And the hits just keep on coming! 3 more riders positive

Pokerface
Pokerface Posts: 7,960
edited September 2009 in Pro race
Ribeiro, Nozal and Guerra positive for CERA. All riders for Liberty Seguros:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ribeiro ... e-for-cera
«13456789

Comments

  • calvjones
    calvjones Posts: 3,850
    Nozal out for life then, 2nd strike.
    ___________________

    Strava is not Zen.
  • jim one
    jim one Posts: 183
    Portugal is a dopers paradise. No surprise what a load of idiots.

    Now Patrik Sinkewitz knows what its like to be beaten by a load of dopers he seemed right up there on most stages.

    Edit- Nozal was in puerto was he not??
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,481
    Nozal was in Puerto. Not sure if he was sanctioned for it though.
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,481
    calvjones wrote:
    Nozal out for life then, 2nd strike.
    Are you sure? He was suspended for being over the 50% hematocrit level before the Dauphine but I don't think he's ever been banned before.
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,711
    Nozal hasn't had a previous ban, to the best of my knowledge.
    Nothing changes, especially at Libert Seguros.
    Seen them a few times this year, the last being the Volta a Portugal, where they were dominant, to say the least. So, no surprise they were caught, there.
    Charged and charged.
    LS: The end?
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Ha. He was very exciting in the Tour of Portugal, climbing very very well. All is now clear.

    http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... r+portugal
    Contador is the Greatest
  • calvjones
    calvjones Posts: 3,850
    andyp wrote:
    calvjones wrote:
    Nozal out for life then, 2nd strike.
    Are you sure? He was suspended for being over the 50% hematocrit level before the Dauphine but I don't think he's ever been banned before.

    of course, silly me. innocent as the day is long until now. See you in 2 yrs Mr Nozal :roll:
    ___________________

    Strava is not Zen.
  • dave milne
    dave milne Posts: 703
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Nozal hasn't had a previous ban, to the best of my knowledge.
    Nothing changes, especially at Libert Seguros.
    Seen them a few times this year, the last being the Volta a Portugal, where they were dominant, to say the least. So, no surprise they were caught, there.
    Charged and charged.
    LS: The end?

    They're ending the sponsorship so the end under that name
  • bikerZA
    bikerZA Posts: 314
    They have to be the unluckiest sponsor around (or not proactive enough to control their team). Second time they've been in a scandal.
    cyclecomparison.com
  • Pokerface
    Pokerface Posts: 7,960
    Didn't Contador ride for that team? Or was that a different incarnation?

    Did any of these guys ride with him?
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,481
    It was a different team, based in Spain and managed by Manolo Saiz. Nozal rode for that team though and was a team mate of Contador.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Pokerface wrote:
    Didn't Contador ride for that team? Or was that a different incarnation?

    Did any of these guys ride with him?

    Everytime someone mentions this I will mention that so did Vande Velde.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,711
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Pokerface wrote:
    Didn't Contador ride for that team? Or was that a different incarnation?

    Did any of these guys ride with him?

    Everytime someone mentions this I will mention that so did Vande Velde.

    He didn't hang around there, though. One season was enough.
    Unlike the Spanish clique.
    Like it not, there are almost as many Contador connections to doping, as there are for Armstrong.

    OP was buried in Spain and exposed elsewhere.
    We now, as a result, have this farcical situation with Valverde.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Nozal hasn't had a previous ban, to the best of my knowledge.
    Nothing changes, especially at Libert Seguros.
    Seen them a few times this year, the last being the Volta a Portugal, where they were dominant, to say the least. So, no surprise they were caught, there.
    Charged and charged.
    LS: The end?

    Call me stupid, but I'm not following why you seem to be blaming the team sponsor for all this. I doubt that some "entity" called Liberty Seguros held these guys down and forced them to "do" drugs. The sponsor is out for a little brand recognition and I'm sure wants
    NO involvement with doping. How do you expect a sponsor to control it's riders like that?
    The riders have already signed a one strike and you're off the team contract(at least in most cases). And they are now probably off the team. Now I know your anti dopers want
    everyone to apoligize to you for doping offences(I still don't have a clue why you want this, but.....) and the like, but you can't possibly, actually, expect that to happen? Can you?
    Oh sure, LS will apoligize, but it's only really a kind of phony, meaningless thing, meant
    to be politically correct. And even if the guilty riders do it, it may only be more of the
    above.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Like it not, there are almost as many Contador connections to doping, as there are for Armstrong.

    This is a ridiculously inaccurate statement.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,241
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Like it not, there are almost as many Contador connections to doping, as there are for Armstrong.

    This is a ridiculously inaccurate statement.

    Agreed. There's sod all concrete against AC. Even the Puerto evidence makes it look like he wasn't involved (IMO)
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,711
    Erm....Dennis, I'm not blaming the sponsor.........but..........their old boss and most of their riders at the time........Operacion Puerto?

    Seems to me they would have had enough of the bad press. Not the exposure they would be craving.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Erm....Dennis, I'm not blaming the sponsor.........but..........their old boss and most of their riders at the time........Operacion Puerto?

    Seems to me they would have had enough of the bad press. Not the exposure they would be craving.


    You would think that they would have had it with BAD press and it would seem to be the end but ................
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,711
    RichN95 wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Like it not, there are almost as many Contador connections to doping, as there are for Armstrong.

    This is a ridiculously inaccurate statement.

    Agreed. There's sod all concrete against AC. Even the Puerto evidence makes it look like he wasn't involved (IMO)

    Ah, but there's the rub. Many will argue there's nothing concrete against Armstrong.

    OK, to get folks to bite, I hyped the bait up a bit, but there is a fair amount of circumstantial evidence and plenty of connections to the wrong people.
    I would have to disagree on the subject of Puerto.

    What is ridiculous, is the hypocrisy employed when debating the likelyhood of certain riders propensity to dope, as opposed to others.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,241
    Blazing Saddles wrote:

    Ah, but there's the rub. Many will argue there's nothing concrete against Armstrong.

    OK, to get folks to bite, I hyped the bait up a bit, but there is a fair amount of circumstantial evidence and plenty of connections to the wrong people.
    I would have to disagree on the subject of Puerto.

    What is ridiculous, is the hypocrisy employed when debating the likelyhood of certain riders propensity to dope, as opposed to others.

    I certainly agree with you on the last bit. I personally refuse to indulge in guilt by association, after all Bassons rode for Festina.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,711
    RichN95 wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:

    What is ridiculous, is the hypocrisy employed when debating the likelyhood of certain riders propensity to dope, as opposed to others.

    I certainly agree with you on the last bit. I personally refuse to indulge in guilt by association, after all Bassons rode for Festina.

    Which, was actually , the only point I was trying to make.
    Contador the rider leaves little not to be admired.
    Would I rule out the possibility that he has/is doped/doping, based upon my admiration for his skills? Nope.
    It's an open ended thing, with all riders, in these trying times.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Every time I ask for people to explain what all this 'evidence' against Contador everyone goes quiet.

    Maybe you can oblige Blazing?
    Contador is the Greatest
  • calvjones
    calvjones Posts: 3,850
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Every time I ask for people to explain what all this 'evidence' against Contador everyone goes quiet.

    Maybe you can oblige Blazing?

    Um... the team he was on for years was discovered to by systematically doping. His initials and name were on documents that detailed doping doses (c'mon Kleber)

    If you like him, fine, but don't use inconsistent assumptions to damn other riders. He's exactly as guilty as Lance; i.e. almost certainly in the past, possibly now, and actively evading the question.
    ___________________

    Strava is not Zen.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Excuse me but don't say such things like me 'using inconsistent assumtions to damn other riders' when this is totally untrue.

    Lance tips the guilty scales so much more than Contador, not least as he tested positive twice, yet it is not even worth explaining to you if you cannot see it for yourself.

    And for the record, I do not think a rider is guilty because he was in a team that had a rider who doped - if I thought that then I would have to say I think the vast majority of the pro peloton doped which I don't. If you think that then...
    Contador is the Greatest
  • Pokerface
    Pokerface Posts: 7,960
    There is no 'proof' that AC has doped. But many of the same links that tie LA to doping also tie AC to doping, with the addition of his 'link' to Puerto.

    They have ridden for many of the same teams, with the same riders (that have subsequently been busted for doping), ridden for the same DS, etc.

    The ease with which AC rides up hills makes him look superhuman to many.

    At the ned of the day - when you're at the top - people will point fingers and make accusations. As of yet, there is no proof. But the LINKS are still there...
  • calvjones
    calvjones Posts: 3,850
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Lance tips the guilty scales so much more than Contador, not least as he tested positive twice, yet it is not even worth explaining to you if you cannot see it for yourself.

    And for the record, I do not think a rider is guilty because he was in a team that had a rider who doped - if I thought that then I would have to say I think the vast majority of the pro peloton doped which I don't. If you think that then...

    Lance tested positive once (if you can find the post dated TUE, let me know) and they found EPO in his 1999 samples in a way which had zero implications for the doping infraction process.

    And no-one is saying a rider is guilty because a colleague tests +ive. I'm saying AC is very likely to have doped if only because he rode for Sainz for what, 4 years? Do you honestly believe he rode clean for all that time? Seriously? Would you bet your best bike on it?
    ___________________

    Strava is not Zen.
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    and the negative results from hundreds of dope tests in 2009 just keep coming...keep a sense of perspective ffs...some of the contributers are bored by the racing and live for drug scandals IMO
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,711
    edited September 2009
    calvjones wrote:
    Um... the team he was on for years was discovered to by systematically doping. His initials and name were on documents that detailed doping doses (c'mon Kleber)

    If you like him, fine, but don't use inconsistent assumptions to damn other riders. He's exactly as guilty as Lance; i.e. almost certainly in the past, possibly now, and actively evading the question.

    That's the way I read it, too.
    There is insufficient disparity to jump from condemning one, to defending the other.


    calvjones wrote:

    And no-one is saying a rider is guilty because a colleague tests +ive. I'm saying AC is very likely to have doped if only because he rode for Sainz for what, 4 years? Do you honestly believe he rode clean for all that time? Seriously? Would you bet your best bike on it?

    Spot on.

    Not condemning him, but certainly not giving him the all clear, with these associations.
    Certainly, no one is saying he isn't a great rider, either.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • calvjones
    calvjones Posts: 3,850
    I think the winner of a stage race plus two others testing positive is worthy of comment, surely?
    ___________________

    Strava is not Zen.
  • Pokerface
    Pokerface Posts: 7,960
    calvjones wrote:
    I think the winner of a stage race plus two others testing positive is worthy of comment, surely?

    Especially when they all ride for the same team. OK - so they're not the best riders in the world... but it's good to see the cheats getting caught.

Categories