Bettini Calls for a clean up!

gumball3000

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/24012008/ ... ijing.html

Is he taking the p1ss?

I respect most pro cyclists and all world champions should be respected, but he is having a laugh. It is like Osama telling people to calm down on the terrorism.

People said Millar was arrogant, (and I agree, he has his moments), but of all the people to suggest an anti doping crusade........

Bronzie

The more I read about Bettini, the less I like and respect him. :roll:

andyp

gumball3000 wrote:

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/24012008/58/bettini-calls-clean-beijing.html

Is he taking the p1ss?

I respect most pro cyclists and all world champions should be respected, but he is having a laugh. It is like Osama telling people to calm down on the terrorism.

People said Millar was arrogant, (and I agree, he has his moments), but of all the people to suggest an anti doping crusade........

Has Bettini a) ever tested positive, b) been linked with a criminal investigation into doping or c) been linked with a dodgy doctor like Ferrari or Cecchini?

The answer to all three is no.

Whilst you can doubt his cleanliness you can offer no proof whatsoever to him having used doping products. I'd suggest, therefore, that you welcome the fact that a leading rider is seeking a cleaner sport and don't post unsubstantiated innuendo.

gumball3000

andyp wrote:

Has Bettini a) ever tested positive, b) been linked with a criminal investigation into doping or c) been linked with a dodgy doctor like Ferrari or Cecchini?

The answer to all three is no.

Whilst you can doubt his cleanliness you can offer no proof whatsoever to him having used doping products. I'd suggest, therefore, that you welcome the fact that a leading rider is seeking a cleaner sport and don't post unsubstantiated innuendo.

Granted.

I am really being out of order, and I know i am not really helping matters, but I cant help but feel a lack of respect for him. This is more than likely totally unfair.

He was the one rider that steadfastly refused to sign the UCI mandate thingy. I realise that, if he was doping, making a huge, press based, refusal to sign it will generate unwanted attention and extra testing, but it was the way he did it.

He was, of course, accused of supplying Testosterone Gel to Patrik Sinkewitz, but I haven't heard much since the accusation and allegedly the Gel is widespread amongst the peleton.

It is so tricky to draw the line somewhere. Maybe it is the attitude, which I am probably mistaking as arrogant. He is probably speaking simply from the heart in a very Italian manner.

Let's face it. Better to be arrogant and clean, than meek and positive.

I consider my wrist slapped and I will back off from Mr Bettini's case.

The testosterone Gel opens up a new, more interesting factor though......

Since testosterone is naturally occurring, apparently the UCI will only test for synthetic product traces, if a test comes back over the Riders natural limit. Therefore, topping up with a gel, should, in theory, be possible and will not be tested for, unless too much gel is used or for too long a period of time.

A friend in the bike industry alleges that this was the trap Landis fell into. Supposedly he fell asleep with a Testosterone patch on, thus tipping his figures over the limit.

This is obviously speculation, but if true and along with the speculation that these gels and patches are commonplace, wouldn't random and more thorough testing be a good idea?

iainf72

gumball3000 wrote:

andyp wrote:

Since testosterone is naturally occurring, apparently the UCI will only test for synthetic product traces, if a test comes back over the Riders natural limit. Therefore, topping up with a gel, should, in theory, be possible and will not be tested for, unless too much gel is used or for too long a period of time.

Not the UCI only, it's the standard test for testosterone. You need to have a testosterone : epitestosterone above 6:1 before they'll do an IRMS test to look for an external source. IRMS tests are very complicated and expensive hence only doing them when suspicion is aroused.

BTW - Sinkewitz said close to the worlds that Bettini wasn't mentioned and the German authorities appeared to have backed that up.

gumball3000

iainf72 wrote:

BTW - Sinkewitz said close to the worlds that Bettini wasn't mentioned and the German authorities appeared to have backed that up.

Will have to lay off the Bettini bashing then...

jerry3571

It's the old scenario that Bettini has never been caught for drugs and he has had hundreds of drug tests which all proved him clean. Yeh right!
I think Bettini is a good character and brings a lot of light and colour to bike racing but none of us can say that he is clean. We can only say he has never proved himself positive in a drugs test but that is all.
Come on folks, let's keep it real.

NJK

andyp wrote:

gumball3000 wrote:

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/24012008/58/bettini-calls-clean-beijing.html

Is he taking the p1ss?

I respect most pro cyclists and all world champions should be respected, but he is having a laugh. It is like Osama telling people to calm down on the terrorism.

People said Millar was arrogant, (and I agree, he has his moments), but of all the people to suggest an anti doping crusade........

Has Bettini a) ever tested positive, b) been linked with a criminal investigation into doping or c) been linked with a dodgy doctor like Ferrari or Cecchini?

The answer to all three is no.

Whilst you can doubt his cleanliness you can offer no proof whatsoever to him having used doping products. I'd suggest, therefore, that you welcome the fact that a leading rider is seeking a cleaner sport and don't post unsubstantiated innuendo.

Behave. Has Bettini ever tested positive? So what if he hasn't it doesn't mean anything. How do you know who is doctor is, i'm afraid your being a bit naive. Di Luca doesn't use Ferrari or Cecchini but has a BIG suspicion of doping. Bettini has grown up in the doping era and at big teams where they can get proper medical assistance.

andyp

NJK wrote:

Behave. Has Bettini ever tested positive? So what if he hasn't it doesn't mean anything. How do you know who is doctor is, i'm afraid your being a bit naive. Di Luca doesn't use Ferrari or Cecchini but has a BIG suspicion of doping. Bettini has grown up in the doping era and at big teams where they can get proper medical assistance.

The best we have then is tenuous cicrumstantial evidence, i.e. he rides for QuickStep and they are assumed to be dodgy given their management. It's not exactly enough to convict someone is it?

Di Luca might not be 'prepared' by Ferrari or Cecchini but he is by the conviced dope supplier, Dr Carlos Santuccione. Bettini's doctor is unknown but the point I was making is that he's never been linked to one of the known prepatores.

I don't think I'm being naive nor do I need to 'behave' but the point remains that whilst there is no doubt that Bettini has prospered whilst doping has been endemic in the peloton there is very little in the way of evidence, be it circumstantial or hard, to prove he has doped.

dave_1

Bettini shows an amazing ability to read a race, esp in closing phases, the guys a a natural in this respect...I'd argue his lack of Grand tour GC form suggests he may not be as "prepared" as many think he might be

NJK

Dave_1 wrote:

Bettini shows an amazing ability to read a race, esp in closing phases, the guys a a natural in this respect...I'd argue his lack of Grand tour GC form suggests he may not be as "prepared" as many think he might be

Personally i think he was born with to many fast twitch fibres to be considered for grand tours. Also whether your a one day specialist or a tour rider has nothing to do with whether you might dope or not. Blood doping will benefit all and the less days in competition the less tests especially if your goal is to win races in the first week and then disappear.

dave_1

NJK wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

Bettini shows an amazing ability to read a race, esp in closing phases, the guys a a natural in this respect...I'd argue his lack of Grand tour GC form suggests he may not be as "prepared" as many think he might be

Personally i think he was born with to many fast twitch fibres to be considered for grand tours. Also whether your a one day specialist or a tour rider has nothing to do with whether you might dope or not. Blood doping will benefit all and the less days in competition the less tests especially if your goal is to win races in the first week and then disappear.

Getting all the power out in one day leads to uneahlthy prep, but the grand tours put ridiculous demands on the body...the gut can't even absorb enough nutrition not matter how much you eat during the 21 days Grand tour... hence syringe injected nutrition needed, drips,...I think the one days make different demands. Bettini may care for his long term health more than we believe

ninjaslim

Bettini has got to be one of the most entertaining riders to watch race, the guy is in a different league to wheel suckers the likes of Cadel Evans. Grand tours or not.

Come on Bettini.

acorn_user

Wee + Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry = Pretty Conclusive Evidence.

It's clever. Carbon has 3 common isotopes. 14C is the one everyone knows. It is radioactive and it's decay is used to obtain ages. 12C and 13C are stable. Due to differences in how they are made, natural testosterone has a different 31C/12C value than artificial testosterone. So artificial testosterone should show up.

I do this for my PhD, albeit with mud from the Arctic ocean rather than juiced blood.

753forme

So Bettini's never tested positive but he comes from a 'generation' that's unclean. Because he won classics regularly in the period when riders were on EPO etc the assumption is he must have been on something. On that basis anybody who won regularly from say 1996 to 2005 is tainted. So Lance Armstrong must have been on something to beat Ullrich who was doping - or is the thinking on Armstrong different?

drenkrom

753forme wrote:

So Bettini's never tested positive but he comes from a 'generation' that's unclean. Because he won classics regularly in the period when riders were on EPO etc the assumption is he must have been on something. On that basis anybody who won regularly from say 1996 to 2005 is tainted. So Lance Armstrong must have been on something to beat Ullrich who was doping

Absolutely. Your point was...?

z000m

im still hoping this clean generation comes along in my lifetime :roll:

OllyBianchi

Dave_1 wrote:

NJK wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

Bettini shows an amazing ability to read a race, esp in closing phases, the guys a a natural in this respect...I'd argue his lack of Grand tour GC form suggests he may not be as "prepared" as many think he might be

Personally i think he was born with to many fast twitch fibres to be considered for grand tours. Also whether your a one day specialist or a tour rider has nothing to do with whether you might dope or not. Blood doping will benefit all and the less days in competition the less tests especially if your goal is to win races in the first week and then disappear.

Getting all the power out in one day leads to uneahlthy prep, but the grand tours put ridiculous demands on the body...the gut can't even absorb enough nutrition not matter how much you eat during the 21 days Grand tour... hence syringe injected nutrition needed, drips,...I think the one days make different demands. Bettini may care for his long term health more than we believe

I have seen speculation tying Bettini's fall out with Bartoli - remember the two had been training partners, roommates and had a loyal domestique/classic winner relationship for years - with Bartoli beginning an involvement with Dr Fuentes.

753forme

My point Drenkrom was that if we start saying everyone who won anything in the period 1996-2005 was doing drugs even if they were never caught (as Gumball suggested at the start of this thread in relation to Bettini) then we may as well right off the last ten years of cycling history. Erik Zabel did ok in that period winning the Green jersey in the Tour and has confessed to dabbling with EPO in 1996 but doing nothing after that. I believe him. My point is you can't just tar everyone with the same brush without proof, even though it may be correct to have a healthy scepticism about some of the successful riders in that period. I think Bettini is clean - that said he's brilliant at reading races and utterly ruthless in a finish - remember what he did to Baden Cooke in the Giro a few years back.

OffTheBackAdam

It's the same across many sports, Michael Johnson, one of the best 200 & 400m atheletes and a current commentator on athletics, was discussing this not too long ago, when the last but one (?) crop of doping allegations came up. He said that because he was beating sprinters who'd subsequently been revealed to have links with BALCO & the like, his victories were also under suspicion.
He denied doping, but saids that he couldn't disprove rumours & allegations. He had no links with any known Drs & trainers who had dopers under there care, wasn't married to anyone who was a known doper either.

forearms Van Petegem

Bettini finished about 7th in the Giro, GC!!! in about 99 or 2000. If you think he has ever been clean you are talking to the fairies.

I think he may have been associated to a scandal back in 1999 also.

Come on guys, Bettini is about as clean as a 2 dollar hooker.

RichN95.

forearms Van Petegem wrote:

Bettini finished about 7th in the Giro, GC!!! in about 99 or 2000. If you think he has ever been clean you are talking to the fairies.
.

1998 - even though Pantani won, it was a particularly flat Giro - Camenzind came 4th, even Marco Velo made the top 20. Bettini made quite a few minutes up by being in breakaways.

Mark Alexander

As a relative novice to riding [4 years] much less racing of any kind [2nd season] and no RR [next year] but I've always thought that everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

In sport though, especially cycling, the opposite seems to be the norm. It also seems that to be a top rider, you need to expect suspicion and hearsay over your integrity as a person. Can this be fair in any way? NO.

for example, many people say that Miller is arrogant and hypocritical.
Even if he is arrogant. surely, once he's payed his penalty, continually tests clean and still wins, I think he may now be a good ambassador for anti-doping.
He can say "you don't need it to succeed"!

Must we be so judgmental and unforgiving?
Any one who says 'clean up our sport' is worth giving the benefit of doubt to in my book
Oh, that includes the teams themselves.

OffTheBackAdam

Mark Alexander wrote:

As a relative novice to riding [4 years] much less racing of any kind [2nd season] and no RR [next year] but I've always thought that everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

Good heavens old chap!
990 posts on these hallowed boards and you're still not aware that such heretical views aren't allowed? :shock:
Now, repeat after me.
Armstrong is guilty
Armstrong is guilty....

Mark Alexander

Well, no ones perfect!