Dr Ferrari on Paris - Nice

iainf72

For those interested

http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=indepth.view&id=100

Even a little comment on the prologue....

richard wants a baum

Cant help but wonder who still uses his services. His obviously not to far removed from the scene.

Kléber

That is a very high VAM. Especially considering the climb up the Montagne de Lure was not so steep and there was a raging wind.

dave_1

oh, yes...contador...many will say ...could only go that fast because of dope eh......never mind the fact he's been tested loads and we all got shown our suspicions were wrong when he blew in Paris Nice...just been beaten by Leipheimer by 18 secs...no talent guys ...just a doper is what many of you will dismiss him as, just like LA gets treated as . How about that eh? that's what you all think of anyone who does a good race.... I think contador is clean...the doping forum verdict will be different though

Kléber

Dave, I think you are setting up a straw man argument here. Has anynoe said Contador hasn't got talent?

I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt and have been watching him ride this year from a neutral sort of perspective. But he still needs to explain why his name is on several Puerto documents.

It's much better for him to confront his doubters and to explain how he was kept away from doping products whilst under Manolo Saiz, rather than just to refuse to answer questions, "altra pregunta" is no way win over the fans.

dennisn

Kléber wrote:

I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt and have been watching him ride this year from a neutral sort of perspective. But he still needs to explain why his name is on several Puerto documents.

It's much better for him to confront his doubters and to explain how he was kept away from doping products whilst under Manolo Saiz, rather than just to refuse to answer questions, "altra pregunta" is no way win over the fans.

Seriously, why do YOU believe that anyone, bike racer or not, owes YOU any kind of explanation for anything. You're not the police, you're not doping control, or even remotely
involved in the "affair"(for lack of a better word).
You seem to be a man of some words and claim to know who, what, when, and why as far as doping goes. Why don't you write an article(newspaper) and or book on the subject laying out all your proofs and evidence. Or better yet, turn all this over to the "authorities". I'm sure they would welcome you help in apprehending all these evil doers. You would be helping the sport.

Dennis Noward

iainf72

dennisn wrote:

You seem to be a man of some words and claim to know who, what, when, and why as far as doping goes. Why don't you write an article(newspaper) and or book on the subject laying out all your proofs and evidence. Or better yet, turn all this over to the "authorities". I'm sure they would welcome you help in apprehending all these evil doers. You would be helping the sport.

Dennis, many articles have been written by people in the know.

Here's one about Puertowritten by people with direct access to the evidence.

We like to discuss some of this stuff which is in the public domain and rumours out there. Perhaps you find that distasteful however you seem to come at it not knowing very much at all

I'd love to hear your take on Puerto for example. There's a lot of information out there, including some confessions from riders, partial confessions and defacto confessions. If you feel you've got something to add, please add it but there's limited value in telling people they shouldn't discuss something, is there?

Kléber

Dennis, I've never stated I know who is doping and who isn't. Rather I've suggested some riders have some legitimate questions to answer and that they shouldn't be ducking them. Many fans want to believe in Contador, Sanchez or Davis but when their names appear in black and white on documents apparently gathered by the Spanish police, a lot of fans will want an explanation. May be you don't... but I do.

Remember, any rider earning a living as a bike racer does so by virtue of advertising, by bringing publicity onto themselves and their jersey. They are not quiet accountants who work in faceless offices, nor session musicians who play anonymously in the background, they are right there in the limelight and court the media. If their name is linked to a massive doping scandal, simply saying "next question" when asked about the matter is not an adult way to treat the issue.

Are you saying riders should be left to ride and not asked about their links to Manolo Saiz or Eufamio Fuentes?

dave_1

other than Valverde who surely will be blocked by ASO , is there anyone of consequence from Puerto who could take out a big win this season? if not...why are we bringin up Puerto. IMO ASO will be very wary of Valverde

iainf72

Dave_1 wrote:

other than Valverde who surely will be blocked by ASO , is there anyone of consequence from Puerto who could take out a big win this season? if not...why are we bringin up Puerto. IMO ASO will be very wary of Valverde

They may be wary of Valverde but his sponsor is a big financial supporter of ASO events AND they're French.

dave_1

iainf72 wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

other than Valverde who surely will be blocked by ASO , is there anyone of consequence from Puerto who could take out a big win this season? if not...why are we bringin up Puerto. IMO ASO will be very wary of Valverde

They may be wary of Valverde but his sponsor is a big financial supporter of ASO events AND they're French.

if he looks likely to get into any major ASO event...I'll concede puerto threads are relevant...until then...why are we talking about 2003-04?...could be argued it is past, time to forget given can't be resolved Iain

Kléber

It's fine to move on but how come some riders got banned and others didn't? As we see, Valverde could get a ban this year and if the investigation is re-opened then it's possible Contador and Sanchez get into hot water too. This is the problem, until the matter is confronted, it will cast a shadow over Spanish cycling.

dennisn

iainf72 wrote:

dennisn wrote:

I'd love to hear your take on Puerto for example. There's a lot of information out there, including some confessions from riders, partial confessions and defacto confessions. If you feel you've got something to add, please add it but there's limited value in telling people they shouldn't discuss something, is there?

Don't care about "Puerto". Don't really care about pro cycling's problems. They are what they are and they are being worked on. Maybe things will get better(I think so) or maybe things will fall apart. I enjoy the races and that's the end of it. I'm only playing devils advocate here. If you know all these facts and figures about doping then put it in writing
and put your name on it. Name names. If you know it's all true, there shouldn't be any problem getting published(people love that kind of stuff) in any number of newspapers.
Instead of just complaining on a forum, get out there and push your agenda in public.
Get noticed instead of lurking in the shadows.
And I'm not telling you to not discuss anything. Shout it to the world.

Dennis Noward

iainf72

dennisn wrote:

Get noticed instead of lurking in the shadows.

I did. Remeber, I'm the chap who made Lance throw his toys out of the cot in Procycling with my question. It was published plain as day with my real name.

And guess what? Well, as it turns out my question was amazingly prophetic.

Go figure.

calvjones

If AC and LL sweeping all before them this year whilst Bella Jorge, Sinkewitz and others are effectively thrown away as dirty goods doesn't offend your sense of natural justice, then you're welcome to enjoy your races Denis. But if sport isn't about honesty, integrity and fair play (at least in the ideal) then what the fk is the point?

Anonymous

I think all the cyclit who are taking drugs should stop and then there wouldn't be a doping problem and there will be no suspicions and things.

dennisn

Kléber wrote:

.... suggested some riders have some legitimate questions to answer...... a lot of fans will want an explanation. May be you don't... but I do.

Remember, any rider earning a living as a bike racer does so by virtue of advertising, by bringing publicity onto themselves and their jersey. They are not quiet accountants who work in faceless offices, nor session musicians who play anonymously in the background, they are right there in the limelight and court the media. If their name is linked to a massive doping scandal, simply saying "next question" when asked about the matter is not an adult way to treat the issue.

Are you saying riders should be left to ride and not asked about their links to Manolo Saiz or Eufamio Fuentes?

And when you get this "explanation" it will affect your life how???? What could some person you don't know, offering up an "explanation" that may or may not be true hold any
sway in your life? How will this make your life better or whatever? What difference does it make?
Movie stars and other "celebrities" hire bodyguards to keep their "worshippers"
at bay in order to gain some sort of privacy in their lives. They don't answer every question put to them by every person who thinks they have some "right" to know this or that. You have no right to these peoples lives, no matter who they are or who you are.
By the same token they have no obligation to you, just as you have none to them. Ask me anything, but I sure don't owe you an answer.
Your advertising argument is lame. Sorry but it is.

Dennis Noward

richard wants a baum

dennisn wrote:
Get noticed instead of lurking in the shadows.



I did. Remeber, I'm the chap who made Lance throw his toys out of the cot in Procycling with my question. It was published plain as day with my real name.

And guess what? Well, as it turns out my question was amazingly prophetic.

Go figure.

Just to show how far behind we can get in Australia we have only just got this issue on our shelves first thing i did was look that question up. Burst out laughing in the middle of the newsagency, i think the girls at the counter thought i was mad.
Dennis if you dont like the discussion dont join in,but some of us do. Puerto is still relevant because the spanish have decided to sit on their hands for years or worse deliberately cover up certain riders activities.

dennisn

richard wants a baum wrote:

dennisn wrote:
Get noticed instead of lurking in the shadows.



I did. Remeber, I'm the chap who made Lance throw his toys out of the cot in Procycling with my question. It was published plain as day with my real name.

And guess what? Well, as it turns out my question was amazingly prophetic.

Go figure.

Dennis if you dont like the discussion dont join in,but some of us do. Puerto is still relevant because the spanish have decided to sit on their hands for years or worse deliberately cover up certain riders activities.

I like the banter back and forth. You have your point and I have mine and I have a right to
call you to task on your ideas as you do mine. I sure don't expect to put my ideas out there without someone saying "wait a minute you crazy nut case". And that happens a lot.
I didn't say Puerto was not relevant. Just said I didn't care. The people in charge of pro cycling will either get a handle on drugs or they won't. I guess that's my stance. Still my favorite sport though.

Dennis Noward

RichN95.

Well, from what I've seen, the Puerto evidence against Bertie is very weak - so weak that it almost shows that he wasn't involved. Doesn't make him clean though.

Anyway, back to Ferrari. While I've no doubt he's a dope pusher, he also knows an awful lot about the science of cycling. He always goes on about VAM and, applying my A level maths from many years ago (A grade mind), it doesn't seem to be a particularly indicative value. So what do the experts think of VAM?

dennisn

RichN95 wrote:

Well, from what I've seen, the Puerto evidence against Bertie is very weak - so weak that it almost shows that he wasn't involved. Doesn't make him clean though.

I disagree. If he wasn't involved , he wasn't involved. You said that. How does not involved translate into a pronouncement of "doesn't make him clean though"? Why would you say something like that? What are you trying to say about him? Don't beat around the bush. Say what you mean. If you dare.

Dennis Noward

richard wants a baum

Ummm Dennis not testing positive to a banned substance doesnt mean your clean, the fact that the investigators havent found alot of evidence that Bertie was on the good dr.s payroll, considering how the spanish judges are protecting these riders from having to answer any tough questions it not exactly surprising. Dennis youve made your point now can people actually discuss this without your approval? or is this thread going to be littered with "were you a professional, how would you know?, your just bitter" rubbish. Its old if you want to discuss it further start a thread please.

dave_1

RichN95 wrote:

Well, from what I've seen, the Puerto evidence against Bertie is very weak - so weak that it almost shows that he wasn't involved. Doesn't make him clean though.

Anyway, back to Ferrari. While I've no doubt he's a dope pusher, he also knows an awful lot about the science of cycling. He always goes on about VAM and, applying my A level maths from many years ago (A grade mind), it doesn't seem to be a particularly indicative value. So what do the experts think of VAM?

Rich, I can't see much evidence of Contador involvement...Kleber mentions doiping is the biggest issue facing cycling...mentions Sanchez and Contador...not strong evidence from what I can get via google...

We aren't talking about races from 2003-2005 so why are we talking old doping news, weak evidence, bumping negative topics to the top of the forum? Puerto should be left alone now until there is something concrete on it, likewise Armstrong, likewise the subject until someone is actually caught in 09. This forum gives the wrong impression of the sport

richard wants a baum

The reason its talked about?, because while most of us talk about how other sports arent doing alot to combat doping (and they arent) this is one of the black marks against cycling. The evidence is there but a the spanish courts are blocking any investigation and has a certain stink of cover up to alot of people. There are plenty of racing threads that arent doping related, but you certainly have created one here. Unfortunately suspiscon will always fall on those who are associated with people who are known doping dr.s DS's and team managers that life Contadors no different if you believe in him thats great but others may not.

dave_1

richard wants a baum wrote:

The reason its talked about?, because while most of us talk about how other sports arent doing alot to combat doping (and they arent) this is one of the black marks against cycling. The evidence is there but a the spanish courts are blocking any investigation and has a certain stink of cover up to alot of people. There are plenty of racing threads that arent doping related, but you certainly have created one here. Unfortunately suspiscon will always fall on those who are associated with people who are known doping dr.s DS's and team managers that life Contadors no different if you believe in him thats great but others may not.

no no no...doping stories arise froma small number of cyclists and stop talking about ancient history-forget it. I chose Contador as those of the jealous, resentful views will twist it into an LA thread...anyone who rides well is linked to doping when they don't deserve to be. You've no cred anyway wi the blatantly bias postings against Armstrong visiting Australia, so don't think we don't know what you think of people who win 7 GTs

richard wants a baum

Right mate i was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt but your obviously just spoiling for a fight so ill leave you to it.

dave_1

richard wants a baum wrote:

Right mate i was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt but your obviously just spoiling for a fight so ill leave you to it.

you didn't accept LA was good for the TDU from what I remember, so I don't think you gave me the benefit of the doubt anyway

richard wants a baum

What are you talking about, i remmeber saying that the TdU would getter better because of good planning by the organisers and that Armstrongs one appearence would be good for crowd numbers for one year but not much beyond that. You have started two threads with the same point and have brought it up in other threads as well you obviously have an axe to grind :roll:

dave_1

richard wants a baum wrote:

What are you talking about, i remmeber saying that the TdU would getter better because of good planning by the organisers and that Armstrongs one appearence would be good for crowd numbers for one year but not much beyond that. You have started two threads with the same point and have brought it up in other threads as well you obviously have an axe to grind :roll:

you bet...after the last few months of negative postings on here...you questioned the value of his being there at TDU given spectators/viewers would return to pre 09 levels...that's like saying many of us don't cycle anymore or follow cause our fav rider retired...of course it raises the level of interest in cycling for a certain section of an audience, it catches interest and they keep at it...so don't try the neutral commentator in Adelaide...you don't like what LanceA did 1999-05 and that's the fact

richard wants a baum

You wouldnt have the slightest clue what i like and dont like. I just finished watching past 7 TdFs and really enjoyed them. But im not under any illusions about how some of those victories were achieved.

monkey71

This has moved so far away from the original topic it's not funny!!!! Yes we are all entitled to express our views, but start banother topic for fu#$s sake!!!! This thread has been totally been hijacked by people wanting to argue with each other, not people wanting to discuss the original topic............

I for one, will be interested to see if some of these guys that appear to be really flying at the moment, will hold that form for July, or indeed can hold a similar performance over three weeks as opposed to the duration of a race like Paris - Nice. It appears some are sticking to their guns and using the race as preparation and others couldn't help themselves and decided to rip the field apart... Interesting few months ahead.