by a jury of members of the public, but it isn't, it's going before the CAS (constituted as a panel of three independent experts), who are experienced at dealing with these matters and surely won't allow public opinion to sway them.

And I'm sure Bruyneel knows this and is just clutching at straws.

d.

[Hot Flatus]

I'm glad the info has been published. Makes it harder for Team Armstrong and the UCI to bury it under a mountain of lies.

[Toady]

This is a bit old (like ... er ... a whole week old) but I've been mulling it over. 

Roger Hammond on the suspensions given to those who gave evidence: "To me it says if you cheat and lie about it for several years, and then drop somebody else in it, you'll be alright. They need to be given the same ban as Lance. They cheated, they took that risk."

Now, I can see his point about the suspensions, even if I'm not sure I fully agree, but it's his language that's a bit concerning - "drop somebody else in it".  That's a bit perjorative - he may as well refer to them as "grassing somebody up", rather than "telling the truth".

Isn't there a whiff of Omerta about that?  Or am I reading too much into his choice of words. 

Nobody likes a grass, know wot I mean?

[simonp]

He asked interviewed during the Vuelta on ITV, as he was the studio pundit, about what he saw or knew. He came across as very shifty.

[Exit Stage Left]

It's a funny time for us GAN/Credit Agricole fans. I rekindled my interest in cycling thanks to Boardman, that was about the time that the old structure of separate amateur and pro branches of the UCI was abandoned.
My heroes were the classy time triallists at CA, as the rest of the peloton were dopers. I wasn't interested in winners, as they are usually pretty nasty people, Indurain being an exception. So I don't feel betrayed by Lance. Wiggins is a throwback to the Boardman period, he even spent some time in the Credit Agricole colours, I rode in a club TT with him at that time.

[Justin(e)]

There's been a notable silence from Bobby Julich ...

Also Cadel Evans.  I cannot think why he has kept his own council.

[Exit Stage Left]

I'm interested in the interaction between the UCI and the IOC.

In 1965, under the pressure of the IOC (the Olympics was then an amateur event), the UCI created two subsidiary bodies, the International Amateur Cycling Federation (Fédération Internationale Amateur de Cyclisme or FIAC) and the International Professional Cycling Federation (Fédération Internationale de Cyclisme Professionnel or FICP). The UCI assumed a role coordinating both bodies.
 
The FIAC was based in Rome, the FICP in Luxembourg, and the UCI in Geneva.
 
The FIAC was the bigger of the two organisations, with 127 member federations across all five continents. It was dominated by the countries of the Eastern bloc which were amateur. The FIAC arranged representation of cycling at the Olympic Games, and FIAC cyclists competed against FICP members on only rare occasions. In 1992, the UCI reunified the FIAC and FICP, and merged them back into the UCI. The combined organisation then relocated to Aigle, close to the IOC in Lausanne.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Cycliste_Internationale

I think that the collapse of the Eastern Bloc combined the traditions of doping in the pro-peloton revolving around soigneurs, with the systematic doping of the 'Amateur' tradition, mainly the former Soviet Empire, but also Italy. It's taken 20 years to sort out.

[Cudzoziemiec]

I don't get the relevance of doping either creating or destroying a "level playing field". Sport is never a level playing field. For instance, some people's bodies react better to EPO or HGH or whatever the drug of the year is. The same is true of any training technique. Some people will get a boost from a drug that no one else has, some will get it from the latest wheels or whatever.

That doesn't mean there are no reasons not to dope: doping is wrong because a) the rules are the rules b) it can be bad for you, even fatal. If Armstrong was a worse case of doping than others it's because he pressured others into doping too, and because his case exposes the corruption (or commercial realism?) in the UCI.

[spesh]

There's been a notable silence from Bobby Julich ...

Also Cadel Evans.  I cannot think why he has kept his own council.

<Clinic mode>

Evans has been linked with Dr. Ferrari, and he was managed by Tony Rominger. He's ridden for Mapei , and his current team, BMC is run by Chris Ochowitz.

</Clinic mode>

Though in fairness to Evans, the Ferrari association was that he met with Ferrari through Rominger in the summer of 2000, to test if he was capable of good things on the road. Apparently, that was the only time they have worked together. His reputation for defensive riding and being a wheel-sucker could come from him hanging on for dear life with the juiced riders, but not having the extra capacity to launch attacks. And he has usually looked absolutely done in at the end of mountain-top finish tour stages...

[citoyen]

I don't get the relevance of doping either creating or destroying a "level playing field". Sport is never a level playing field. For instance, some people's bodies react better to EPO or HGH or whatever the drug of the year is. The same is true of any training technique. Some people will get a boost from a drug that no one else has, some will get it from the latest wheels or whatever.

Well, if you're looking at it that way, it's pretty damn unfair that I'm genetically ill-equipped to follow my dreams of becoming a prima ballerina.

As for Evans, I take heart from the fact that Ferrari and Armstrong described him in their email exchange as "dumb" - which I presume to mean "too dumb to dope".

d.

[henshaw11]

I don't get the relevance of doping either creating or destroying a "level playing field". Sport is never a level playing field. For instance, some people's bodies react better to EPO or HGH or whatever the drug of the year is. The same is true of any training technique. Some people will get a boost from a drug that no one else has, some will get it from the latest wheels or whatever.

Well, if you're looking at it that way, it's pretty damn unfair that I'm genetically ill-equipped to follow my dreams of becoming a prima ballerina.

Aye.
In any case, there's already some degree of self-selection in a bunch of pro cyclists, and whilst there'll be some sort of physiology variation, that'll probably show up in the type of rider they are - eg climber, sprinter, gc-contender, domestique, etc, and within each they may be relatively similar. Plus stages are often won on tactics, not simply on fitness.

It's also worth remembering that the UCI regulations wrt the machinery used, are intended to keep the playing field less lumpy than it would otherwise be.

[Exit Stage Left]

As for Evans, I take heart from the fact that Ferrari and Armstrong described him in their email exchange as "dumb" - which I presume to mean "too dumb to dope".

d.

Heaven knows why Bruyneel thinks there's an air of pre-judgement in this case.

[henshaw11]

 
'kin 'ell - looks like there's another shitstorm on the horizon, revolving around Ferrari..

http://road.cc/content/news/69193-20-teams-dozens-riders-and-%E2%82%AC30m-italian-doping-inquiry-bigger-operacion-puerto

[Exit Stage Left]

'kin 'ell - looks like there's another shitstorm on the horizon, revolving around Ferrari..

http://road.cc/content/news/69193-20-teams-dozens-riders-and-%E2%82%AC30m-italian-doping-inquiry-bigger-operacion-puerto

It's just got really interesting, perhaps we should open up a separate false accounting thread on this board, we've got lots of financial expertise on this forum after all.

It is claimed that two image rights contracts were drawn up for each rider involved, one of them false and in a lower amount than was actually the case, which would be deposited with the UCI in accordance with its rules.
 
The rider would pass on the second, hidden, image rights contract to a Monaco-based company, T&F, which would sell it back to the rider’s team at an inflated price and keep 6 per cent of the sum involved.
 
T&F would pay the remaining 94 per cent into current accounts at the Banca Svizzera Italiana that all the riders involved in the ‘Ferrari system,’ at least those with teams based or registered outside Italy, were required to have.
 
Riders would then make payment from that account to Ferrari for the services he provided into one of two accounts held by the doctor in Swiss banks.
 
Besides actual bank transfers, money is said to have been moved clandestinely using what are described as more traditional methods, such as in a briefcase driven across the Swiss border in the boot of hired cars.
 
Potential charges go well beyond disciplinary measures that may be instituted by sporting authorities, and could include ones relating to tax evasion and money laundering.

[simonp]

Ah, dual contracts.

http://rangerstaxcase.wordpress.com/2012/05/22/doncaster-dooms-spl/

[Exit Stage Left]

I always did wonder how doping was paid for, I assumed prize money played a big role.

[hatler]

OK, so, I'm over 50, but given that it appears that virtually every rider ever to have pulled on a pro-team jersey and been paid for it is about to have their legs cut out from under them, should I be out there offering my services as a domestique ?

[Justin(e)]

I always did wonder how doping was paid for, I assumed prize money played a big role.

The best thing about the Usada report was that they "followed the money".  IMO, this is always the best way to uncover the truth.

Another thing that I have been wondering about is the trail of the pharmaceuticals - there must be some sort of auditory trail then leads to many more physicians.  Notwithstanding the administrators, I think that the doctors are the most culpable players in all of this.  I would go so far as making it a sanctioning offense for riders, and a criminal one for doctors.  Even the threat of jail for a 'respectable' physician would be enough to scare most of them off and this would dry up the supply.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Another thing that I have been wondering about is the trail of the pharmaceuticals - there must be some sort of auditory trail then leads to many more physicians.

What, 'an ear to the ground' sort of thing?