BanHammer Time: Valverde Gets Two Years
by Chris Fontecchio on May 31, 2010 11:38 AM EDT
in News
Email
Print
Minimal details but according to Sporza, the International Sports Tribunal TAS has affirmed the UCI's decision to ban Caisse d'Epargne rider and reigning Vuelta a Espana champion Alejandro Valverde for two years. Ban is effective January 1, 2010 (adios, points). Read the full press release on the flip:
Lausanne, 31 May 2010 - The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has partially upheld the appeals filed by the International Cycling Union (UCI) and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) against the Spanish Cycling Federation (RFEC) and the Spanish cyclist Alejandro Valverde. Accordingly, the CAS has imposed a two-year ban on Alejandro Valverde starting on 1 January 2010 but has denied the request of the UCI and WADA that results obtained by the athlete prior to the beginning of the suspension be annulled.
This matter arose as a result of the Spanish criminal investigation (Operación Puerto) which began in May 2004. On 29 August 2007, the UCI requested the RFEC to initiate disciplinary proceedings against Alejandro Valverde on the basis of the evidence gathered within the Operación Puerto proceedings, including the blood bag labelled “blood bag number 18”, the blood from which was purported to belong to Mr Valverde. On 7 September 2007, the RFEC denied the UCI’s request and refused to open disciplinary proceedings against Mr Valverde. In October 2007, both the UCI and WADA each filed an appeal with the CAS, requesting that Alejandro Valverde be found guilty of an anti-doping rule violation and that a two year suspension be imposed. Later, the Italian authorities opened disciplinary proceedings against Mr Valverde on the basis of evidence which they had in their possession, including a sample and DNA analysis of the blood from “blood bag number 18”. On 11 May 2009, the CONI Anti- Doping Tribunal (TNA) ruled that Mr Valverde had committed “use, or attempted use of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method” and, as a consequence, the athlete was banned for two years from participating in events organised under the auspices of CONI or related national sports organisations in Italy. Mr Valverde appealed the TNA decision to the CAS and, on 16 March 2010, the CAS confirmed the two year ban.
In its decision, the CAS Panel found, by a majority, that it could use the evidence collected in the course of the Operación Puerto for the purpose of the CAS arbitration. The CAS Panel also found, by a majority, that the scientific evidence which consisted, in essence, of:
- Blood bag number 18
- Scientific evidence that such blood contained EPO
- DNA evidence that clearly demonstrated that blood bag number 18 contained Mr Valverde’s blood
was sufficient to conclude that Mr Valverde committed an anti-doping rule violation, considering that Mr Valverde’s blood contained EPO, a prohibited substance according to Article 15 of the Anti-Doping Regulations (ADR) of the UCI (precisely, Article 15.2 of the UCI ADR: “Use or attempted use by a rider of a prohibited substance or prohibited method”). On the basis of the same regulations, a two-year suspension has been imposed on Alejandro Valverde, starting on 1 January 2010, in order to take into account, among other reasons, the fact that the CAS hearing which was initially scheduled for November 2009 had to be postponed until March 2010. Finally, the CAS considered that there was no evidence that any of the results obtained by Mr Valverde prior to 1 January 2010 was through doping infraction and decided that the appellants’ request to annul those results should be denied.
The award, with the grounds, is published on the CAS website (www.tas-cas.org/recent- decision).
The full decision is available at TAS. Head over to Recent Decisions and download the pdf. Now, with English!
342 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Looks like he picked the right strategy then
Ride like you stole it and keep riding until they catch up with you….
World Rankings as of May 31, 2010
Result
1 Alejandro Valverde (Spa) Caisse d’Epargne 392 pts
2 Cadel Evans (Aus) BMC Racing Team 374
3 Philippe Gilbert (Bel) Omega Pharma – Lotto 294
4 Joaquin Rodriguez Oliver (Spa) Team Katusha 268
5 Luis Leòn Sánchez Gil (Spa) Caisse d’Epargne 222
"Age and treachery will overcome youth and skill" - Fausto Coppi
good
that is all.
"I was watching the Tour de France in 2005, just being a fan again. I thought, ‘you're a fucking idiot. You're a bike fan who gets to ride the Tour de France.'"
- david millar
haha! hadn’t thought of it that way,good point!
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on May 31, 2010 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Links to CAS decision and UCI statement in the fanpost
Copy the links and delete fanpost, perhaps?
"i just see giro and get all spazzy" - Gavia
yeah, can you pass on the UCI link?
I already did the CAS part, as you can see if you refresh. Thanks!!
by Chris Fontecchio on May 31, 2010 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Links
UCI, in French. They said that they will issue an English version later.
The award in a very large pdf-file.
"i just see giro and get all spazzy" - Gavia
by TheFigurehead on May 31, 2010 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions
If you only could read the first judgement through Gavia's summary
this one is 61 pages in English that seems to contain a lot of the stuff that the first one did. The TAS press release does contain this odd sentence at the end
Finally, the CAS considered that there was no evidence that any of the results obtained by Mr Valverde prior to 1 January 2010 was through doping infraction and decided that the appellants’ request to annul those results should be denied.
I guess that EPO just spontaneously appeared in his blood bag.
yeah... that's it.
Although he never did fail a test……..
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Neither did Basso
prior to his banning (though he admitted it).
For that matter, Landis claims he took EPO from 2002 through 2006 and he never failed a test for EPO; it was testosterone that got him.
Were Ivan's Blood bags ever as clearly linked to him as Al Val's have been?
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions
No, but given that he admitted it
I’m not sure what else you’d want, unless you think there’s a possibility his confession to doping itself was false. But generally, if a guy cops to it, that’s pretty much game set match…
Actually, I should clarify
I assume his bags weren’t as clearly linked but, in fact, I don’t know one way or the other. I just know he admitted to doping.
That's where I was headed.
I think he copped to doping and took the penalty assessed instead of runningth erisk that the bags were actually linked directly to him. Damage control as it were.
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 10:47 PM EDT up reply actions
How was that damage control?
He got 2 years, same as Valverde. How was it any different than if the bags were linked to him?
He just copped to "attempted doping"
that has a much nicer ring to it, and doesn’t mess up his first Giro win.
Damage Control
Thank You Katie….
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on Jun 1, 2010 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Fair enough
I had forgotten that aspect of it. Though I still think the fact he never failed a test is as meaningless as the fact that AV (or Lord Voldemort, for that matter) never failed a test. To me, Basso’s “attempted to dope, but never did” is even less believable than “I didn’t inhale”…
strange that
because if we only believe the positive, it didnt make sense how he would use testosterone only that day. but whatever, testing and the testees are both flawed, i still like landis, i kinda thought he was on something when he blew past sinkewitz like sinkewitz was on mud.
kinda like fabian..
oooohhhh
i went there and i liked it. lol
Manzano injected EPO into the bag...
when the evil Doctor Fuentes was not looking!
Racing for Victory and Free Beer!
Thanks to the Figurehead
for the link to the official decision.
by Chris Fontecchio on May 31, 2010 11:46 AM EDT reply actions
No they're apparently upholding all his results...
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
oh sorry didn't read the ehtire date..
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions
no worries,
still not sure if they will disqualify him only, or also restate the results and bump up everyone
muggito
Man, if they bump up results that would be awesome for my VDS
Spilak….an extra 70 pts. I vote for that!
But all his results
Or his results prior to January 1, 2010?
“that any of the results obtained by Mr Valverde prior to 1 January 2010 was through doping infraction and decided that the appellants’ request to annul those results should be denied.”
Only since the beginning of this year are results annulled.
He keeps all the rest including last year’s Vuelta and all the others.
“Accordingly, the CAS has imposed a two-year ban on Alejandro Valverde starting on 1 January 2010 but has denied the request of the UCI and WADA that results obtained by the athlete prior to the beginning of the suspension be annulled.”
Looks like UCI was trying to get more of his wins thrown out but that didn’t fly at the CAS.
More importantly
Rinaldo Nocentini wins the 2010 Tour de Med
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
And even more CRUCIALLY, Igor Anton wins the final stage of Romandie :-))
"A mountain is not an obstacle, it is an opportunity" - Robert Millar
M. cent pour cent
gets LBL podium, which is nice to see
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on May 31, 2010 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Suite à la décision du TAS, M. Valverde ne pourra participer à aucune épreuve cycliste jusqu’au 31 décembre 2011. De plus, il est disqualifié de toutes les compétitions auxquelles il a pris part depuis le début de l’année et tous les points marqués lui sont retirés. De plus, M. Valverde devra rembourser les prix obtenus.
from UCI:
Following the decision of the TAS, Mr. Valverde will not be able to participate in any races until Dec 31 2011. Moreover, he is disqualified from all events in which he took part since the beginning of the year and all his points are taken back. Additionally, Mr. Valverde will have to reimburse all prizes received.
muggito
Thankfully
No.
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions
I would have hoped he saw this coming
And planned accordingly. At least it’s only this year’s prizes.
sadly though, will all of him teammates who worked there asses off
and got a cut of the prize money be out of luck as well?
by ZoeRochelle on May 31, 2010 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I should say: Valverde is the one who has to pay back the money
Doesn’t matter what he has done with the money in the meantime, spent it on tapas or given it to teammates.
They could still be unlucky, though: race organisers, even the big ones (or especially the big ones?), are notoriously slow with pay-out of prize money.
Woohoooo
about….time. But right before D-L so he can’t nab another win before the ban so that’s good. Well David Arroyo-Tour de France captain?
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
But he isn't really a GC guy
maybe guys like Uran took it easy in Italy in anticipation this would happen? I see Arroyo captaining the Vuelta myself.
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
My guess
Is that Caisse isn’t gonna change their plans around because Arroyo got 2nd at the Giro. All along it was looking like Lulu was Caisse’s Plan B if/when Valverde got suspended. I don’t see them changing their plans because of the Giro.
Arroyo's not likely to get a 12-minute head start again
Cazzo, it's going to be a bloodbath! The Mortirolo is a horror, absolutely interminable. -- Michele Scarponi
Regardless of getting in the right break...
i doubt the top finishers of this Giro (be it Arroyo, Basso, Nibali), as hard as it was, will be in the best of form for another GT just a few weeks from now.
They’ll go, compete, maybe try for stage wins, but I don’t see any of them contending for a win in France.
will Basso even be there? I seem to recall someone saying he’s going for Giro-Vuelta this year, could be wrong.
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on May 31, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions
ah cool thanks
it will be really interesting to see what kind of form he has, wonder what his ambitions are
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on May 31, 2010 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
CN post race thing said he said he wants to go for GC
but he will probably do a Menchov
Sastre may go for the Giro-Vuelta and Nibs is thinking about it
this years Vuelta could have the deepest field of any GT…well unlikely but quite a solid line-up if all these guys do scratch their Tour plans.
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
I expect Liquigas to line up for Kreuziger
in the Tour. I assume his anonymity this year should be a sign that he’s been building up for July.
If anyone has the experience to do the Giro-Tour double it's Basso
yes his recovery may suddenly not be as good(wonder why?) but he knows what he has to do to be at full strength for July. If he is then Kreuz has no chance to captain the team ahead of Basso.
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
It'll probably be another co-captain scenario
Liquigas tends to love bringing multiple GC potentials just to see what’ll happen. If he recovers well then all the power to him.
Leaky has mastered the co-captain thing
but at the Tour, with so many more top riders present, they can’t expect Kreuz to get Leaky a two podium finish and may need a team fully behind Basso to get one podium.
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
I think it's more a sign that he's on my VDS team
and decided not to score any points just like the rest of my team.
anonymity?
i think he’s had a fairly solid spring.
giro di sardegna: winner of stage 2 and gc
paris-nice: fourth in gc (third with the erasure of valv.piti’s results), winner of white jersey
volta ciclista a catalunya: eighth in gc
amstel gold: fifth
he underperformed in romandie, but medical tests done shortly thereafter showed early signs of pneumonia. i actually think he overdid things (including riding milan-sanremo for the first time, immediately ahead of the volta).
Erasing of results
doesn’t necessarily mean that other riders move up. The spot could be left empty, like we will do in the VDS.
He was quiet doing such things i guess
i probably didnt pay good enough attention, but nonetheless, my point was mainly that i think he’s been building up for a good showing at the Tour.
i remember; his climbing was unreal, extraordinary, and superhuman stuff.
"Race radios in Cat 4?"
by gravel road on May 31, 2010 10:20 PM EDT up reply actions
his teammates got caught, but he didn't
speaks wonders really, he probably wasn’t doing anything bad. I remain a Cobo believer
Question of the morning, why 01/01/2010
What’s significant? Or is it just convenient?
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 11:56 AM EDT reply actions
perhaps it's the date that would have been used
if VV hadn’t appealed and dragged the case out
muggito
Yeah I'm guessing they had to assign an effective date.
Since they didn’t strip his results retro actively, 1/1 makes sense to me. Also serves to keep him out of all races for two full years.
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Actually for only one and a half years.
He’s raced almost 6 months already.
Racing for Victory and Free Beer!
you'll need to explain that one.
Banned from 1/1/2010 till12/31/2011. Two years. All results after 1/1/2010 rescinded. Therefore no racing, no results for two full calendar years. He won’t come back in October of 2011 and win Lombardy or something like that.
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
But my eyes and brain remember differently
I will always remember him racing this year just like I remember Killer racing last year’s Giro regardless of what the official results say. One can’t really erase such a prominent rider so easily.
To bad the KGB doesn't run the UCI!
They could simply airbrush him out of the picture!
Racing for Victory and Free Beer!
or the CIA
they would have smuggled him out of the country in an illegal flight, then have a female soldier drag him naked on a leash
or Truman
he would have thrown a nuclear bomb on the house of his civilian relatives
or…
so many possibilities
haha!
I like airbrush out of picture idea, I say just airbrush out his head, replace with…Shaquille O’Neal?
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on May 31, 2010 8:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Gavia=crayons
Crashdan (and apparently TheFigurehead) = airbrush/photoshop.
And, for completeness’ sake – Majope = diorama drama
Crashdan stepping up?
If you do, keep the body and head in the disproportionate!
Racing for Victory and Free Beer!
PdC = Full service design agency
I'm betting on science to cure all the damage done by my reckless behaviour.
by omnevelnihil on Jun 1, 2010 12:08 AM EDT up reply actions
well in the interest of completeness
Sui J — Photographic Services – Eastern Region
and Veloki – Graphic Design Department.
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on Jun 1, 2010 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
similarly I will remember Piti at LBL
and his half-assed contributions to the three man chase group behind Vino/Kolobnev before he rode down Gilbert to sprint for the final podium spot. Bah Piti Bah
I'm scrolling through the decision
It’s a scanned document, so I can’t search for it.
"i just see giro and get all spazzy" - Gavia
by TheFigurehead on May 31, 2010 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, a longish explanation
Section 19
"i just see giro and get all spazzy" - Gavia
by TheFigurehead on May 31, 2010 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions
haha!
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on May 31, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Por fin y GRACIAS a Dios!!!
So he gets to keep all of his victories prior to the beginning of the year.
But he doesn’t get to keep anything from the beginning of the year? Right?
Racing for Victory and Free Beer!
right....
he loses out on Romandie, but keeps the Vuelta and all his one-day wins from before.
The vuelta officials are probably pleased as it would have been another case of a belated GT winner (albeit a nice guy in Samuel Sanchez) after the original winner got popped.
good point,
though I wonder what Sanchez is thinking right now?
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on May 31, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Hmm, I'm kinda annoyed about the lack of Euskie GT winner...
"A mountain is not an obstacle, it is an opportunity" - Robert Millar
Yeap...
Samuel Sanchez would have been the winner. I’m baffled really because the blood bags, alleged doping all took place a while back ago. So in effect it seems that a different time period, where Valverde had some big wins (including the Vuelta) would be where the ban would start cancelling out wins.
Poor Cadel would have been second at a GT again
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
Ding Dong! The Witch is dead. Which old Witch? The Wicked Witch!
Ding Dong! The Wicked Witch is dead.
Dude, how can one not be overjoyed!
He hid behind every legal maneuver he could and even behind the Spanish Federation!
Let’s wait and read his reaction to the “unjust” and threaten to put his lawyers through another round of legal action!
I wonder in the Spanish Federation is footing his legal bills?
Racing for Victory and Free Beer!
NOT JOYOUS
Discuss this in light of the implications of the Landis affair. Where’s the joy in any of it?
Agreed x 1000
In isolation, Valverde got what he deserved, and all the legal appeals were frustrating and annoying.
He was however, a guilty man, in a guilty sport, trying to fight for a false innocence amongst a majority who hide behind a similar lie. And he lost.
He was caught, and we’ve long learned that cheating is super ok! as long as you don’t get caught….or die. So, it’s just more of the status quo.
I’m not happy about him being suspended, and I wouldn’t have been happy if he ‘got away with it’ either like others. The reality is, in a sport so damaged and built on past lies and deception, until the ‘powers-that-be’ recognize the past reality and address it, through progressive solutions/deterrents vs reactive ‘slaps’, that there is little to be happy about.
This system of punishment and enforcement is supposed to prevent future events of a similar nature, but we have no reason to believe it will, because the past has shown us it doesn’t. So instead we revel in one man’s punishment and claim to be overjoyed?
Not me, I’m not that vengeful or naive.
I’ll be happy when the rules are effective, cause then I won’t have to rest my joy on the punishment of some and the successful aversion of the same by many more…
When it stops…that would be worth celebrating.
In related wierdness
yesterday when I was stirring my compost pile, I unearthed a aluminium bottle cap with the brand ‘Valverde’ printed on it…which was weird (I’ve never even seen it before) and I joked with my partner that it was a sign he’d get suspended today.
no kidding.
Good one Lawrence...
he’s hardly a rogue in the sport and unfortunately, has plenty of company in the doping department.
Indeed ... no joy here.
This affair has dragged on for over 4 years. To me that indicates a broken system.
The evidence that Valverde doped is convincing, yet he never tested positive. Broken system.
Some of his results were likely achieved while doped, and yet they will stand. Broken system.
If you accept the validity of the legal process in this case, there are still many blood bags unclaimed by their rightful owner. Many of the guilty seem to be getting clean away. Broken system.
I am not happy when I see a guilty individual banned if I know that others, equally guilty, are still running free. That is not justice.
If you're waiting for a justice system that succeeds in punishing all guilty parties...
…before endorsing it’s ability to punish any guilty parties, you’re going to have an awfully long wait.
As true as that may be
there is a big difference between getting something that is working to work extremely well, and getting something that is broken to work.
it’s kinda like the difference in effort between increasing an average speed of 35kmph to 40kmph over 100km vs increasing an average speed from 10kmph to 15 kmph over 5km.
Optimization is very difficult, but designing a functioning system doesn’t have to be. What we have is far so from optimal, not working well…and arguably barely working at all.
It "works" mainly
by the UCI tossing some meat to the peanut gallery occasionally, and self-congratulating itself on a job well done….
The systematic aspect of it remains untouched and unchecked
Sure, I agree.
but what I read from Ed K is a question of minutiae…measured from an efficient system for example.
Something that “functions mainly” is in my mind something barely functioning.
I just don’t accept the odd small ‘success’ here and there as good enough. Rouleur nailed it. There are many more example of it being broken than being fixed.
However, celebrating these small ‘wins’, or thinking they are any sort of numbers minority, especially considering the dates, is a fools delusion.
And you think *not* punishing dopers within the statute of limitations...
…will improve that? Really?
Not sure how you derived that conclusion from what I said.
I didn’t say because what we have isn’t functioning well it’s better to have nothing at all.
I said what we have isn’t functioning well so it’s better to have something that does function well.
I got it from the fact that you were objecting to my original point...
…and your constant complaints about the Valverde procedure, and the fact that he’s been prosecuted at all.
My original point was you take what you can get, as a start, and try to get more. I don’t disagree that the system could be improved. But I don’t see that as reason to complain when it has actually worked.
Well, then we agree
the system could be improved.
The only thing I object to is the line of thinking that somehow questioning the system we have is equated with supporting having no system at all.
There was reason to believe Blood letting worked as well, and it is possible to “actually work” in very few instances….but there were better reasons why we stopped that and thankfully found better ways. However, questioning blood letting isn’t suggesting that we do nothing instead.
I dunno
I think sending in a few cyclists for a good old fashioned Civil War era bloodletting as a punishment for doping might do the trick . . .
Might be a good testing procedure also
Like canaries down a mineshaft, if the leeches go fast…
I'm betting on science to cure all the damage done by my reckless behaviour.
I have no idea what your last paragraph is trying to say, but...
…I’ll be comfortable saying we agree when you are willing to concede that the Valverde procedure, and the penalties it has resulted in, were entirely legitimate and warranted. Since I don’t think you’re anywhere close to conceding that (unless I’ve missed some major evolution in your position), then we’re very far from agreeing.
As for the torturous aspect of this whole thing, the UCI has clearly been letting it play out this far in order to get a number of legal precedents established. I expect those to be exploited in the near future in other cases, and will be very disappointed if they aren’t. (Unfortunatley, McQuiad’s most recent comments are not encouraging in this regard; but we can live in hope.)
Which is all the better reason why we should take the defense of:
“i’ve never tested positive” or “i’m the most tested athlete” with a heavy gain of salt at best
Nice Post
The 2010 Giro sucked. Dopers and Cadel.
by rubesANdbabes on May 31, 2010 7:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Why does
the refusal of the Spanish Cycling Federation to open disciplinary proceedings against Mr Valverde for his involvement in Operation Puerto.
,
SPC ( to add to the ruthless use of initials here) have jurisdiction and the upper hand over the ruling body of International Cycling [ International Cycling Union]?? { Which by the way is, ICU, where I live and is short for Intensive Care Unit in Hospital, probably were the rules committee needs to be!}
Soli Deo Gloria
Your question if I understand is why the Spanish fed has powers of (un)enforcment that theUCI doesn't, correct?
The reason is, as I understand it, UCI wirth the rules. It then defers to the local federations to do the actual enforcement of the rules. That way UCI (iCU) does not require an enforcement body in each country that holds events under it’s jurisdiction. Also it means only one body does all of the enforcement at all levels of the sport within a given country.
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions
BAH...
" … UCI writes … "
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Caisse Partly To Blame
Caisse d’Epargne should have suspended Valverede as soon as CONI ruled against him. Their allowing him to continue is one reason this has dragged on for so long.
Amen
Let me go on record saying I fervently hope they don’t find a replacement sponsor for next year and have to fold as a result of their disgraceful handling of this.
The more likely scenario though is that Contador slides into Valverde’s vacant spot and brings a truckload of money with him.
+1 on the last bit in particular
"A mountain is not an obstacle, it is an opportunity" - Robert Millar
And then the floodgates open up on Puerto...
and we discover that Contador is, in fact, AC.
Talking about egg on your face!
Maybe Manolo Saiz can come back as be DS!
Racing for Victory and Free Beer!
I expect Conta to hook up with Alonso
and take half the CDE team to his own team with new management. Maybe Ferrari sponsorship.
Contador probably has his own people
he strikes me as someone who wants his own way. Not saying it would be ideal, but i kinda expect a new team with Contador just picking off some of his preferred riders both from Caisse and Astana.
But setting up all the practical aspects is a huge undertaking
Service course, mechanics, travel arrangements etc, not to mention licenses and . I wonder if Conta and his people want to take that step?
The head of the team should be fired
but don’t put the riders jobs in jeoprady. I’ve always liked the way Caisse rode for their team leader and they once again did so at the Giro. There are a lot of good riders getting paid well(for cycling standards) on that team..don’t blame them.
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
I tend to agree...
…except that they have also gone way too far in the opposite direction that BMC went with Santambrogio and Ballan. Neither of them should probably have been withdrawn until there was something specific, but given the specificity and the nature of the accusations against Valverde, Caisse really should have pulled him until the challenges were resolved.
I agree
that’s why I say clean out those in charge of the decision but don’t punish the people riding their bikes who had no say, or the DS’s who couldn’t influence a decision either way.
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
Yeah...
…I wasn’t so much objecting, I guess, as registering my sense of where it was wrong. I would say that the fact that they did this speaks very badly about them as an organization, but ‘who’ should pay the price for that, in terms of actual people, is always tricky.
Unzue should be canned
but really, despite my long-running refrain that the holding companies of doping riders should be sanctioned as well as the rider (and sometimes more so),
the Valverde case implicates people well beyond Unzue—and beyond cycling.
At a minimum unnamed functionaries in the Spanish Federation need to be replaced.
The Spanish Federation should be replaced
maybe the the Basque…
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
oy. at the risk of provoking an intercontinental
pelota volley from Albertina . . .
the Basque cycling bunch is hardly a bastion of doping probity.
Maybe partly,
Don’t you feel that Spanish Cycling Feds should be backing up UCI, by putting the clamps on their own countries team (Caisse in this case){cute}, not condescending them. Like wise as should ALL Country cycling federations!!! Too many Cops patrolling the grounds using a different rule book! and don’t forget to mention a lack on INTEGRITY.
Soli Deo Gloria
Ha Ha Ha
a few months after Puerto broke, Fuentes was an invited speaker at a conference on “Sports Medicine” at the King Juan Carlos University in Madrid.
caisse, the spanish federation
lots of people who dropped the ball (or willingly threw it against the wall- the ball is glass) on this one, none of whom will suffer as a result of their actions, i’m almost certain of it. i agree with jens though, caisse are at the front of the queue when it comes to disgraceful conduct.
"I was watching the Tour de France in 2005, just being a fan again. I thought, ‘you're a fucking idiot. You're a bike fan who gets to ride the Tour de France.'"
- david millar
It's dubious to start blaming this on Caisse, or other.
Everyone just behaved in the status quo…there is no one more guilty of doing things “just the way it works”
This particular example gets more attention, but it’s hardly different than any other.
Most if not all teams abide by the agreement
not to race riders currently under investigation, so yes I’d say it’s different.
BMC
Just sat Ballan for two months pending investigation
"Some people are like slinkies - not really good for anything but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs."
What you say is true
but they don’t sit Hincapie? So even within their team exists different policies. That’s a big part of my point.
Speculative claims from a dubious source
do not equal an investigation. Unless I’m missing something.
"Some people are like slinkies - not really good for anything but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs."
+1
you can’t compare hincapie, even ballan, with valverde. they had bags of his blood fer chrissakes.
"I was watching the Tour de France in 2005, just being a fan again. I thought, ‘you're a fucking idiot. You're a bike fan who gets to ride the Tour de France.'"
- david millar
You're then missing the fact that
it’s an full investigation comfirmed by the US cycling associtaion and USADA…
there is also an investigation revolving around fraud of the government, and conspiracy. I think that a full-fledged investigation.
I, personally, am not saying that those teams should ban those riders, but don’t confuse that with the fact that these events aren’t very different.
As well….oh.. Ursula said it. Numerous countries are involved.
There was proof against Valverde
Floyd Landis words are not proof.
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
Yes,
and what you’re stating above is person’s under “investigation”…
Puerto began with Manzano’s words as well….and no more proof. It took what? four years to get proof.
If we want consistency, we have to ask for it. Either they sit when under investigation, or they sit when the legal matters are done.
I actually didn't state anything above
but you can’t sit people when only rampant speculation is your reason. How many baseless speculation has there been over the years? But when you have a bag of blood lying around which proves doping then you sure as hell can sit someone. Valverde wasn’t even under investigation, the only thing to solve was how to get by legal loopholes so they could suspend him.
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
Huh?
You wrote: “Most if not all teams abide by the agreement not to race riders currently under investigation.”
and I pointed out team(s) who haven’t done that with riders currently involved in an investigation by 2+ countries, involving numerous persons and with previous testimony by 6+ people.
Oh yeah...
you’re absolutely right…. I was responding to Jens comment with that sorry. Anyway, you seem to be supporting the same ideas:
That somehow there is a difference between Manzano’s rampant speculation and Landis’s. which I would disagree with.
that once Manzano’s testimony lead to proof, he should have been suspended, but I also disagree with this, because the appeals centered on the idea of weather that proof was legally admissible.
Anyway, this is off on a seperate tangent that I really don’t feel like defending all that vigorously.
I’m just surprised people would support the banning of Valverde at the beginning of this investigation and not support the same for the riders implicated by Landis.
I fully support banning the riders Landis listed if evidence is found
and if there were no evidence against AV I wouldn’t have supported his suspension. I also really hope evidence is found and Lance and JB get shit canned!!
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
ok, that's clear and I agree
but should they be banned during the investigation?
That seems to be the contentious question.
I say no, others say yes, others say the two cases are too different to compare (which I don’t see, but that could be me)
Here is where I stand
while the Italians were claiming AV had doped but hadn’t been able to prove this yet then no he shouldn’t have been suspended. Once they found that his blood matched that of the blood bag they had and could prove he doped then yes he should have been. At that point it was more a waiting game to see if the Spanish fed would play along or if they had the legal ability to suspend him anyway, the investigation was all but over. So as long as the accusations from Lanids can’t be proven then those he accused should be allowed to race. If they are confirmed then those riders should be suspended by their teams right away.
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
It's a mostly pointless discussion
because most cases are about positive A samples or sanction request following passport analysis. In those cases teams always sideline their riders. Investigations like the AV one (and the Landis fallout) are abnormalities. There can’t be a rulebook for that so teams will have to use discretion in cases like that. CdE clearly demonstrated that they had no regard for anything but their own win-count. For that they deserve to pay the price in my book.
Well, i think it takes too much time/effort
to purge all the skeletons in the closet from the riders of the early 00’s. There has to be a line drawn in the sand where you say ‘too many people were doping back then and we accept this fact and move on.’ Valverde’s ban stems from a doping ring that saw much legal action and resulted in the suspension of some riders and the pariahing of dozens of others (im not sure if thats a word, but i like it). To some, the Valverde thing was based upon evidence that is tangible and recordable as evidence in a court of law, while the Landis investigation hasn’t produced anything but speculation. Nothing can and should be done until there is evidence or corroboration, but the Valverde case was hard to deny.
Caisse didn't even sideline him when a federation
had found him guilty ferchrissakes, what more do we have to say on the subject?
I'm merely pointing out
that Caisse waited until the legal matters were ruled on, which considering he never tested positive in competition is all they could do, I believe.
But we disagree.
I’m also pointing out that an investigation involving the testimony of 6+ people, two or more countries and 5 atheletes is no small matter either.
It's many more then just Landis
It’s also:
Frankie Andreau
Betsy Andreau
Fillipo Simeoni
Greg Strock (vs Hincapie)
Emma O’Rielly
Michael Anderson
That’s 7 people.
The difference that I see, and it may be semantics..
The Italians were actively looking at specific allegations regarding Ballan and Stambrogio. USAC/USADA are looking at a general investigation, that has yet to bring specific evidence of malfeasance regarding George, or any of the riders implicated. If there were something beyond Landis’ statements, then you would see BMC sideline Hincapie. I believe in the case of the Italian investigation there was more than hearsay evidence of probable wrongdoing.
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Not sure the Landis investigation
has enough sporting clout to sit riders. Its more of a legal and image based issue now
However
We had heard that different countries are investigating the Landis claims. So I see that there’s an investigation ongoing but no suspensions of riders.
Yes
but its not solid enough to warrant benching at this point, and the whole time span thing to, its not a current issue, but a dredging of the past.
Now some may say Valv’s case is a dredging of the past, but that wasnt particularly removed from the Puerto case in the timeline of events there. Puerto hasn’t ended until we get more action from the spanish authorities.
Ultimately Valverde brought more short-term glory to Spanish cycling
and the only win of consequence he loses out on is Romandie, even though the alleged doping happened earlier and would have seen him suspended during the period he won his biggest events.
Caisse should have suspended Valverde
The difference between Valverde and some others is that CONI went through all the steps and found him guilty. Valverde was offered the chance to defend himself of the charges. In stead of argueing the evidence, Valverde chose instead to argue CONI had no jurisdiction over him. CONI had Valverde’s blood from which they extracted DNA. They then got the evidence from Operation Puerto and positively matched his DNA to that of Blood Bag #18. CONI suspended him and that is the time Caisse d’Epargne should have suspended him as well.
~~~ice
They're greedy and wanted their best rider
for as long as humanly possible. Now they’re sunk, and they’re probably gonna fold, but it was the best chance they had i guess.
Italians?
I thought the Spanish refused to cooperate. How did CONI get the blood bags and/or DNA test to make the case?
Further proof of a corrupt system
will likely be how quickly Valverde is signed by another team during the suspension.
I bet you Garmin will sign the new "clean" Valverde!
JV is such a whore!
Sorry JV!
Racing for Victory and Free Beer!
no worries
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on May 31, 2010 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Except he can't be signed while suspended.
He’s banned from all participation.
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions
But their contracts didn't begin until post suspension
I think that’s how it goes, preliminary deals before the suspension ends is OK?
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
Sure...
but think about it….a guy gets popped, gets a two year ban and almost instantly, already has a job waiting for him when he comes back.
It differs
Sella, Ricco and Rasmussen were surely holding out looking for better teams. For Basso it was easy because the top Italian team approached him but many of these guys don’t get the offer they would like.
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
I for one...
Can’t wait to see Valverde back.
I believe cycling is worse off for a rider like Valv.Piti to not be in the peloton.
Bunch of slack-jawed faggots around here. This stuff will make you a god damned sexual Tyrannosaurus, just like me - Jens Voigt, Predator (1987)
Um, and apparently he's already 6 months into his suspension...
giving new meaning to “using races as training”
explain how?
and . . . by
“rider like Valv.piti” what exactly do you mean?
a conscience-challenged nimrod?
Perhaps there’s another choice in there somewhere
Only because I believe...
He’s a talented, entertaining rider.
I don’t in any way condone his cheating, but I believe (Vino in a similar fashion) that he’s a terrific rider to watch.
The peloton is a lesser place whilst he’s missing.
Bunch of slack-jawed faggots around here. This stuff will make you a god damned sexual Tyrannosaurus, just like me - Jens Voigt, Predator (1987)
the troubling thing (as with Vino)
is the precise relationship between the “terrific rider to watch” & the doping, though, isn’t it, alas?
"I was just trying to keep warm" - Ian Stannard on finishing third in KBK
And therein...
lies the rub.
Bunch of slack-jawed faggots around here. This stuff will make you a god damned sexual Tyrannosaurus, just like me - Jens Voigt, Predator (1987)
Well, with a couple of significant exceptions
(03 Vuelta and last year’s Vuelta),
I think Valverde became a really annoying rider to watch, unless you like the spectacle of watching JRod flog himself to near-death so that Valverde can wheel-suck in a group behind.
Y'know . . . there's a puzzling 'grey market"
that I’d like to know more about:
Who was supporting a Ricco or a Basso or a Rasmussen during their suspension? Are they living off of savings or living off of credit advanced by an agent?
Ricco was "teaching" spinning classes.
"Mollema not flying, +12 at interm." Bruce. "I hope he doesn't slip in Frinking's tears.." Seahorse.
that’s awesome, I wanna take that class!
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on May 31, 2010 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions
wow…seriously though, I hope that goes ok for that dude
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on May 31, 2010 9:16 PM EDT up reply actions
He seems to be doing fine with that so far... all ready has a world class level triathlete under his tutelage
and the triathlete was called out for taking Tyler as a coach
Tommeke!, Tommeke!, Tommeke!, Tommeke!
On the other hand,
he is taking clients away from coaching businesses who don’t have a famous front man from a cycling career built on doping. Also, he is currently suspended!
I doubt Basso was short of a few quid before he got banned.
He did “charity work”, didn’t he?
"I was just trying to keep warm" - Ian Stannard on finishing third in KBK
doesn't basso's wife own or operate a spa or some sort of salon?
i remember reading something to that effect.
She worked in a beauty salon
Elisa Basso used to go there, Ivan went along to get tanning cream & met his future wife.
If we're not gonna redistrib VV points.
Then at least erase them. No way people should be rewarded for putting him on the team. You gamble, you loose, you pay.
With the new Superted syste,
There is no redistributing.. Or I thought that’s what they told us at the beginning
Screw what they told us!
And I’ll let them get by with no redistrib. But no way should teams get to keep points.
^ i already have ; )
"Race radios in Cat 4?"
by gravel road on May 31, 2010 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions
To quote "Pulp Fiction"
“…but you know it, she knows it, f*cking Marsellus knew it, and Antwone should have f*cking better known better.”
Racing for Victory and Free Beer!
Inevitable, deserved & right
but still a damn shame to see such an attractive rider, and what always seemed a cordial & likeable guy, sidelined in his prime years.
For sure.
I really liked VV back in his early Kelme days, when he was the Green Hornet and not Valv.Piti.
Yeah, as much as I loath him now
I became a fan the first time I saw him race, in the Vuelta 2003 I think. But as Jens says, what do we really know about his abilities?
"i just see giro and get all spazzy" - Gavia
by TheFigurehead on May 31, 2010 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions
I've always liked him, and always will.
I’ve long stopped judging guys based on doping. It’s disappointing for sure, but knowing that we’re catching less than are getting away with it…then the numbers aren’t flattering, and as I said before, if your teammates are cheating, and you’re using them, then you’re cheating too.
I have to search for a long time….in fact I can’t think of a team, that I could say….yeah, they’re probably truly clean, especially if I look at details and ignore the PR spin. I’m disappointed that AV has the label, and the criticism now, but come on…
he still beat, and lost too, a whole bunch of other dopers (the same thing).
Sure, let’s asterisk his 2008 L-B-L, for example, and give the real win to…..2. Rebellin – nope, 3. F. Schelck -nope (Puerto) 4. Andy – maybe not (he is Frank’s Brother) 5. Pfanberger – nope, 6. Dekker – nope, 7. Evans…hmm.. maybe. So we’ll give it to Evans on a strength of a MAYBE.
I don't know what you're getting at here
Do you want to argue against my feelings? Good luck, I’ll let you know when they’re willing to respond.
"i just see giro and get all spazzy" - Gavia
by TheFigurehead on May 31, 2010 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Not replying to your feelings or directly to you
more to the comments around “What do we really know about his abilities”
Well, he beat 6 other likely, questionable, or convicted dopers. So we know that and that’s about all we know for certain.
OK, so it was an answer with no point what so ever
"i just see giro and get all spazzy" - Gavia
by TheFigurehead on May 31, 2010 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Nice Ad Hominem.
There is an argument to be made that if the majority is doping than it’s a level playing field, only faster. I don’t fully believe this, but if a doping rider is beating other doping riders…it may ultimately be the better rider who won.
Saying that *the answer* had no point is a claim about your answer...
…not a claim about you. An ad homeniem is a claim about you, rather than about your claim, or in this case your answer.
As pointed out by Ed, not an ad hominem
And your view of the sport has nothing do to with mine, so you can have that argument with yourself. I’m naive enough to not believe that the majority of the sport is doping.
"i just see giro and get all spazzy" - Gavia
by TheFigurehead on Jun 1, 2010 3:09 AM EDT up reply actions
You mean the Green Bullet!
Cato would have never allowed his boss to be bothered by the UCI types!
Racing for Victory and Free Beer!
That is what makes me pissy
He is the most complete rider who can light up practically any race. But I still have no idea if he could be all that unassisted. For all we know he might just be another Voeckler or Nocentini or something similar?
You don't think his junior record or the last 1-2 years are an indication for that?
Never sure, of course.
Short answer: no
And in my book a rider puts an asterisk at all his results when he elects to dope. Sorry Basso et. al.
Long Answer: This line of thinking puzzles me
it’s not that I don’t agree…it’s just that I can count on one finger the number of bike riders I am absolutely certain don’t enhance their performance by artificial means, whether they take it over illegal levels or not.
Everyone else has there hands as deep in it as anyone. So then you have to asterisk everyone.
I think the more relevant question is: If top rider named ___X___ is clean and on a pro team, how could he NOT know who was doping on the team? He just buys into the excuse: “Oh, honest boss, I just had a really super duper day you’ve never seen before”
AND, if he does know, even if HE’s not doping, he’s just as guilty as anyone else IMHO, cause he’s using a doped rider as a teammate. AND if for some reason he doesn’t know, he should be able to expect something, and if it were me, I’d be saying “I don’t want him on my team cause I don’t trust him and he’s a cheat”
I just don’t buy any of it. In the sports I’ve done, I can tell you in five minutes who cheats and by how much, and then you weight what’s acceptable.
A good example is Mr.Lance. We know half his team are asterisk’ed…and we also know he’s a total loony control freak. He knows everything about every teammate for every minute, including how much the ate, what leftover’s they threw out from dinner….EVERYTHING. So even IF he never doped….at all, totally clean, he STILL cheated as much as anyone, cause he had a ‘synthetic’ team …all doped to the gills, helping HIM win, which HE used. If so, he’s as much a f*ing cheat as anyone.
so what does that mean? It means everything you thought was true, isn’t, asterisks for all.
The only caveat to this is that a whole team, is honest and clean amongst the hoards of bad teams. However, that just seems impossible to be competitive. LeMond ideas put it best. What, suddenly, after hundreds of years of human performance, we evolved overnight and started pumping out 30% more power.
That’s got to be some pretty effective training.
to clarify
that statement about Mr.Lance should be in the past….as in the USPostal team etc.
I’m not making a statement about the Shack….although…
I thought all team mates who tested positive were ex-team mates by then
Well, except that Chinese guy this year on Radio Shack …
Yeah, they were, but in light of what claims are made that doesn't fill me with confidence
I don’t buy into the idea that one day Landis, while wearing a USPS jersey can be a clean domestic, who drives the most insane pace up a mountain side I’ve ever seen.
Then the next year he goes to Phonak, decides he’s not good enough, so he’ll cheat like crazy.
That’s without factoring in his admission. When you do?
By this logic
everybody was guilty, because everyone had to have had knowledge of doping practices. And for that matter, i bet alot of them were fully envelopped in such practices, it was the only way to keep up at that point with the contenders.
So, my point is this. If everyone is truly guilty, who is in the wrong. The behavior was condemnable, but it wasnt making the difference. The ones who were doped out of their minds are obviously more guilty, those are the ones who got caught or left a trail, but the people who just did it after injury, or once or twice during a season are not really villains. They’re cheats, but I don’t believe they warrant the any ire in retrospect , as may or may not be the case in the Landis investigations. All that can be done now is the establishment of justice, but it’ll never be complete, and the more we accept this incomplete justice, the more we accept what really is an injustice to some over others.
Maybe Im way off base, but asides from Puerto, we should probably let bygones be bygones. No digging for something thats not there, or something thats so buried that it’ll take forever to conclude, and for that matter we really should accept post-ban riders, and not villify them still (even though I understand those you will).
Eh...
CN: Valverde to fight suspension
Valverde and his Caisse d’Epargne team each pointed out the confusing nature of the ruling. The court stated “that there was no evidence that any of the results obtained by Mr. Valverde prior to 1 January 2010 was through doping infraction” even though it agreed that he had committed a doping violation.
But that quote comes from the press release. The ruling says (section 19.14, page 59 in the pdf-file):
There is no evidence that any of the results obtained by Mr Valverde since 6 May 2006 until now was through doping infraction. Thus, the Appellants’ Request to annul those results should be denied.
There’s no confusion here. At least not on CAS’ part.
"i just see giro and get all spazzy" - Gavia
Does the actual wording of the ruling mean
that NO results will be annulled? Glad I haven’t already reset them in the VDS …
S57 rules
Inter alia. AV doped, is banned from 1/1/10 and all results since then annulled, none before. CAS has spoken.
What is S57, and inter alia what? Does CAS say: results from 1/1/2010 are annulled? Seems not, from above quote. May the annulment have been a hasty conclusion in the UCI press release?
Not even if it involves a trip to Vegas...
…to cover an off road race?
We can't stop here...
"Do you think we are a bunch a girls?...Go and ride some cobbles and you’ll definately know that we don’t discuss perfume and shaving cream." - Dom
by Jimbo... on Jun 1, 2010 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
S57 =
If you go to CAS on anything procedural they are also allowed, and duty bound, to go back and also look a and decide upon the merits of the substantive case (or the doping violation was also CAS’s to decide as well as all other issues)
The rest of the case is procedural – with many implications far and wide. But CAS is allowed to say – AV = doper = banned.
All parties accept going in that CAS is practically the final word. Appeals to Swiss court on points of law only not matters of fact (unless wholely unreasonable). AV got what he asked for in the end.
Only those results from races after 1/1/10
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on May 31, 2010 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions
I predicted that at 12:27pm!
Change my name to Nostradamus please!
Racing for Victory and Free Beer!
Dude! Nostradamus could have predicted that...
…and he’s been dead for a few centuries, give or take.
Move over Lance, you have company
<Valverde’s statement said the court agreed that “none of the victories were obtained through use of prohibited practices, which is confirmed because Alejandro Valverde, possibly the most controlled the athlete in the world, has never failed a doping test.”>
I think they should settle it with a cage fight, winner gets to race, loser forfeits all race results and gets 2 years
How about, winner gets his appeal accepted by the Swiss supreme court...
…who proceed to write a three word decision: “ha ha, sucker!”
first thing I thought of
but on second thoughts I’m a little unsure where to point him.
Dude, I can see my house from here
According to Lance
you shouldn’t be posting comments like that(referring to one of the Shack commercials).
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
STFU Lance, and DIAF.
(is that permissible? If not, LA’s people can drop me a line at my profile email for an address at which to serve process.)
I was wondering about STFU
or SFTFU
(shut Floyd the fuck up)
Giro...Giro.....Giro!!!!!!!!
Quitter's People United member # 42
Shouldn't it be "HTFU Lance" this year?
Russian Vladimir Karpets is not only known for his mullet but also for his radical facial hair; he is not known for much else.
Smug Ole Pat McQuaid finally got his wish...
But it certainly won’t help his karma with that donation thing and all.
Russian Vladimir Karpets is not only known for his mullet but also for his radical facial hair; he is not known for much else.
VDS updated ...
http://www.podiumcafevds.com/results.php?rider=2
Results 2010 :: Alejandro Valverde Belmonte
No results found!
Old results still accessible through http://www.podiumcafevds.com/riders.php?id=2
For example, Tour de Romandie: http://www.podiumcafevds.com/results.php?race=97
so other people not moved up
but Valverde ceases to exist?
is this the official way? (it works for me)
muggito
Yes, the official Podium Café VDS way
And UCI, too, I think. Up to individual organisers to bump other riders up.
In that case I as an organizer..
Oh wait, never mind.
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on Jun 1, 2010 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Please remove me out of this game
since you took away all the points of valverde
i dont want e be a part of this game anymore
can you please remove me and i DONT have valverde in my team so thats not the reason
i just thini its absolutley not done to take away points from riders who get suspended
or caught with epo
early days
although I am glad that Spilak wasn’t bumped up to Romandie winner or the CabinBoys would be out celebrating this weekend
muggito
have you bagged being a cycling fan too? What would cause this type of reaction?
The UCI took away the placings so why should the points remain?
Re justin
i really think iuts not done to punish fantasy games players twice
because one of their riders is caught on doping
you allready have one cyclist less and now you also lose his points
thats against my ID of a fair and nice game
and once agian i DONT have valvrede in my team
but if one of my riders gets caught it will happen to me as well
that means i have to be worryd about that all the time i really dont like that in a game
as i dont like the witch hunt on riders who use as well i think its to match
In normal doping cases
you keep the points made up until the date of the positive test. In the case of AV it can hardly be callled “punish” because everyone was aware of what was hanging over him and gambled on him anyway. Last year those who did so won, this year they lost. It’s a game. shrug
It seams to be e rule here if some is suspended he loses al his points
and i dont want to be in games with rules like that
when players of hese games are being punished for hings they
can’t do anything about the fun of his game is gone
like i said before i have a problem wih the witch hunt that is goining on in cycling
next time some other rider who is in my team might get suspended and maybe even
while he is unguilty and hen i will lose his points thats rabish i just don’t like that
Like Jens said, usually all points would not be lost if a rider got caught doping.
Valverde is a special case because his ban dates back to January 1 of this year. Officially, he didn’t race this year—so no results, no points.
The one part VDS players had absolute control over was the decision to take or not take Valverde. We all knew that his ban was likely to be extended worldwide this season, and speculated about how far back they might strip his results if he did. Losing all points was always a possibility.
Will something similar happen again this year? My guess is: probably not. We’re halfway through the season, and the judicial process is slow. If a new case comes up, the rider in question will probably lose points only from when the positive or announcement of infraction occurs (although they might lose all points from the race if it happens during a stage race).
Even if their federation or the UCI ends up stripping earlier results, the decision is unlikely to be made until after the season is over. And in VDS, all results are final as soon as the season ends.
Hope that helps clarify things.
It’s so stupid I’m speechless--Fabian Cancellara, on claims that he rode a motorized bike in the classics
Why would i bag beining a cycling fan???
unlike a lot of people i dont get upset when a rider gets caught on epo
o think this will stop is a naiive as to think murder and rape will not ever happen again
i dont understand why some people hate valverde or vino that match
they did something wrong and they get punnished for that
i like cycling and will never stop watching it but i watch it for fun and if i want o get
angry and botherd i go and watch some docu about women who get treated bad in africa or
something i don’t like this site beiing so keen on everything about doping
i’m a fan trasing epo i leave it to the lads of he WADA
where those not the rules when the game started?
"Ants don’t worry, they operate like a fantastic team, they accept obstacles and deal with them in a positive manner, they don’t complain and remain positive. An ant doesn’t work on emotion, is proactive and always chooses the ant role."
Probably were but I don't think they're on the rules page
unless I’ve missed them, which is entirely likely. But if not, possibly they should be?
"I was just trying to keep warm" - Ian Stannard on finishing third in KBK
yeah it was were debated at the time.
Let the reactionary go. Heck it moves me 351 or something….
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on Jun 1, 2010 7:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Couldn't find a rule about this situation in a breif look at pre-VDS threads.
but I had thought the points would remain, and the penalty was that you couldn’t choose another rider. If this is the case, if Scarponi happened to get popped, I’d be a bit f^&%d. Not that I know he’s doping, but I share a little suspicion. Are there any precedents in the VDS game, last year, even?
I think this was discussed in one of the pre-VDS threads
I was under the impression that taking Valverde was a distinct risk
In general, we would remove points from the point of the infraction forward.
In Valverde’s case, though, his official results are being stripped back to January 1. No results, no points.
Previous years: Ricco lost all points for the Tour in ‘08; Di Luca from his positive forward in ’09; guys like Colom who tested positive out of competition last year didn’t lose any previous points because there was no proof of dopage in the specific races where he earned them—and his results were not stripped retroactively.
He’s here, really? Tell him I said hi. How’s he doing?--DZ, on being told Floyd Landis was present at the ToC.
Yup, that's it exactly.
He’s here, really? Tell him I said hi. How’s he doing?--DZ, on being told Floyd Landis was present at the ToC.
Interesting to see what happens next
The Italian authorities have evidence against other riders. Now that the Valverde case has held up to scrutiny, it will be interesting to see if they bring more cases.
There were 200 names on file
I’d like to see the focus move beyond cycling to the footballers, but that isn’t likely to happen.
However, it will be interesting in the long run to see if those who avoided justice so far get off better than Birillo and Zapatero. After all, 1st and 4th at Il Giro isn’t a bad showing at all for the Fuentes alumni association.
Vlaanderens Mooiste
I confess...
to a rather shocking lack of interest in the other sports. That’s probably wrong, but that’s how it is for me. Apparently, the Italians have evidence from other sports too, but no idea if they will do anything about it. I think it more likely that they will bring more cycling cases, but I can’t be sure. Certainly, it sounds like they have the means to do so. Vediamo.
It's time...
for a crack-down on drug use in surfing methinks!
Bunch of slack-jawed faggots around here. This stuff will make you a god damned sexual Tyrannosaurus, just like me - Jens Voigt, Predator (1987)
pfft since when is Maui Wowii a performance enhancer?
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on Jun 1, 2010 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Dude.. You gonna eat that cupcake?
have you supported your local race photographer today?
Why not? It's cheap, easy and you might win something.......
by Christopher See on Jun 1, 2010 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Hm, correct me if I'm wrong
but weren’t a number of non-cyclists also implicated by Operation Puerto? I seem to remember hearing about tennis players and footballers, among others, being implicated, but no names named. And I have heard exactly zero about that since. Perhaps my memory is faulty?
It does seem to me that a big part of the reasons cycling has these “episodes” is that a non-negligible number of fans/media/authorities in cycling care about it, whereas I guess they don’t in other sports. I’m convinced the only reason all the steroid issues in baseball were brought to light is because of Congressional interest. Come to think about it, I don’t even know if there is drug testing in the NBA or NHL; I can’t recall ever hearing about a player in either league ever being tested, much less failing a test…
This leaves Caisse quite a lot less convincing in GTs.
It wouldn’t be so bad if they still had Joaquin Rodriguez. Maybe Soler will have a particularly good year to compensate. Feelings are slightly mixed about this, because there is arguably no more complete rider (which someone said up there already) among all the riders doping in the peloton. But if he’s out of the picture, we can have just a slightly better idea where we stand, one of the guys about whom there is solid evidence having been removed.
Y'know who Valv-piti is un-doped?
Freire. nttawt
(and you’ll notice that I don’t think for a minute that Vavlerde is clean this minute)
Really?
Because I tend to think (without much supporting data) that those who are accused of doping ride clean after the accusation. For example, I’d bet my milk money (but not my lunch money) that Valv.piti rode clean this year.
I used to think in that direction, but...
Off the top of my head: Rebellin, Di Luca, Nozal, Ribeiro—all popped in the past couple of years after earlier accusations or cases (Rebellin on video, Di Luca earlier suspension, Nozal & Ribeiro both Puerto alumni).
I don’t know whether Valverde continued to dope or not, but Frei told us how easy it was to avoid EPO positives, and well-managed blood doping is still virtually impossible to detect.
Eh, maybe I’ve gotten too cynical, but if someone is doping and winning and not testing positive, I don’t see why they would stop.
He’s here, really? Tell him I said hi. How’s he doing?--DZ, on being told Floyd Landis was present at the ToC.
Jose Ivan Gutierrez reaction on the Valverde ban
Had not seen this before now. Sounds more like a guy that is upset on the behalf of his friend than a constructive way to go for the fight against doping, and why doesn’t he mention the bloodbags at Fuentes place?
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/gutierrez-responds-to-valverde-ban
"Don't mention the blood bags!"
Seem to be the official Spanish policy in this case.
"i just see giro and get all spazzy" - Gavia
by TheFigurehead on Jun 3, 2010 3:23 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Podium Cafe
Related FanShots on Podium Cafe
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Celebrate the Giro d'Italia at Podium Cafe!
Check our Giro Section for race updates, on-the-scene reports, and other hijinx.
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
