Bradley Wiggins’ comments about Lance Armstrong ‘not acceptable’ says head of UCI

DaSy wrote:

Val-Ver-Day blown away - what else do I have to say.

Chris Hayes wrote:

@ Don Simon. Hey, you know what: for the circa USD 500m that LA has raised for cancer through Livestrong, I can forgive him.

I'm glad that he raised so much for cancer and raised awareness to the levels that he did with Livestrong.

I am also glad that you are able to forgive him.

I, on the other hand, find it abhorrent that he used cancer and cancer victims as a tool in his quest to cheat and defraud the cycling world and the much wider population.

@Jimmy Ray Will, Valverde was banned on a suspicion and nothing more, I do not know why he didn't appeal but suspect that it may have been linked to his age and to money available forcing a pragmatic decision to be made. He is rightly pissed off and likely to bang that drum of innocence at every opportunity.

It was discussed at length here in the summer and consensus was that unless you have evidence of foul play, the guy is innocent. Your accusation of "unrepentant doper" needs supporting evidence. He is an accused doper who has served a ban and never failed a test. He is innocent and should be free to ride without  this cloud hanging over him. For him to be unrepentant, he must have done the doping in the first place. Prove it, or wind the old neck in..

Can't be having one rule for one, can we?

don simon wrote:

@Jimmy Ray Will, Valverde was banned on a suspicion and nothing more

That's not really the case. He was banned because blood bag 18 from the Operacion Puerto raid was found to be a DNA match to Valverde, and that this bag also contained traces of EPO. It's pretty compelling evidence.

DaSy wrote:

don simon wrote:

@Jimmy Ray Will, Valverde was banned on a suspicion and nothing more

That's not really the case. He was banned because blood bag 18 from the Operacion Puerto raid was found to be a DNA match to Valverde, and that this bag also contained traces of EPO. It's pretty compelling evidence.

Except for the catalogue of fuck ups that render everything no more than suspicion.

don simon wrote:

DaSy wrote:

don simon wrote:

@Jimmy Ray Will, Valverde was banned on a suspicion and nothing more

That's not really the case. He was banned because blood bag 18 from the Operacion Puerto raid was found to be a DNA match to Valverde, and that this bag also contained traces of EPO. It's pretty compelling evidence.

Except for the catalogue of fuck ups that render everything no more than suspicion.

To be fair, I didn't say he was an unrepentant doper, that was someone else. 

However, I don't have to prove anything, as the sanction was made, which Valverde took without appeal. 

I think, and I say think, there was a point somewhere (again someone elses) about double standards, and I'd argue you are maybe guilty of this; you shouldn't really pick and choose which doping sanction you recognise. 

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

don simon wrote:

DaSy wrote:

don simon wrote:

@Jimmy Ray Will, Valverde was banned on a suspicion and nothing more

That's not really the case. He was banned because blood bag 18 from the Operacion Puerto raid was found to be a DNA match to Valverde, and that this bag also contained traces of EPO. It's pretty compelling evidence.

Except for the catalogue of fuck ups that render everything no more than suspicion.

 

To be fair, I didn't say he was an unrepentant doper, that was someone else. 

However, I don't have to prove anything, as the sanction was made, which Valverde took without appeal. 

I think, and I say think, there was a point somewhere (again someone elses) about double standards, and I'd argue you are maybe guilty of this; you shouldn't really pick and choose which doping sanction you recognise. 

 

Apologies, you're right it was Chris Hayes who called him unrepentant.

You'll have to point out where my double standards are. He was accused of doping or attempting to dope, it's not clear whether CONI ever had bag 18, there are allegedly traces of EPO in the bage which have never been seen in blood drawn from Valverde. Innocent until proven guilty, from what I have read, it's not proven, and that's always been my position, or the complete opposite....

Much like Contador, it was presumed and not proven, and the same as Froome, no one could prove his guilt either, he was obviously lucky to get away with no ban. But he is as guilty of cheating as Valverde in my eyes.

The other side is continuing to call him a doper. Prove it or put up.

Much like Contador, [...] and [...] Froome [ ..] he is as guilty of cheating as Valverde in my eyes.

[/quote]

I'm satisfied with Bag 18 to be honest: given that most of his generation of Spaniard seems to be at it.  But now you're equating TUE misuse with EPO use...

Chris Hayes]</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Much like Contador, [...] and [...]&nbsp;Froome&nbsp;[ ..]&nbsp;he is as guilty of cheating as Valverde in my eyes.</p>

<p>[quote wrote:

I'm satisfied with Bag 18 to be honest: given that most of his generation of Spaniard seems to be at it.  But now you're equating TUE misuse with EPO use...

And there's the money shot. i think you'll have to pull out the old list of names on this one by way of evidence. Of course it's fine to have an opinion on it, it's just as I think that Team SKY are screwing the system and that Froome is a naughty, naughty boy.

Paxti Vila - Manuel Beltran - Moses Duenas - Hector Guerras - Isidro Vega - Luis GArcia del Moral - Jose Belda - Aketza Pena - Santiago Perez - Jesus Manzano (despite his name) - Jose Fabian - Aitor Gonzalez - Francesco Sanchez - Jenaro Lozano - Iban Mayo - Abraham Olano - Marcos Serrano - Alberto Contador - Roberto Herras -  Oscar Sevilla - Pedro Delgado - and one Alejandro Belmonte Valverde who received a two-year ban in 2010 AND Oscar Pereiro if you want to include salbutamol....AND even poor old Joseba Beloki paid Fuentes for something...but obviously not anything 'medical' ...  Valverde had DNA evidence taken from a blood sample in Italy whcih matched a random bag of blood found in a lab in Spain, labels and everything,,,guess whose? His defence was that the Italiian authorities had no jurisdiction in Spain and he was banned.  But the Spanish authorities decided not to open a case against him - because, of course, there's no history of doping in Spain. 

But my favourite of all was Oscar Freire...a superb classics rider who didn't dope. 

Chris Hayes wrote:

Paxti Vila - Manuel Beltran - Moses Duenas - Hector Guerras - Isidro Vega - Luis GArcia del Moral - Jose Belda - Aketza Pena - Santiago Perez - Jesus Manzano (despite his name) - Jose Fabian - Aitor Gonzalez - Francesco Sanchez - Jenaro Lozano - Iban Mayo - Abraham Olano - Marcos Serrano - Alberto Contador - Roberto Herras -  Oscar Sevilla - Pedro Delgado - and one Alejandro Belmonte Valverde who received a two-year ban in 2010 AND Oscar Pereiro if you want to include salbutamol....AND even poor old Joseba Beloki paid Fuentes for something...but obviously not anything 'medical' ...  Valverde had DNA evidence taken from a blood sample in Italy whcih matched a random bag of blood found in a lab in Spain, labels and everything,,,guess whose? His defence was that the Italiian authorities had no jurisdiction in Spain and he was banned.  But the Spanish authorities decided not to open a case against him - because, of course, there's no history of doping in Spain. 

But my favourite of all was Oscar Freire...a superb classics rider who didn't dope. 

Wow, 21! That a lot, out of how many?

Hardly most as you were bandying around earlier. Respect for not cutting and pasting the list though. There's at least two names on there who where suspended for suspicion of doping rather than proven doping, which are very, very different and two who were not found guilty of anything, but don't let that stop you sullying their names.  One whose name looks suspiciously invented. You've even pushed the generation line with some of those names, but hey! When you've got to bend the rules to support your claims, who am I to argue?

Chris Hayes wrote:

Paxti Vila - Manuel Beltran - Moses Duenas - Hector Guerras - Isidro Vega - Luis GArcia del Moral - Jose Belda - Aketza Pena - Santiago Perez - Jesus Manzano (despite his name) - Jose Fabian - Aitor Gonzalez - Francesco Sanchez - Jenaro Lozano - Iban Mayo - Abraham Olano - Marcos Serrano - Alberto Contador - Roberto Herras -  Oscar Sevilla - Pedro Delgado - and one Alejandro Belmonte Valverde who received a two-year ban in 2010 AND Oscar Pereiro if you want to include salbutamol....AND even poor old Joseba Beloki paid Fuentes for something...but obviously not anything 'medical' ...  Valverde had DNA evidence taken from a blood sample in Italy whcih matched a random bag of blood found in a lab in Spain, labels and everything,,,guess whose? His defence was that the Italiian authorities had no jurisdiction in Spain and he was banned.  But the Spanish authorities decided not to open a case against him - because, of course, there's no history of doping in Spain. 

But my favourite of all was Oscar Freire...a superb classics rider who didn't dope. 

I started sing-reading that like 'We didn't start the fire' by Billy Joel in my head. Didn't work. True story.

don simon wrote:

He (Valverde) was accused of doping or attempting to dope, it's not clear whether CONI ever had bag 18, there are allegedly traces of EPO in the bage which have never been seen in blood drawn from Valverde.

I think the bags have always been in the control of the Spanish authourities, so I doubt CONI ever actually had them. Valverde asked for the DNA test of his blood taken by the Italians to be tested by a neutral lab, but that was refused. There was potentially less physical  evidence againt Armstrong than Valverde. A bust of Dr. Fuentes, a high level doping doctor, yeilded hundreds of bags of blood, plasma and documnentation. One of those bags was labeled Valv-Piti (in itself not a giant leap to Valverde (who owned a dog called Piti)). The blood was matched via DNA from a separate test taken years later. The bag also had EPO traces in it.

I agree that there are lots of loose ends, but there is at least a preponderence of evidence against him. I don't know why CONI wouldn't have agreed to test his blood in a neutral lab in a neutral country, that would have shut-down that argument. Also, his continued performance at a high level since then suggests he was either not doping effectively before, or still is doping (which I think unlikely, but who knows?); many others like Millar and Hamilton seemed to drop like stones after their suspensions.

Maybe his early days when with Kelme were dodgy (the period the date on the bag refers), who knows. Ultimately, CONI, CAS, UCI and WADA, who had direct access to the evidence, all agreed that he was at least storing blood with Fuentes, hence the ban. 

don simon wrote:

 Except for the catalogue of fuck ups that render everything no more than suspicion.

There wasn't confusion over the evidence, that was pretty clear-cut. The confusion was over the jurisdiction of the various bodies trying to either dodge the whole issue in the case of the Spanish authourities, or those trying to make him accountable in the case of the Italians.

Chris Hayes wrote:

@ Don Simon. Hey, you know what: for the circa USD 500m that LA has raised for cancer through Livestrong, I can forgive him.

....'circa USD 500m that Livestrong has raised'. Quite how much LA raised, and quite what it's been used for, I can't determine from the sources accessible to me.

Chris Hayes wrote:

I'm bored of the vilification of Lance Armstrong, and the closing down of the debate around the circumstances under which he raced. 

I seriously doubt that many Grand Tour or Classics winners raced clean between Indurain and Contador.  Add to this the fact that the current World Champion is an unrepentant unproven drug-cheat underlines the double-standards at play here. 

It's clear from the race times posted these days that riders are 'cleaner', but there's a big difference between alleged TUE misuse and admitted EPO use. 

I'm bored of the blinkered view where Lance wasn't a bully who wrecked the lives of other people... Etc, etc.

don simon wrote:

Chris Hayes wrote:

I'm bored of the vilification of Lance Armstrong, and the closing down of the debate around the circumstances under which he raced. 

I seriously doubt that many Grand Tour or Classics winners raced clean between Indurain and Contador.  Add to this the fact that the current World Champion is an unrepentant unproven drug-cheat underlines the double-standards at play here. 

It's clear from the race times posted these days that riders are 'cleaner', but there's a big difference between alleged TUE misuse and admitted EPO use. 

I'm bored of the blinkered view where Lance wasn't a bully who wrecked the lives of other people... Etc, etc.

Except Valverde was proven. His blood was in teh bag, as confirmed via DNA testing. He spent two years kicking his heels about not racing because of that confirmation.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, and its easy now to call out Armstrong for what we know he is. However at the time, I can understand exactly how the heroics of a cancer survivor could motivate many a soul. Which I think is Wiggins real point hey?

As mentioned, Landis' ride was incredible to watch... and incredible in all aspects. Bless him. 

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

don simon wrote:

Chris Hayes wrote:

I'm bored of the vilification of Lance Armstrong, and the closing down of the debate around the circumstances under which he raced. 

I seriously doubt that many Grand Tour or Classics winners raced clean between Indurain and Contador.  Add to this the fact that the current World Champion is an unrepentant unproven drug-cheat underlines the double-standards at play here. 

It's clear from the race times posted these days that riders are 'cleaner', but there's a big difference between alleged TUE misuse and admitted EPO use. 

I'm bored of the blinkered view where Lance wasn't a bully who wrecked the lives of other people... Etc, etc.

 

Except Valverde was proven. His blood was in teh bag, as confirmed via DNA testing. He spent two years kicking his heels about not racing because of that confirmation.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, and its easy now to call out Armstrong for what we know he is. However at the time, I can understand exactly how the heroics of a cancer survivor could motivate many a soul. Which I think is Wiggins real point hey?

As mentioned, Landis' ride was incredible to watch... and incredible in all aspects. Bless him. 

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/valverde-fights-back-over...
Concrete as a concrete thing made from a blend of aggregates bound together by a hydraulic binder. Come back when he's had a positive test and not guesswork.

don simon wrote:

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

don simon wrote:

Chris Hayes wrote:

I'm bored of the vilification of Lance Armstrong, and the closing down of the debate around the circumstances under which he raced. 

I seriously doubt that many Grand Tour or Classics winners raced clean between Indurain and Contador.  Add to this the fact that the current World Champion is an unrepentant unproven drug-cheat underlines the double-standards at play here. 

It's clear from the race times posted these days that riders are 'cleaner', but there's a big difference between alleged TUE misuse and admitted EPO use. 

I'm bored of the blinkered view where Lance wasn't a bully who wrecked the lives of other people... Etc, etc.

 

Except Valverde was proven. His blood was in teh bag, as confirmed via DNA testing. He spent two years kicking his heels about not racing because of that confirmation.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, and its easy now to call out Armstrong for what we know he is. However at the time, I can understand exactly how the heroics of a cancer survivor could motivate many a soul. Which I think is Wiggins real point hey?

As mentioned, Landis' ride was incredible to watch... and incredible in all aspects. Bless him. 

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/valverde-fights-back-over...
Concrete as a concrete thing made from a blend of aggregates bound together by a hydraulic binder. Come back when he's had a positive test and not guesswork.

Are we glossing over the suspension then... which, came after the linked article. 

don simon wrote:

 

I'm bored of the blinkered view where Lance wasn't a bully who wrecked the lives of other people... Etc, etc.

Can't say I'm really that bothered if a realitively small amount of riders who couldn't dope as effeciently. Plenty of people have been directly responsible for wrecking more lives of people just going about their everyday business. A few guys spinning their legs for a living is hardly a big deal.