Contador feels your pain

I got an email today that said, “the dividing line between those riders who get pissed about other riders doping, and those that don’t get mad is pretty stark.”

I have to agree.

Tour de France winner Alberto Contador said Thursday that the forced exit of Danish cyclist Michael Rasmussen, which paved the way for his own victory, was fundamentally unfair and set a bad precedent for the sport.

Source: velonews.com

It’s late, I’m tired and… What?

…Madrid gynecologist Eufemiano Fuentes, the doctor alleged to have masterminded doping programmes for athletes.

Fuentes is a gynecologist?

Are you fucking shitting me? Have I already heard that and somehow managed to forget?

Man, I’m in the wrong business.

In the same vein, Ryan sent me three emails today regarding his ebay auctions.

From: Ryan
Subject:
Send some traffic to my attempt to stop doping… I can’t take this peleton at two speeds shit anymore…

Greg LeMond autographed helmet (OCLV Trek carbon)
cgi.ebay.com

Here is another item…
cgi.ebay.com

I don’t know Ryan, never met him, but I will say this: That guy is all in.

Where you at?

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestmailby feather

About big jonny

The man, the legend. The guy who started it all back in the Year of Our Lord Beer, 2000, with a couple of pages worth of idiotic ranting hardcoded on some random porn site that would host anything you uploaded, a book called HTML for Dummies (which was completely appropriate), a bad attitude (which hasn’t much changed), and a Dell desktop running Win95 with 64 mgs of ram and a six gig hard drive. Those were the days. Then he went to law school. Go figure. Flagstaff, Arizona, USA

32 thoughts on “Contador feels your pain

  1. Maybe he just got tired of staring at pussy all day, and wanted to work on assholes instead.

  2. Here’s what I find most ironic on that dividing line. By and large, I find most racing cyclists (I’m a former long-time racer myself) to be quite outspoken on politics and other related topics. But the more I try to engage them on the topic of doping, I’m almost floored by the fact that they always seem to want to change the subject.

    I find that most feel that Tyler, Lance and Floyd are universally clean. Almost without question. And if you suggest otherwise, they just shut down.

    But, then again, I know the world has changed. I took a 13 year break from racing my bike, and started again a few years ago. I had myself downgraded 2 levels to Cat 4 (appropriately so), but witnessed some things (even as a Cat 4) that had me scratching my head. Like guys who could suddenly bolt off the front of a circuit race (on a 3 mile course) and lap the field in a 35 mile race (this happened to me once).

    I remembered back to my younger days and knew just how badly we all wanted to actually win races. I suppose if EPO were available in 1985, I would have known plenty of guys who would have headed down to TJ and taken it (no matter their racing category).

    My point in all of this, is that some guys have egos that really need that high placing, even when millions of dollars are not at stake. I think the doping mentality is already firmly rooted at the grass roots level. I knew plenty of juniors who were popping stimulants at the velodrome on Friday nights back in 1985. There are probably plenty of dickhead masters riders who would do anything to place 1-min ahead of their cross-town rivals at the time trial districts.

  3. BTW, “lakeforestbike” guy on eBay:

    Do not be so naive as to think that just because Jonathan Vaughters wants to start a clean team, that he’ll “get” a clean team. You need to look at the “why’s” of Operation Puerto.

    Why did Puerto exist? It’s simple: The riders USED to be able to get their dope and doping schedules from their team’s medical staff. Then WADA rained on UCI’s “sweep it under the rug” strategy and forced REAL testing upon the peloton. They took it out of the UCI’s hands. The UCI could not longer sabotage a positive test and make it go away (like they’d been doing). Puerto was a network designed to help individual riders (from any team) get hooked up with the dope they felt they needed. Their teams stopped giving it to them (well, perhaps not Liberty Seguros).

    As the Puerto network went away, rest assured that another took its place. And do not think that there are not similar networks happening right here in the USA. If Vaughter’s riders want to be on dope, they’ll get on dope. he’ll have nothing to say about it.

  4. I suspect there are lots of tiny little recreational racers at local events who dope. I think they are docs, or know some docs really well in a lot of cases.

    As Greg Lemond says, it often goes back to the docs.

    That infamous outside magazine article, the guy who dopes for journalism purposes, to describe its affect on himself (I’ll try to find a link later), had no trouble finding a couple docs to provide the juice.

    Basically all you need is some cash and motivation.

    When I see some of the time differentials at local races, it makes me very suspicious. You start estimating their watts/kg, and you start coming up with numbers that should ball park them in Cat 1-2 ranks.

  5. Actually that is not all of what was said and you have taken him out of context. He went on to say that the problem he has is that he should not have been allowed to start and then to yank him once he has the yellow is bad for the sport… I am paraphrasing. I can hunt for the actual quote if anyone doubts this.

  6. Tod,

    yeah, that’s technically correct regarding Contador.

    But he didn’t raise any objection to Rasmussen splitting the agencies and taking out racing licenses in places to fly into that gray zone. That was all OK with him?

    Contador also didn’t object to Rasmussen incurring a warning 45 days prior to the event, which should of barred him. That was a UCI problem not to notify ASO. That was OK with him?

    Rasmussen according to his team, lied to his team, and to prove he wasn’t lying, all he had to do is show his passport. That was OK with Contador.

    Contador’s quote is emblematic for what he didn’t focus on, as well as what he did focus on.

  7. ok – actual wording:
    “I don’t know what is really behind it, but I do know that what should not be possible is to be told in the middle of the race that you can’t participate when there was no problem at the beginning,”

    I did not have it exact. I will say that I think he is 100% correct in this opinion. How can you argue this? This is an administrative problem, not a rider problem.

  8. What’s really sick is McQuaid’s explanation regarding why the UCI rules were not enforced regarding Rasmussen’s recorded warning.

    McQuaid said they did not enforce the rule because it was an “unfair” rule, and that they would be changing it at their next UCI congress (gee Pat, would that not require a VOTE at the congress?). This is the big clusterfuck that is the UCI. They make the rules up as they go along. Rules mean nothing, as the UCI is a dictatorship, not a true worldwide governing body.

  9. NO, again you are missing the point. He says that once you are ok’d to race that should be FINAL unless there is an infraction during the race.

    The issues of missed doping tests were known issues to UCI prior to the start of the tour. Whe was he allowed to race? It was not contador’s job to worry about the Chickens whereabouts.

    Contador just days that he wishes he did not win this way. I think that is what used to be called sportsmanship.

  10. Tod, Rasmussen was not yanked by the Tour or the UCI.

    His EMPLOYER got sick of his shit. They knew he was lying. Obviously they’d investigated, or they would not have made the determination. They felt personally humiliated by his non-truths and bogus explanations. They yanked him off the tour team and then fired him. Obviously they found him in violation of his team contract and they decided to enforce it.

    The UCI *should* have prevented him from riding. Heck, if you miss two random dope tests in the USA, you get the automatic 2-year ban. No questions asked. Ask Ken Carpenter (former Olympic track sprinter) about the consequences of avoiding random dope tests.

  11. Yes, I understand how he left the Tour, but the point is that there was an implication that Contador is soft on doping because of the opening statement. If that is all you read, then yes, I agree it is not a good position for him to take. But you have to keep reading to get the point he is really trying to make.

    I am not trying to stick up for Contador, we all know that he is barely escaping the O.P mess and may still get snagged up in its net.

  12. Thanks Tod. You are right. And yes, Contador has much to worry about as far as this German guy. He ain’t going away.

  13. I have not seen any discussion on how this years Tour might effect Floyd’s decision which I think is due out in the next few weeks.

    My $0.02 is that it shoots him in the ass.

  14. “NO, again you are missing the point. He says that once you are ok’d to race that should be FINAL unless there is an infraction during the race.”

    Yes, from a governing body perspective. Even I’d be pissed off if the UCI suddenly switched its position and yanked him. Actually, since they allowed him to race in the fist place, they should have been BACKING his allowed participation.

    But thankfully, one team’s sponsor finally got a spine and decided not to tolerate their being lied to by their rider (Rasmussen). I’ve actually written emails to CSC’s senior executive team wondering why they still choose to financially support a team with a guy like Riis running it for them. Their publicist wrote back and tried to blow sunshine up my ass over just how great a guy Riis is, and how committed he is to the anti-doping movement (uh-huh, Ivan Basso, please stand up).

  15. I really can not figure why it’s taking so long for Floyd’s decision to be rendered. Does the panel have to discuss the case together, or can they take the transcripts and review at home?

    It’s amazing how long it is taking. And I have no idea which way the case will swing. The longer they take, the more chances fr them to be influenced by media reports over doping though, eh?

  16. “It’s amazing how long it is taking. And I have no idea which way the case will swing. The longer they take, the more chances fr them to be influenced by media reports over doping though, eh?”

    Yep- exactly….

  17. I think Floyd’s case is problematic. There is no doubt the French Lab, probably the same one that took down the rider, really screwed up the analysis.

    Now, you can read through the really bad data and “see” that Floyd doped (as the esteemed Dr. Don Catlin did). Or, you can say, these analysis are technically poor and we can’t convict a guy on beyond a shadow of doubt if the data have been so screwed. (As the chief tech for the IRMS machine did).

    So I think the arbitration committee is stuck between convicting Floyd based on bad data, or calling a “technicality” and letting him go.

    My personal opinion is that 1) sure Floyd doped and 2) you can’t convict him on that analysis because the work was so sloppy. If you can’t do better lab work than that, then you can’t convict.

    I think that is the reason the decision is so slow to come. The arbitrators are trying to look into the faulty analysis with the same understanding a scientist would. Of course, that’s probably wishful thinking on my part.

  18. The shit thing with Landis is that if he gets off it will be due to a “technicallity” not because he is really innocent…sigh…gotta love American lawyers.

  19. And this will be an inherent problem for all future high-profile doping cases. The tests are complicated, and are not easily interpreted by laymen. I’ll bet that you could take an actual doper, administer a test, get a truly positive result and then hire Floyd’s defense team to poke a zillion holes in the results.

    All that stuff about the overwritten test data? Turned out that it was as simple as the lab worker turning on the machine and making sure that it was working properly.

    What I think will work against Floyd is the personal character stuff. This is a “preponderance of the evidence” stuff and not “beyond reasonable doubt”. Floyd and his buddy really fucked up by calling Lemond that night. Even if Floyd really had nothing to do with it.

  20. Floyd could be the new OJ; guilty as sin meets the Keystone Kops. The authorities have gotta have game if this mess is ever going to get cleaned up, and there’s no way that the greater good will be served by a conviction based on shoddy work. The standard in an arbitration is “a preponderance of the evidence” rather than “beyond a reasonable doubt,” so it could go either way.

    Speaking of “got game,” whomever made that “French Labs” crack after the first dog crash still has me laughing a month later-that was great.

  21. besides, it’d be cool to see Floyd perform once he knows every single eye is upon him. Sort of like Tyler’s “stellar” results in the spring (lol)

  22. I still say Fuentes is a pole-smoking semi-señorita who takes it up the chuff from the likes of Lance, Basso, and all the dopers as ‘payment’.

  23. bikepunk…

    i’ll buy that, only with photographic evidence that Fuentes looks like Lance’s Mom…. (just like all the other “chicks” he’s banged)

  24. ‘….if slick pulled off the trick, then you must acquit that hick’
    -Johnny Cochrane

    I personally don’t have proof either way, as to whether Floyd is guilty or not. Neither do you.

    I do know that USACycling considered him guilty from the get go, which could affect the arbitration ruling.

    USACycling has had its own agenda going on for years, supposedly ‘for the good of the sport’.

    But, Hey, it’s life, where nothing is as up front or as above board as most of us would like to see.

  25. To summarize:

    If pussy + juice = Fuentes, than Floyd + Fuentes + UCI + American Lawyers = The Juice?

  26. Jon
    You must have been platered on Yuenglimg Lager…yes he is a snatch doctor. Guess there’s not much money lookin @ pussy in Spain.