Leipheimer suspicious blood values in 05

iainf72

Remember when in 2004 Tyler Hamilton was warned by the UCI he had strange blood values and should explain himself / see a doctor?

Well.....

http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/sport/akt ... 88624.html

Holczer writes about it in his new book.

The article translates well through google.

bipedal

If he knew this, why did he make loads of statements about clean cycling and hold up Gerolsteiner as a super clean team? Why not just keep his head down like most other team owners at that time?

iainf72

bipedal wrote:

If he knew this, why did he make loads of statements about clean cycling and hold up Gerolsteiner as a super clean team? Why not just keep his head down like most other team owners at that time?

He feared the legal consequences of suspending Levi. It's like he was between a rock and a hard place.

05, eh? Nice weather in Tenerife?

http://www.tdfblog.com/2006/07/doping_roundup_.html

Kléber

Holczer still seems like a fool and I think he's kept some more things quiet because he didn't want to scare a replacement sponsor. His "I don't want to know" stance is only a short step away from the "make sure you're fully prepared, just keep me out of it" stance adopted by other DSs in recent years.

iainf72 wrote:

http://www.tdfblog.com/2006/07/doping_roundup_.html

I couldn't help noticing this:

The team says Rogers, sitting a bare 1 second behind Tom Boonen in the Tour, cut off contact 2 months ago, and that “all medical arrangements for T-Mobile's 29 riders will in future by handled by the University Clinic in Freiburg.”

Yeah, that worked well didn't it!

I wonder if a team could effectively say "from now on, we'll stop outsourcing our doping, it's coming in house now" today?

blazing_saddles

2005 was when he won up the mighty Rettenbachferner, at the Deutschland tour, dropping his team leader Georg Totschnig in the process.
Best form of his life.................outside of the Bruyneel years.

FransJacques

2005 was when he won up the mighty Rettenbachferner, at the Deutschland tour, dropping his team leader Georg Totschnig in the process.
Best form of his life.................outside of the Bruyneel years.

Hmmm-where did I read this post before? Do you moonlight in the clininc? Or does it need a footnote? Or do you have a post duplication wah-wah pedal that you step on?

Anyway, Levi is small fry but a good stepping stone to the big prize winning fish. Who will catch that one?

NJK

Of course he doped! A decent but not great US amateur, plucks a podium at the vuelta in 2001. That was good enough for me let alone 2005! And his missus saying he did blood transfusions when at Rabobank. Also the similar attitude like LA of win at all costs similar to many US athletes.

blazing_saddles

Interesting. The Clinic has come up with Hamilton's values when warned.
The word snap, comes to mind.
http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/news.php ... ton_appeal

moray_gub

NJK wrote:

Of course he doped! A decent but not great US amateur, plucks a podium at the vuelta in 2001. That was good enough for me let alone 2005! And his missus saying he did blood transfusions when at Rabobank. Also the similar attitude like LA of win at all costs similar to many US athletes.

I hardly think a win at all costs attitude is particular to US athletes and isnt really an indication of doping.

afx237vi

Moray Gub wrote:

NJK wrote:

Of course he doped! A decent but not great US amateur, plucks a podium at the vuelta in 2001. That was good enough for me let alone 2005! And his missus saying he did blood transfusions when at Rabobank. Also the similar attitude like LA of win at all costs similar to many US athletes.

I hardly think a win at all costs attitude is particular to US athletes and isnt really an indication of doping.

Also, the idea of Leipheimer having a "win at all cost" attitude is quite funny. Maybe a "suck wheel to finish somewhere vaguely near the podium at all cost" attitude...

calvjones

afx237vi wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

NJK wrote:

Of course he doped! A decent but not great US amateur, plucks a podium at the vuelta in 2001. That was good enough for me let alone 2005! And his missus saying he did blood transfusions when at Rabobank. Also the similar attitude like LA of win at all costs similar to many US athletes.

I hardly think a win at all costs attitude is particular to US athletes and isnt really an indication of doping.

Also, the idea of Leipheimer having a "win at all cost" attitude is quite funny. Maybe a "suck wheel to finish somewhere vaguely near the podium at all cost" attitude...

Jellylegs1968

NJK wrote:

Of course he doped! A decent but not great US amateur, plucks a podium at the vuelta in 2001. That was good enough for me let alone 2005! And his missus saying he did blood transfusions when at Rabobank. Also the similar attitude like LA of win at all costs similar to many US athletes.

When did the lovely Odessa shop Levi???

NJK

Moray Gub wrote:

NJK wrote:

Of course he doped! A decent but not great US amateur, plucks a podium at the vuelta in 2001. That was good enough for me let alone 2005! And his missus saying he did blood transfusions when at Rabobank. Also the similar attitude like LA of win at all costs similar to many US athletes.

I hardly think a win at all costs attitude is particular to US athletes and isnt really an indication of doping.

A win at all costs attitude in the world of cycling is a pretty good indication. Wiggins has not got this attitude to win the TDF, he knows his limits. Leipheimer, Landis, Hamilton, Armstrong always worried me the language they used when pursuing their dream. And yes the this is a US attitude which starts at collegiate level.

Kléber

A win at all costs attitude. As demonstrated by Americans like Rasmussen, Ullrich, Basso, Pantani, Dekker, Millar, Heras, Vinokourov etc etc

NJK

Kléber wrote:

A win at all costs attitude. As demonstrated by Americans like Rasmussen, Ullrich, Basso, Pantani, Dekker, Millar, Heras, Vinokourov etc etc

I'm talking about US attitudes funny enough that is why i used US examples, also some on your list were just lazy talented athletes.

dulldave

NJK wrote:

Kléber wrote:

A win at all costs attitude. As demonstrated by Americans like Rasmussen, Ullrich, Basso, Pantani, Dekker, Millar, Heras, Vinokourov etc etc

I'm talking about US attitudes funny enough that is why i used US examples, also some on your list were just lazy talented athletes.

As lazy as the conclusion you've drawn? Doubt it.

NJK

dulldave wrote:

NJK wrote:

Kléber wrote:

A win at all costs attitude. As demonstrated by Americans like Rasmussen, Ullrich, Basso, Pantani, Dekker, Millar, Heras, Vinokourov etc etc

I'm talking about US attitudes funny enough that is why i used US examples, also some on your list were just lazy talented athletes.

As lazy as the conclusion you've drawn? Doubt it.

Hilarious!

dulldave

Thanks

BikingBernie

Of course, every stereotype has its exceptions, Then again, they often contain a grain of truth...

"The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well."

Pierre de Coubertin (A Frenchman and founder of the modern Olympics).

"Winning isn't everything; it's the only thing".

Henry Russell Sanders (An American football player and coach).

"The way I race the Tour, even stuff like I'm doing here today, the thought and methodical approach, and the robotic approach to racing, not showing emotion, not showing suffering or pain, is not a popular style of racing in France. To them panache is the guy who suffers and is swinging all over his bike and looks like he's about to fall off. And I've never found that to be an effective way to try to win."

Lance Armstrong, doper and seven times 'winner' of the Tour de France.

DaveyL

Possibly "Bernie"s finest ever cherry-picking post

DaveyL

http://www.fleurdelis.com/desiderata.htm

"Desiderata", Max Ehrmann (American)

"If you can't take a punch, you should play table tennis", Pierre Berbezier (French rugby player).

See, anyone can join in. Hurrah!

DaveyL

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5099/ ... -race.aspx

Man, this is like shootin' fish in a barrel.

Seanos

BikingBernie wrote:

Lance Armstrong, doper and seven times 'winner' of the Tour de France.

Do the libel laws not apply if you use emoticons?
:roll:

donrhummy

BikingBernie wrote:

Lance Armstrong, doper and seven times 'winner' of the Tour de France.

Serious request here: name me the rider who placed behind him that you think was the legitimate winner. Someone whom you are CERTAIN did not dope.

moray_gub

BikingBernie wrote:

"Winning isn't everything; it's the only thing".


:

How is that win at all costs US driver Michael Schumaker doing these days anyhow..................oh wait he has almost drove another driver into a wall...........damn yanks eh what are they like.

NJK

Moray Gub wrote:

BikingBernie wrote:

"Winning isn't everything; it's the only thing".


:

How is that win at all costs US driver Michael Schumaker doing these days anyhow..................oh wait he has almost drove another driver into a wall...........damn yanks eh what are they like.

I thought he was German, Michael SchumaCHer. You seem to have taken my point to rather extreme measures.

BikingBernie

Moray Gub wrote:

How is that win at all costs US driver Michael Schumaker doing these days anyhow..................oh wait he has almost drove another driver into a wall...........damn yanks eh what are they like.

Once again, both your and DaveyL's grasp of logic is wanting. To give an analogous example that might be simpler for you to grasp, take a generalised statement such as 'Levels of obesity are higher in the USA than in Europe'. To point to a fat German, or come to that a skinny American, does not in any way disprove the statement! Similarly, to point to non-American individuals who are highly competitive does not in itself disprove a claim that a 'win at all costs' mentality is particularly 'American' in character. In fact 5 minutes search on Google will bring up thousands of articles arguing just that. Here is just one of particular relevance:

Documentary scores as it shines a light on the hypocrisy in our win-at-all-costs culture.

http://www.outsports.com/os/index.php/c ... in-america

And another...

In writing of the American Sport scene Shirley (1983, p. D1) observes:

Our win-at all-costs philosophy has so distorted our sense of values that we have reversed the precept of baron Pierre de Coubertin when he founded the modern Olympic games. Today, on all levels of sport… the most important thing is not merely to take part but to win: the most important thing in life is not the struggle but the triumph; the essential thing is not to have fought well but to have conquered.

From Sport, ethics and education by Peter James Arnold (1998).

And another...

Coker comes off as a relatively harmless fount of ingrown patriotism. Far more sinister, the movie implies, is the cult of victory that permeates every inch of American culture, from the football fields where it is practiced to the churches where it is preached. Conditioned to win at all costs, youth are reduced to passive vessels for the warrior spirit.

http://www.imagesjournal.com/2002/reviews/heartsminds/

And another...

What in Old Tom Morris's name had happened to the gentleman's game of golf? 'The Americans started losing,' was the simple theory given by Bernard Gallacher, who captained Europe in 1991. Well, quite. That's usually when the trouble starts.

The 1991 Ryder Cup was dubbed 'the war on the shore' by the US media, a dumb reference to a real war, killing real people, happening a very long way away from the sculpted greens and artificial water hazards of Kiawah Island. The Europeans had won the cup in 1985 and in 1987, and then retained it with a draw at The Belfry in 1989. As Gallacher suggested, the 1991 tournament swiftly became both an amusing and unpleasant insight into how America behaves with its back against the wall. 'It was like that World Wrestling Federation stuff on television, where you have bad guys and good guys,' said Gallacher. 'We were the bad guys. When the Americans apply themselves to winning something as seriously as they have the Ryder Cup, you know you have to cope with a very ruthless animal.

...Europe lost a bauble at Kiawah Island, but golf lost something more fundamental. The 1991 Ryder Cup comprehensively introduced the era of the moronic 'get in the hole' cry and rabid partisanship from the galleries, as well as the win-at-all-costs resolution that has since crept into the game. Much of the old character and fun has gone.

The blame for this certainly can't be laid solely at the door of one particular event or country, but - as is often the case these days, it seems - those seeking clues could do worse than to start their search by examining one peculiarly dominant strand of America's collective DNA.'

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/osm/stor ... 46,00.html

Of course, when it comes to 'rabid partisanship' you can't beat America, which I guess is the reason why when Armstrong 'won' his sixth Tour, T-shirts carrying the message 'France 0 USA 6' on the front and 'Don't mess with Texas' on the back were big sellers back in Austin.

http://www.morethanthegames.co.uk/cycli ... e-worrying

On the other hand, at least according to Armstrong and his apologists, aren't 'The French' supposed to 'hate winners'?

BikingBernie

donrhummy wrote:

name me the rider who placed behind him that you think was the legitimate winner. Someone whom you are CERTAIN did not dope.

And so, as predicted, the Armstrong fan-boys are being forced to move from a now unsupportable 'He beat them all and he was clean' stance to the new defence of 'So what, all the rest doped as well'. :roll:

iainf72

BikingBernie wrote:

donrhummy wrote:

name me the rider who placed behind him that you think was the legitimate winner. Someone whom you are CERTAIN did not dope.

And so, as predicted, the Armstrong fan-boys are being forced to move from a now unsupportable 'He beat them all and he was clean' stance to the new defence of 'So what, all the rest doped as well'. :roll:

I don't think that's Don's point.

If you take the wins, who do you give them to? They just need an * next to the name and job done. Or no winner.

BikingBernie

iainf72 wrote:

If you take the wins, who do you give them to? They just need an * next to the name and job done. Or no winner.

Agreed.

moray_gub

So you have provided a few links where various individuals say win at costs attitude is prevalent in the States.........aye very good but it is prevalent in most countries and most sports especailly at the top level. Your problem is you love a good stereoetype much in keeping with sections of the right wing English tabloids actually. To carry one as you do particlarly with regard to Americans says more about you than i could hope to.