Mrs Fuentes Lifts the Lid

andrewgturnbull

...and then shut its again, while threatening to kiss and tell all about her husband's clients - not just cyclists this time:

From http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/ar ... yuh7UbdYog

My revelations could ruin Spanish sport, says Fuentes' wife

1 day ago

MADRID (AFP) — The wife of the doctor at the centre of the 'Operation Puerto' doping affair said she could bring down Spanish sport if she revealed all to which she was privy.

In an interview with La Provincia newspaper, the wife of Dr Eufemiano Fuentes, Cristina Perez, a European 400m bronze medallist in 1987, said: "I know what happened at the Barcelona Olympics in 1992."

Perez said "many Olympic medals" were won by Spain thanks to her husband. Spain won a record 13 gold medals at the Barcelona Games.

"It's a Pandora's Box and if opened one day, it could bring down sport," Perez said.

"But out of respect for my companions, to the people who sacrificed so much, I'm keeping mum although I could speak out and ruin all those caught up in this little world."

Fuentes is reported to have been the mastermind of a vast blood doping network, which was dubbed 'Operation Puerto' in May 2006 following a police raid on his Madrid laboratory which uncovered doping products and blood bags.

While names of around 200 'clients' from the world of sport were reportedly found, only a few have been sanctioned.

Perez, 43, herself suspected of doping at the Seoul Olympics in 1988, defended her husband, saying he had been a victim of a campaign by the Spanish government.

"To call a doctor dedicated to sports science who has killed no one a criminal mastermind seems shameful to me."

I wonder what the good doctor has done to upset his wife?

Cheers, Andy

afx237vi

Spot the dopers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spain_at_t ... mpics#Gold

disgruntledgoat

Wait, what's that claking sound i can here... It almost sounds like subpoenas being typed!

blazing_saddles

This news came out yesterday.

IMO, she is hinting, not just at her contemporaries, but at this being State sponsored doping, "from a distance", for the Olympics. If not actually financed, certainly not discouraged.
1992? The crazy years.
The Spaniard's were doing exactly the same as Conconi's Ferrara mob, for the Italians.

If you think State involvement unlikely, read Matt Rendell's "Death of Marco Pantani".
If you just want a quick hint, read this link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesco_Conconi

andyp

Given that the Spanish state sponsored hit squads to murder Spanish nationals in other countries, it should be no surprise that they may have sponsored systematic doping regimes to ensure Spanish gold medallists at the Barcelona games.

leguape

Blazing Saddles wrote:

This news came out yesterday.

IMO, she is hinting, not just at her contemporaries, but at this being State sponsored doping, "from a distance", for the Olympics. If not actually financed, certainly not discouraged.
1992? The crazy years.
The Spaniard's were doing exactly the same as Conconi's Ferrara mob, for the Italians.

If you think State involvement unlikely, read Matt Rendell's "Death of Marco Pantani".
If you just want a quick hint, read this link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesco_Conconi

Definitely sounds like a warning that they might not like what they find if they continue to pursue Dr F. Then again, they're just about coming to terms with Franco, what's a little state-sponsored doping by comparison?

aurelio_-_banned

andrewgturnbull wrote:

...and then shut its again, while threatening to kiss and tell all about her husband's clients - not just cyclists this time:

From http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/ar ... yuh7UbdYog

It`s a good job Armstrong isn`t implicated in this particular doping ring, otherwise his lawyers and PR team would be already claiming it was all nothing but `hearsay` and hate-filled lies. Still, as long as his holiness isn`t involved, I guess it is OK to assume there being a client of a doctor who specialises in doping is proof enough of doping. (As long as that doctor isn`t Ferrari of course).

RichN95.

afx237vi wrote:

Spot the dopers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spain_at_t ... mpics#Gold

I was a big athletics fan back then, and I remember Cacho came out of more or less nowhere to win the 1500m.

6288

aurelio wrote:

andrewgturnbull wrote:

...and then shut its again, while threatening to kiss and tell all about her husband's clients - not just cyclists this time:

From http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/ar ... yuh7UbdYog

It`s a good job Armstrong isn`t implicated in this particular doping ring, otherwise his lawyers and PR team would be already claiming it was all nothing but `hearsay` and hate-filled lies. Still, as long as his holiness isn`t involved, I guess it is OK to assume there being a client of a doctor who specialises in doping is proof enough of doping. (As long as that doctor isn`t Ferrari of course).

u r just a complete waster ... what has armstrong got to do with this ... nothing other than ur petty imagination and mispalced begrudgement ... please just cancel ur account and never come back ...

knedlicky

andyp wrote:

Given that the Spanish state sponsored hit squads to murder Spanish nationals in other countries, it should be no surprise that they may have sponsored systematic doping regimes to ensure Spanish gold medallists at the Barcelona games.

Not sure what the connection has to do with doping, but didn't the UK also sponsor hit squads to murder British nationals in other countries, e.g . in Gibraltar in 1988?

aurelio_-_banned

6288 wrote:

[ ... what has armstrong got to do with this ... nothing other than ur petty imagination and mispalced begrudgement ...

I would have thought my point was clear (unlike your `English`...). Fact is that on this and just about every other forum evidence of doping such as being a known, or even suspected, client of someone like Fuentes is taken to be practically incontrovertible proof of doping. However, when it comes to Pharmstrong such evidence is often dismissed out of hand.

Some US forums even have, or supposedly have, a policy of not allowing any evidence other than that relating to confirmed dope tests to be discussed in relation to doping allegations, yet whilst this policy might be applied when it protects Armstrong (and come to that other US riders), it appears that it is usually ignored when the allegations relate to European riders.

So, surely, either allegations such as this should be ignored as `hearsay` etc or equal weight given to the similar evidence which stands against the Ego.

aurelio_-_banned

andyp wrote:

Given that the Spanish state sponsored hit squads to murder Spanish nationals in other countries, it should be no surprise that they may have sponsored systematic doping regimes to ensure Spanish gold medallists at the Barcelona games.

So, given that the US is currently running an international operation where even foreign nationals are kidnapped and subjected to imprisonment without trial , `dissapearance` and torture (euphemistically called `Rendition`), does this mean we may assume that the medals the US won at the recent Olympics were achieved with the help of state-sponsored doping?

Rhods

This is hilarious! These analogies and conclusions drawn are something else!

Imagine, just imagine that cycling was one day totally clear of any doping and drugs. What would Aurelio do? What would he do with all that pent up anger? It seems that it's so potent that he could spontaneously combust if he doesn't get rid!

Of course, everyone is entitled to their own view, but at the risk of being accused of being an Lance fan blah blah blah, please loosen up and don't let everything be about "him"!

GroupOfOne MkII

knedlicky wrote:

andyp wrote:

Given that the Spanish state sponsored hit squads to murder Spanish nationals in other countries, it should be no surprise that they may have sponsored systematic doping regimes to ensure Spanish gold medallists at the Barcelona games.

Not sure what the connection has to do with doping, but didn't the UK also sponsor hit squads to murder British nationals in other countries, e.g . in Gibraltar in 1988?

Hmm don't know enough about the Spanish hit squads to comment fully, but I'm not sure if you could say the 'Death on the Rock' was a "hit squad" sent to "murder British nationals". Certainly their operation resulted in the death of three British nationals (who let's not forget were attempting to bomb a military parade), but I'm pretty sure they weren't sent to Gib with the specific aim to kill them, unlike I'm guessing the raison d'etre of the Spanish hit squads.

Anyway it doesn't surprise me was Mrs Fuentes has been saying, you've only got to think about various speculation pre-Beijing about what the Chinese may or may not be upto to realise winning Golds at your Olympics is very important.

Also when you think of other state sponsored doping, for example East Germany, then they didn't stick to just cyclists, so it'd be naive to think Fuentes hadn't diversed.

aurelio_-_banned

Rhods wrote:

just imagine that cycling was one day totally clear of any doping and drugs. What would Aurelio do?

Simple, I would go back to watching pro cycling with the sort of enthusiasm I used to have...

Rhods wrote:

What would he do with all that pent up anger? It seems that it's so potent that he could spontaneously combust if he doesn't get rid

Actually I am pretty chilled and tend to look on the whole pro cycling / doping / Armstrong circus with detached amusement tempered by a sense of sadness. As I have said elsewhere, if anyone is filled with pent up anger, it is Mr. Armstrong himself.

aurelio_-_banned

GroupOfOne MkII wrote:

you've only got to think about various speculation pre-Beijing about what the Chinese may or may not be upto to realise winning Golds at your Olympics is very important.

Quite so. Similarly, does anyone know how far the blood-doping of the US cycling team at the 1984 Olympics (including that of the `winner` of the road race, Alexi Grewal) was the result of `official` help provided by the US Cycling Federation?

leguape

aurelio wrote:

GroupOfOne MkII wrote:

you've only got to think about various speculation pre-Beijing about what the Chinese may or may not be upto to realise winning Golds at your Olympics is very important.

Quite so. Similarly, does anyone know how far the blood-doping of the US cycling team at the 1984 Olympics (including that of the `winner` of the road race, Alexi Grewal) was the result of `official` help provided by the US Cycling Federation?

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/ ... /index.htm

blazing_saddles

Yes 1984, but "Big Brother" wasn't really watching. I'm particularly impressed bit this paragraph:-
"The cycling scandal was not the only bad sports news of the week. It was revealed that 86 U.S. athletes in other sports had flunked USOC-administered drug tests in the nine months before the L.A. Games. The tests had turned up anabolic steroids, stimulants and testosterone; two athletes who had made the U.S. team were dropped."

Another tainted LA.

For so long, they've all been at it.
I wonder how we are so eager to think it's all changing, now?

iainf72

aurelio wrote:

Quite so. Similarly, does anyone know how far the blood-doping of the US cycling team at the 1984 Olympics (including that of the `winner` of the road race, Alexi Grewal) was the result of `official` help provided by the US Cycling Federation?

Does it matter really ? At the time it was within the rules.

andrew_s

iainf72 wrote:

aurelio wrote:

Does it matter really ? At the time it was within the rules.

No it wasn't.
There was no specific ban, but "any physiological substance taken in abnormal quantity or taken by an abnormal route of entry into the body, with the sole intention of increasing in an artificial and unfair manner performance in competition...." covers blood doping OK

DaveyL

"Mrs Fuentes lifts the lid" ? I thought she'd be complaining that Eufemiano kept leaving the lid up...

moray_gub

andrew_s wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

aurelio wrote:

Does it matter really ? At the time it was within the rules.

No it wasn't.
There was no specific ban, but "any physiological substance taken in abnormal quantity or taken by an abnormal route of entry into the body, with the sole intention of increasing in an artificial and unfair manner performance in competition...." covers blood doping OK

Blood doping was not illegal in 1984, it was after the LA Olympics that the IOC added it to its list of banned methods and substances, so Ian was right in what he said

MG

Arkibal

What the h*** has LA to do with Mrs. Fuentes???
aurelio, is it possible for you to post anything without bringing LA into the mix?
Scary.
your obsession about LA is very weird...

Back to topic, Fuentes has been around for decades, surely there are hundreds of athletes he doped, and probably still does.

moray_gub

andyp wrote:

Given that the Spanish state sponsored hit squads to murder Spanish nationals in other countries, it should be no surprise that they may have sponsored systematic doping regimes to ensure Spanish gold medallists at the Barcelona games.

LOL.........ill give you your due with this one andy this is an absolute belter , to go from Spanish murder squads to organised Olympic doping in one sentence ........brilliant !

MG

andrew_s

Moray Gub wrote:

Blood doping was not illegal in 1984, it was after the LA Olympics that the IOC added it to its list of banned methods and substances, so Ian was right in what he said
MG

It doesn't have to be specifically listed to be illegal.

Would you like to explain how blood doping is not the illegal activity of "taking a physiological substance in abnormal quantity or by an abnormal route of entry into the body, with the sole intention of increasing in an artificial and unfair manner performance in competition...."?

moray_gub

RichN95 wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Spot the dopers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spain_at_t ... mpics#Gold

I was a big athletics fan back then, and I remember Cacho came out of more or less nowhere to win the 1500m.

I was a big athletics fan myself ,whilst not an absolute favourite he was a decent middle distance man and if i recall correctly the final was ran at a very slow pace which suited fast finishers like him.He also bagged a silver in Atalanta 4 years later so allegations of drug taking may be some way off the mark.Many strange results in middle distance running over the years his was just one of many. Although ive heard the Spanish used to go over the world killing folks so you just never know what they are capable off

MG

andyrac

Moray Gub wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Spot the dopers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spain_at_t ... mpics#Gold

I was a big athletics fan back then, and I remember Cacho came out of more or less nowhere to win the 1500m.

I was a big athletics fan myself ,whilst not an absolute favourite he was a decent middle distance man and if i recall correctly the final was ran at a very slow pace which suited fast finishers like him.He also bagged a silver in Atalanta 4 years later so allegations of drug taking may be some way off the mark.Many strange results in middle distance running over the years his was just one of many. Although ive heard the Spanish used to go over the world killing folks so you just never know what they are capable off

MG

Same here, he was useful, but no more - so to win Gold was a little surprising to say the least. Though, as you say, he followed up 4 years later with a Silver - though I can't remember his results in between, i;e the Worlds and Euros. You couldn't say he was, but it wouldn't be a big surprise if it was later found out that he was among them.
There is something very 'fishy' about the whole Puerto episode - why only cyclists named? Why has it been 'dropped'? Are big Spanish Superstars impicated?? Will we ever find out?

colint

aurelio wrote:

Rhods wrote:

just imagine that cycling was one day totally clear of any doping and drugs. What would Aurelio do?

Simple, I would go back to watching pro cycling with the sort of enthusiasm I used to have...

.

So when was this dope free age that you speak of so fondly ? Or is it just the Armstrong era that you're so unhealthily obsessed with ? (Bearing in mind that this thread had nothing to do with Armstrong until you started whiping your one trick pony of opinion

colint

aurelio wrote:

Rhods wrote:

just imagine that cycling was one day totally clear of any doping and drugs. What would Aurelio do?

Simple, I would go back to watching pro cycling with the sort of enthusiasm I used to have...

.

So when was this dope free age that you speak of so fondly ? Or is it just the Armstrong era that you're so unhealthily obsessed with ? (Bearing in mind that this thread had nothing to do with Armstrong until you started whiping your one trick pony of opinion

aurelio_-_banned

colint wrote:

So when was this dope free age that you speak of so fondly ? Or is it just the Armstrong era that you're so unhealthily obsessed with ? (Bearing in mind that this thread had nothing to do with Armstrong until you started whiping your one trick pony of opinion

One, it`s not so much the `Armstrong era` that I am supposedly `unhealthily obsessed with`, as the whole Epo and ` 800 ml of packed cells` era. (And yes I know blood doping existed in cycling as far back as the early 80`s, what with the US Olympic cycling team and Moser`s `preparation` for his Hour record. However, there is no evidence that blood doping was used in stage races until advent of big-budget teams likes USP who were able to provide the required medical backup and overcome the logistical problems associated blood doping. For example, by using motorcycles with refrigerated panniers to transport the blood).

I know that doping has existed as long as there has been cycle racing. However the big problem with modern doping is that it works so effectively it has the ability to turn Tour also-rans like Indurain, Riis and Armstrong into `winners`. Modern doping boosts the performance of riders so much that `clean` riders might as well go home. In turn those who dope virtually force other riders to dope, even if this is at a risk to their health, or to accept that they will almost certainly not end up on the podium. Also, modern-day doping benefits different riders to different degrees, so even if everyone doped this would not create a `level playing field`.

All this means that modern doping makes the outcome of events meaningless, as one cannot know whether the `winner` was the most dedicated, naturally gifted or determined rider in the race or had simply pushed the doping envelope further than everyone else or has a physiology which adapts to modern doping methods better than anyone else.

As to my concerns amounting to `an unhealthy obsession`, I would argue that far more people should be far more concerned than they appear to be that, due to the effectiveness of modern doping methods, cycling sport has ceased to be truly sport at all and has become nothing more than empty sports entertainment, akin to WWF wrestling.

As to the focus on Pharmstrong, this is surely natural given the fact he was almost certainly the biggest beneficiary of the EPO/Blood doping era, what with his seven Tour `wins`, the way he goes out of his way to attract publicity and controversy and the way so many are prepared to argue he was `clean`, despite extensive evidence to the contrary, whilst at the same time being quite prepared to accept that almost any other rider in the sport over the last 18 years or so did in fact dope.

aurelio_-_banned

Duplicate post removed. :oops: