Savoldelli and his mouth

iainf72

From Cycling Weekly.

SAVOLDELLI VENTS HIS FRUSTRATION
Paolo Savoldelli vented his frustration with cycling in an interview with Tuttosport.

Savoldelli stated that he became disillusioned with the sport after former team-mate Alexander Vinokourov tested positive for blood doping at the 2007 Tour de France.

“I don't believe in that positive test. He doesn't have the same blood group as [Andriy] Kashechkin. Something strange happened. Like with [Floyd] Landis, how else can you explain why he spent a fortune on his [legal] defence? And the case of Rasmussen? That's simply proof that cycling is paying the price for the war between the UCI and the Tour de France”.

The two-time Giro champion has now retired from professional cycling, after a largely fruitless season with Italian team, LPR.

Shocked that a client of Dr Ferrari's might not "believe" in a positive test. Didn't Paolo have really borderline HCT in the Giro in the late 90's?

I like the reasoning though "he spent loads on his defense, he must be clean" - You'll do well in the construction industry il Falco.

Still one of my favourite riders - 05 Giro made him a legend in my eyes - Really gutsy riding.

afx237vi

It's funny how he knows what blood types Vino and Kash are. 'Cos, you know, I imagine that's quite a frequent topic of conversation between certain riders during their down time on the team bus.

Kléber

Like with [Floyd] Landis, how else can you explain why he spent a fortune on his [legal] defence?

err, because he had everything at stake and because he surrounded himself with lawyers who charge by the hour.

micron

and because he dug himself in too deep to be able to back down

6288

fuck me ... we're picking on someone else again now ... i'm gonna start another thread to see who you guys actually like ...

Kléber

6288, what should we do? He is saying that Vinokourov, Rasmussen, Kasheckin and Landis have been found guilty when all along they were innocent. This is an explosive allegation to make but Salvoldelli is just voicing an opinion, backed up with no evidence.

Should we applaud him or comment on his smooth pedalling style and descending skills?

6288

I'd trust the opinion of a champion who spent 10+ years in the peleton over the majority in here ...

Kléber

6288, forget forum members, would you trust the opinions of national federations, accredited anti-doping labs, police forces, the UCI, ASO, WADA, the Court of Arbitration in Sport and others?

Or do you trust Salvoldelli who asserts Vinokourov, Rasmussen, Kasheckin and Landis are innocent?

dennisn

6288 wrote:

I'd trust the opinion of a champion who spent 10+ years in the peloton over the majority in here ...

I'm with you on that count. Although having me on your side may not be the best of ideas.
I've been ranting against these guys for some time now but have discovered that they do
"know all about it", or so they keep telling me.

Dennis Noward

DaveyL

It's not Il Faclo vs the BikeRadar Forum Anti-Doping Massive (BRFADM), as Keleber points out it is Il Falco vs " the opinions of national federations, accredited anti-doping labs, police forces, the UCI, ASO, WADA, the Court of Arbitration in Sport and others?"

Sorry for duplicating your post, Kleber....

Le Commentateur

iainf72 wrote:

Didn't Paolo have really borderline HCT in the Giro in the late 90's?

He was the Saeco rider tested at Madonna di Campiglio in 1999 : I have a photo of the results sheet stored somewhere but can't find it at the moment, but it's something very close to 50%, like 49.9%.

SpaceJunk

Kléber wrote:

Like with [Floyd] Landis, how else can you explain why he spent a fortune on his [legal] defence?

err, because he had everything at stake and because he surrounded himself with lawyers who charge by the hour.

Yeah - plus bear in mind that alot of these funds were raised in the FIght Floyd Fairness Fund (or whatever it was called).

Then again, maybe he didn't raise too much money - I wonder if anyone bothered buying a signed Flloyd ohoto for 20 bucks??

richard wants a baum

dennisn wrote:

6288 wrote:

I'd trust the opinion of a champion who spent 10+ years in the peloton over the majority in here ...

I'm with you on that count. Although having me on your side may not be the best of ideas.
I've been ranting against these guys for some time now but have discovered that they do
"know all about it", or so they keep telling me.

Dennis Noward

So let me get this right, you trust one rider who has won in a peroid of proven doping defending proven dopers rather than the organisations intrusted with the detection of cheaters and the national governing bodies? Dont you usually go on about how we shouldnt worship these guys and that there all falable? I think you just love taking the complete opposite side to every argument what are you bored?

tubularglue

he has a baby face
silky smooth pedaling style
dropped like a rock
retired


he can say what he wants

no big whoop :shock:

dennisn

richard wants a baum wrote:

dennisn wrote:

6288 wrote:

I'd trust the opinion of a champion who spent 10+ years in the peloton over the majority in here ...

I'm with you on that count. Although having me on your side may not be the best of ideas.
I've been ranting against these guys for some time now but have discovered that they do
"know all about it", or so they keep telling me.

Dennis Noward

So let me get this right, you trust one rider who has won in a peroid of proven doping defending proven dopers rather than the organisations intrusted with the detection of cheaters and the national governing bodies? Dont you usually go on about how we shouldnt worship these guys and that there all falable? I think you just love taking the complete opposite side to every argument what are you bored?

Just agreeing with 6288. Why should I believe what you say about the pros? Have you any experience on the pro tour? What was the last team you rode for? What's your Grand Tour winning record? How many different pro roomies have you had in your career? When, if ever, was your last long "bullsh*t session" with any pro rider?
See what I mean? Why should I believe what you say? Why should I?

Dennis Noward

nick hanson

Fair comment.

iainf72

dennisn wrote:

[See what I mean? Why should I believe what you say? Why should I?

You seem to be missing the point here somewhat.

Savoldelli commented on riders who've been found guilty of doping based on positive tests. Some of them have challenged it tooth and nail but the evidence says they're guilty.

If someone was caught killing someone, but his mum said "no chance, he's a lovely boy" does that change the guilt?

dennisn

iainf72 wrote:

dennisn wrote:

[See what I mean? Why should I believe what you say? Why should I?

You seem to be missing the point here somewhat.

Savoldelli commented on riders who've been found guilty of doping based on positive tests. Some of them have challenged it tooth and nail but the evidence says they're guilty.

If someone was caught killing someone, but his mum said "no chance, he's a lovely boy" does that change the guilt?

It's not so much about who's guilty or whose not. It's more about why would I believe
someone who was not there(so to speak) over someone who was. I realize that people have a need to think they know all about it and even feel that because they have read all about it that they do know. You can't read a book or two about or by Lance and know all about him any more than a book would tell me all about you. There is more to people than books, newspapers, magazines can ever tell. You have to know someone before you
can claim to know his motives for saying something or if he's a liar or not(aren't we all
on occasion). All we ever see of these "celebrities" are very little bits in time as compared to
the rest of their lives.
Salvoldelli could be lying or telling the truth. I don't know the man and therefore have no
reason to doubt what he says. He may be telling the truth or think he's telling the truth
or lying. He simply made a statement. It was nothing earthshaking. A simple interview
that some people seem to get more out of than he put in it. It wasn't God telling Moses to go build a boat. It was a man answering a few questions. Nothing more.

Dennis Noward

iainf72

dennisn wrote:

Salvoldelli could be lying or telling the truth. I don't know the man and therefore have no
reason to doubt what he says.

You have no reason to doubt? Did you miss the parts where there were positive doping tests?

The evidence says they doped. Savoldelli says "no they didn't, I know them"

You find the statement which isn't based on any tangible evidence more compelling than the evidence?

:roll:

dennisn

iainf72 wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Salvoldelli could be lying or telling the truth. I don't know the man and therefore have no
reason to doubt what he says.

You have no reason to doubt? Did you miss the parts where there were positive doping tests?

The evidence says they doped. Savoldelli says "no they didn't, I know them"

You find the statement which isn't based on any tangible evidence more compelling than the evidence?

:roll:

Someone who was there gave his version.
Someone who wasn't there gave his version
I don't know either of them.
Not hard for me to figure.
Add to that the fact that I don't really care about "the truth". It might be much stranger
than most of us can imagine and it might be simpler than 1 +1.
I'm curious but beyond that..........

Dennis Noward

.

timoid.

dennisn wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Salvoldelli could be lying or telling the truth. I don't know the man and therefore have no
reason to doubt what he says.

You have no reason to doubt? Did you miss the parts where there were positive doping tests?

The evidence says they doped. Savoldelli says "no they didn't, I know them"

You find the statement which isn't based on any tangible evidence more compelling than the evidence?

:roll:

Someone who was there gave his version.
Someone who wasn't there gave his version
I don't know either of them.
Not hard for me to figure.
Add to that the fact that I don't really care about "the truth". It might be much stranger
than most of us can imagine and it might be simpler than 1 +1.
I'm curious but beyond that..........

Dennis Noward

.

I still can't work out if you or a troll or an idiot.

Due process says they doped. Ergo they doped.

richard wants a baum

dennisn wrote:

richard wants a baum wrote:

dennisn wrote:

6288 wrote:

I'd trust the opinion of a champion who spent 10+ years in the peloton over the majority in here ...

I'm with you on that count. Although having me on your side may not be the best of ideas.
I've been ranting against these guys for some time now but have discovered that they do
"know all about it", or so they keep telling me.

Dennis Noward

So let me get this right, you trust one rider who has won in a peroid of proven doping defending proven dopers rather than the organisations intrusted with the detection of cheaters and the national governing bodies? Dont you usually go on about how we shouldnt worship these guys and that there all falable? I think you just love taking the complete opposite side to every argument what are you bored?

Just agreeing with 6288. Why should I believe what you say about the pros? Have you any experience on the pro tour? What was the last team you rode for? What's your Grand Tour winning record? How many different pro roomies have you had in your career? When, if ever, was your last long "bullsh*t session" with any pro rider?
See what I mean? Why should I believe what you say? Why should I?

Dennis Noward

Dennis i havent ever raced i just like riding my bike and following the races, but at no point did i ask you to believe what i was saying, i was pointing out that there is clear evidence to show these guys doped. Dont believe me believe the clear scientific evidence or not you could always believe Tyler

6288

i think u've also gotta find a full transcript of what salvoldelli actually said ... my interpretation is that he was saying that nothing is as black and white as it is made out to be and that he beleives that the test results and media picture are not the full story ...

i go along with that ,,, after all he was there throughout all these scandals and open to the same temptations and the consequences of their results ...

dennis ... stick with it ... from what i've read ur old enough to know your own mind and have experienced life enough to teach a few folk on here a thing or two ...

the best example i can give ... 1 man wins 7 tours ... cheat ... 1 country wins all but 2 or 3 medals in the same discipline in the olympics and its all down to hard work ... you do the math ... (i'm british btw)

dennisn

Timoid. wrote:

dennisn wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Salvoldelli could be lying or telling the truth. I don't know the man and therefore have no
reason to doubt what he says.

You have no reason to doubt? Did you miss the parts where there were positive doping tests?

The evidence says they doped. Savoldelli says "no they didn't, I know them"

You find the statement which isn't based on any tangible evidence more compelling than the evidence?

:roll:

Someone who was there gave his version.
Someone who wasn't there gave his version
I don't know either of them.
Not hard for me to figure.
Add to that the fact that I don't really care about "the truth". It might be much stranger
than most of us can imagine and it might be simpler than 1 +1.
I'm curious but beyond that..........

Dennis Noward

.

I still can't work out if you or a troll or an idiot.

Due process says they doped. Ergo they doped.

You misunderstand me. I don't care if they doped. Doesn't or wouldn't change my feelings about them one way or another. And I don't have a lot of feelings about
them to begin with. I don't know them. Everyone else is claiming to know it all, not me.
The only thing I'm claiming is that rest of you don't know as much as you think you do.

Dennis Noward

richard wants a baum

Based on what evidence?

moray_gub

You misunderstand me. I don't care if they doped. Doesn't or wouldn't change my feelings about them one way or another. And I don't have a lot of feelings about
them to begin with. I don't know them. Everyone else is claiming to know it all, not me.
The only thing I'm claiming is that rest of you don't know as much as you think you do.

Dennis Noward[/quote]

Dennis while i disagree with Salvoldelli you are bang on the money with your last point about posters not knowing as much as they like to to think When it comes to doping this forum is populated with posters who like to let others know they are more knowledgeable about the subject.


MG

richard wants a baum

Moray Gub wrote:

You misunderstand me. I don't care if they doped. Doesn't or wouldn't change my feelings about them one way or another. And I don't have a lot of feelings about
them to begin with. I don't know them. Everyone else is claiming to know it all, not me.
The only thing I'm claiming is that rest of you don't know as much as you think you do.

Dennis Noward

Dennis while i disagree with Salvoldelli you are bang on the money with your last point about posters not knowing as much as they like to to think When it comes to doping this forum is populated with posters who like to let others know they are more knowledgeable about the subject.


MG[/quote]


Im sorry but i think most of whats been said in this thread is pretty obvious stuff and a bit of disbelief that someone could defend cheaters. But as usual Dennis arrives with his 'dont worship these guys were all human why do you hate these guys' line (not a go at you dennis) which to be honest is pretty touchy feely for me. These guys cheated, they were caught fair and sqaure by the organisations setup to monitor and catch dopers. A certain amount of disdain for an individual who is selfish enough to cheat is pretty normal. As far as knowing more than others, this is a forum and last time i checked forums were place to express your opions on certain subjects? If you dont like what certain ppl write dont read the thread or that particular persons post, sound fair.

Patrick1.0

Every "doping" thread on this message board just goes the same way. I am coming on less, partially because of this and partially because it's the winter and wall to wall talk about doping in cycling is too much for anybody to take... apart from our Den.

cougie

Dennis - you say you dont care about the truth ? So why bother posting ? If paolo did say that - then i am glad he has gone - clear out the old guard.

dennisn

cougie wrote:

Dennis - you say you dont care about the truth ? So why bother posting ?

I enjoy the back and forth banter and it helps improve my typing skills.I guess I do care what the truth is, It's just that I'm not all that wrapped up in Pro sports. Lot of other things in my life seem to have a bit more meaning than whether this person or that person did this drug or that drug. I know they dope and if the ruling bodies don't try to put a stop to it
pro cycling will simply go away. I believe that the powers that be are trying and will eventually get a handle on it. Probably sooner than later.

Dennis Noward

dennisn

richard wants a baum wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

You misunderstand me. I don't care if they doped. Doesn't or wouldn't change my feelings about them one way or another. And I don't have a lot of feelings about
them to begin with. I don't know them. Everyone else is claiming to know it all, not me.
The only thing I'm claiming is that rest of you don't know as much as you think you do.

Dennis Noward

Dennis while i disagree with Salvoldelli you are bang on the money with your last point about posters not knowing as much as they like to to think When it comes to doping this forum is populated with posters who like to let others know they are more knowledgeable about the subject.


MG

Im sorry but i think most of whats been said in this thread is pretty obvious stuff and a bit of disbelief that someone could defend cheaters. But as usual Dennis arrives with his 'dont worship these guys were all human why do you hate these guys' line (not a go at you dennis) which to be honest is pretty touchy feely for me. These guys cheated, they were caught fair and sqaure by the organisations setup to monitor and catch dopers. A certain amount of disdain for an individual who is selfish enough to cheat is pretty normal. As far as knowing more than others, this is a forum and last time i checked forums were place to express your opions on certain subjects? If you dont like what certain ppl write dont read the thread or that particular persons post, sound fair?