Paul Kimmage.....

Macaloon

I'm also interested in the journalistic "omerta". Are we to believe any colleague who doesn't publicly denounce Kimmage is in the tank? Or is it understandable *in this case* that people who need to work together prefer not to join lynch-squads?

I've tried hard to avoid it but the double-standards are twisting my mind and I can't see straight. Might be time to take this to Twitter. Got my eye on UCIOverloud for an utterly nauseous piece of lynchmobbery unearthing and broadcasting something that had been deleted. (Not suggesting this character is a journalist, btw, *chuckle)

nic_77

RichN95 wrote:

ThomThom wrote:

When was Paul last wrong?

When was ever right without David Walsh getting there first? His much vaunted investigative joirnalism has only ever been copying Walsh.

Amen. As demonstrated in Seven Deadly Sins... (a great read by the way, and plenty of new angles)

David Walsh smelt something he didn't like in 1996, and then went about a careful and meticulous quest to gather the necessary evidence to backup his suspicions in LA Confidentiel. He uncovered the people willing to speak up - Betsy / Emma / Swart / Steffen, and along with Ballester's 'technical' evidence built a strong case.

It wasn't Walsh's fault that Lance had the media / political / legal clout to bury it (at least until the same evidence was largely re-presented again in the USADA report, albeit accompanied by some additional rider testimony).

All Kimmage has done is speculate, and correctly guess that the bear did indeed sh*t in the woods. He can continue to throw around accusations, because they can't be proven wrong.

iainf72

Ok. here's my take on this (FWIW)

Kimmage is a good interviewer because he's a bit of an a-hole who doesn't mind offending people. He's not really great on the investigation side though. I'd be sure he hears things from people in the know but he doesn't seem to pick up the thread and turn it into something more (like Walsh does, for example)

I'm not sure Walsh has published his Brailsford piece yet. I'd be interested to read. The thing for me with Sky is they've made a few spectacular missteps but no one in senior management seems to have suffered for it. Regardless of which side you sit on it, there is either lying or hypocrisy at work, but it doesn't follow there is doping.

At a macro level, the Wiggins and Armstrong tales are very similar (fairly crap GT rider learns to climb and wins TdF). But if you drill down that's about where the similarities end. The Sky tactics are dull and do look like USPS, but they won the Tour so they're the right tactic.

ddraver

iainf72 wrote:

. The Sky tactics are dull and do look like USPS, but they won the Tour so they're the right tactic.

What really gets my goat about that is that Liquigas tried to do the exact same thing in the Giro, but we hear no bleating from the Twitter Taliban about ITPS or any cr*p like that!

Jez mon

iainf72 wrote:

Ok. here's my take on this (FWIW)

Kimmage is a good interviewer because he's a bit of an a-hole who doesn't mind offending people. He's not really great on the investigation side though. I'd be sure he hears things from people in the know but he doesn't seem to pick up the thread and turn it into something more (like Walsh does, for example)

I'm not sure Walsh has published his Brailsford piece yet. I'd be interested to read. The thing for me with Sky is they've made a few spectacular missteps but no one in senior management seems to have suffered for it. Regardless of which side you sit on it, there is either lying or hypocrisy at work, but it doesn't follow there is doping.

At a macro level, the Wiggins and Armstrong tales are very similar (fairly crap GT rider learns to climb and wins TdF). But if you drill down that's about where the similarities end. The Sky tactics are dull and do look like USPS, but they won the Tour so they're the right tactic.

As far as I can see, it's not in Sky's interest at all to start making senior management suffer. At the moment they can happily claim ignorance, and the average fan will probably buy that. If senior management start suffering for those mistakes, it just puts all these mistakes through the press again.

dave_1

Jez mon wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

I think Sky have made it open season on themselves so I agree Kimmage has every right to turn his sights on them. Leinders was as dodgy as they come and Sky knew Rasmussen was shady and was under Leinders. Decker went + by 2008. Sky knew this team had a problem and Leinders was their doctor. Why did Sky sign him?
I had hardly heard of Christopher Froome before 2011 Vuelta..he was really far behind at the TDF 2008..his weird trajectory and the fact he is the best climber and time trialist in the world in the past 2 years leave me wondering. I have no proof but have little faith in them now..but still hold out some hope for Wiggins.

One of the more sensible skeptical posts. Although I wouldn't say that Froome is the best TTer or indeed the best climber.

It's difficult to have faith in any cycling team at the moment, Sky do a lot right, unfortunately they have also done a reasonable amount of harm with Lienders.

I think Froome was a dominant winner of the 2011 Vuelta if he had been left to play his own cards rather than do miles on the front each climb...and in the 2012 TDF, without that 1.20 second time loss when he crashed/punctured in week 1, he would have been entitled to shell wiggins on the two climbs he clearly could have left him behind on. With some luck...Froome is a double grand tour winner..on physical performance definitely.

At least Wigggo placed highly in 2007 TDF TT that Vino won at TDF..at least a hint of form in one of his now specialist disciplines..and he had to transition from track to road in mid 2000s...but Froome...show me one half decent result in anything as a pro , a single performance that hints at what was to come. I won't buy into it cause I don't believe the best climbers can TT like Tony Martin as well, nor best TTers can climb like Herrera. Wiggo is not great at climbing and was saved by the route of the mountains in the last TDF. I have no proof Froome dopes of course.

Slightly off topic, I remember being surprised at Luttenberger appearing in front group and top 6 overall at TDF 1996...normally we hear of them before they appear to be best in the world. I'll use that criteria now more thn ever, my reasoned criteria, as well as take into account what background they are coming from-track/MTB, before deciding if credible. A bit of Lemond theory mixed with an understanding 2 mile track pursuits do not prepare one for 21 day stage races

ocdupalais

Dave_1 wrote:

..but Froome...show me one half decent result in anything as a pro , a single performance that hints at what was to come. I won't buy into it cause I don't believe the best climbers can TT like Tony Martin as well, nor best TTers can climb like Herrera. Wiggo is not great at climbing and was saved by the route of the mountains in the last TDF. I have no proof Froome dopes of course.

Froome didn't join Sky as a no-mark chump.
For GT big hitters that climb like they TT'd, there's:
Coppi
Anquteil
Merckx
Hinault
Fignon
Indurain
Roche

... Without the tedious drug references in this case, virtually ALL of the great GT riders combined those two apparently different disciplines: why should Wiggins and Froome be any different?
Also, Coppi won the TDF aged 21 without much of a palmares up his jumper prior...

My suspicion is that Froome has what I remember one of the DS's at ONCE saying about Alex Zulle Vs Eric Breukink (I know, I know... But this was to do with temperament): he said EB was the more naturally gifted athlete, but AZ had a psychology that enabled him to suffer beyond anyone else he'd ever encountered.
You mention Herrera, but how much had you heard about him in Colombia before he appeared at the Tour? Why shouldn't that be the case for Froome? - Africa's hardly a cycling hot-bed...

Bakunin

iainf72 wrote:

.... The thing for me with Sky is they've made a few spectacular missteps but no one in senior management seems to have suffered for it. Regardless of which side you sit on it, there is either lying or hypocrisy at work, but it doesn't follow there is doping.

The spectacular missteps are spectacular though.

Why the stupid and crazed reaction of senior management to USADA? Why exile all those with a dodgy history?

Sky itself seemed very unsure of itself -- forced signing of silly declarations of no-doping.

Both Sky and Kimmage are in the same spot -- cycling is such that if you win the tour, hire a dopy doc, employ riders with dubious associations all you get is questions.

dave_1

OCDuPalais wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

..but Froome...show me one half decent result in anything as a pro , a single performance that hints at what was to come. I won't buy into it cause I don't believe the best climbers can TT like Tony Martin as well, nor best TTers can climb like Herrera. Wiggo is not great at climbing and was saved by the route of the mountains in the last TDF. I have no proof Froome dopes of course.

Froome didn't join Sky as a no-mark chump.
For GT big hitters that climb like they TT'd, there's:
Coppi
Anquteil
Merckx
Hinault
Fignon
Indurain
Roche

... Without the tedious drug references in this case, virtually ALL of the great GT riders combined those two apparently different disciplines: why should Wiggins and Froome be any different?
Also, Coppi won the TDF aged 21 without much of a palmares up his jumper prior...

My suspicion is that Froome has what I remember one of the DS's at ONCE saying about Alex Zulle Vs Eric Breukink (I know, I know... But this was to do with temperament): he said EB was the more naturally gifted athlete, but AZ had a psychology that enabled him to suffer beyond anyone else he'd ever encountered.
You mention Herrera, but how much had you heard about him in Colombia before he appeared at the Tour? Why shouldn't that be the case for Froome? - Africa's hardly a cycling hot-bed...

If Herrera was coming in 10 seconds off Hinault and Lemond in a 40km time trial ..I would look back differently on him , yeah. After the reasoned decision, and the scale of the doping, I feel not one of these pros can really be trusted to be honest. I will not believe a rider can be both the best TTer and best climber in the world..which Froome basically is if you remove sky's impeding team orders and his unfortunate time loss in week 1 of TDF 2012. Wiggo looks less likey to be a doper to me as he was saved from the hellish attacks Contador and Froome could have put in and also a not very hilly TDF route. Wiggins climbing is nothing too suspect..but who knows. My bet is he'll go backward when Conatdor and Froome start those incredible accelerations they both have in 2013 TDF. Wiggins would have arrived in the front climbing groups sooner if there were more clean riders and also if he had left track racing behind 5 years earlier. The Lemond theory that TDF GT contenders must stand out from day 1 of their careers is a rule of thumb and a good one...but to suggest someone should train for 2 mile track efforts for a decade and them seamlessly become a grand tour GC contender is really unreasonable. Adjustment takes time.

Richmond Racer

Dave, Wiggins is a TTer who can climb pretty well - that's him in his own words.

Also if you look at his palmares on the road from his track days, his wins were by no means all TTs and pan flat races.

And as I've already said elsewhere, I'm not a buyer of the idea that Lemond's theory from the past that a GT winner is fully formed from the time they turn pro and ride their first GT, holds true 100% now.

nic_77

It is my suspicion that Sky hired Leinders not to dope, but partly to learn about doping. It would be extraordinary naive and remiss of Sky (with their MG philosophy and lofty ambitions) to enter the world of cycling without wanting to know everything there is to know about large swathes of their competition. DB would surely have been party to this decision.

With the fall-out of USADA and other prodding and poking from various sources I imagine that some of the non-cycling management started asking rather blunt questions. Sky have then had to undertake some rather awkward back-pedaling through their pretense of innocence to 'clean up' a team that was almost certainly already performing clean.

None of this makes Sky a doping team, nor any of the cycling management pro-doping. It makes them smart and sensible, but unfortunately also now caught between a rock and hard place. They can't admit the truth, and now just have to hope that it goes away. I'm pretty sure that Kimmage isn't interested in that happening - I just wish he'd approach it in a more sophisticated manner.

ddraver

I think the truth is simpler nic - they suddenly needed a cycling doctor half way through the last GT of the season when they were in short supply. So they picked up this innocent looking dutch bloke who told them how to treat Eddie Bos' saddle sores. They had few options and zero time as the team was being layed low by a nasty, contagious virus, not dissimilar to one that had killed off one.of their poor staff weeks earlier.

During the off season they started doing a bit more work, realised they'd made a big mistake and quietly let him go and hired someone more appropriate

Funnily enough that matches exactly what they said happened too...

It was an awful, massive PR disaster, but until someone, Kimmage or otherwise, finds something...you know...real, that's all it was.

Richmond Racer

Having thought about it some more, I realise the problem with Kimmage is that he's a bit needy. Therefore I'm recommending to Fran Millar via Twitter that she sends him a Rapha-Sky musette as a gesture of goodwill

iainf72

ddraver wrote:

During the off season they started doing a bit more work, realised they'd made a big mistake and quietly let him go and hired someone more appropriate

Funnily enough that matches exactly what they said happened too...

Not quite. They realised they'd made a mistake when it appeared in the press that he was associated with doping. When that happened DB said they'd do an investigation.

http://www.cyclesportmag.com/news-and-c ... ent-clean/

Then his contract was not renewed

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/leinder ... estigation

I must've missed the part they admitted a mistake

ddraver

you did, it was in an interview with DB by DW...

iainf72

ddraver wrote:

you did, it was in an interview with DB by DW...

Fair enough.

So did he say he accepted Geert was a doping doctor and he didn't do due diligence when hiring him? (as with many other on the team)

tailwindhome

ddraver wrote:

I think the truth is simpler nic - they suddenly needed a cycling doctor half way through the last GT of the season when they were in short supply. So they picked up this innocent looking dutch bloke who told them how to treat Eddie Bos' saddle sores. They had few options and zero time as the team was being layed low by a nasty, contagious virus, not dissimilar to one that had killed off one.of their poor staff weeks earlier.

During the off season they started doing a bit more work, realised they'd made a big mistake and quietly let him go and hired someone more appropriate

Funnily enough that matches exactly what they said happened too...

It was an awful, massive PR disaster, but until someone, Kimmage or otherwise, finds something...you know...real, that's all it was.

Very unfortunate that this turn of events coincided with a TDF 1-2 and a Vuelta 2-3.

Richmond Racer

TailWindHome wrote:

ddraver wrote:

I think the truth is simpler nic - they suddenly needed a cycling doctor half way through the last GT of the season when they were in short supply. So they picked up this innocent looking dutch bloke who told them how to treat Eddie Bos' saddle sores. They had few options and zero time as the team was being layed low by a nasty, contagious virus, not dissimilar to one that had killed off one.of their poor staff weeks earlier.

During the off season they started doing a bit more work, realised they'd made a big mistake and quietly let him go and hired someone more appropriate

Funnily enough that matches exactly what they said happened too...

It was an awful, massive PR disaster, but until someone, Kimmage or otherwise, finds something...you know...real, that's all it was.

Very unfortunate that this turn of events coincided with a TDF 1-2 and a Vuelta 2-3.

---

ddraver

I gotta ask RR, what are you meaning when you put

---

?

ddraver

iainf72 wrote:

ddraver wrote:

you did, it was in an interview with DB by DW...

Fair enough.

So did he say he accepted Geert was a doping doctor and he didn't do due diligence when hiring him? (as with many other on the team)

You mean when people were dying and riders were dropping like flies? No, they did nt, but again (and again and again and again) Who else knew there was anything to know about Leinders at the time?

What you are suggesting by due dilligence is that Sky should have had their own police force and Anti doping agency to do investigations into their staff. Bit less time reading Race Radio and cyclismas I think iain...

Richmond Racer

To be frank there's so much denial and finger-pointing going on at the moment...

De Rooj says back in May last year 'the management knew nothing about the doping, it was all the riders and the doctors'
A paper claims to know that Bottle named Leinders in his USASA statement
Leinders denies
NOS.nl claims that an 'anonymous ex-rider' says Leinders and De Rooj were involved. Also that Boogerd doped. And Luttenberger
Boogerd and Luttenberger both deny doping

FFS...I'm just going to wait for the outcome of the Dutch AD agency's investigation, when they announce who did what at the end of the day

rick_chasey

The impression I get from watching Wilfred de Jong and de Wereld draait door is no-one in Holland is enormously surprised.

Rasmussen in 2007 was huge in Holland and I think everyone then figured it out by then. The focus is and has been on the younger Gesinks etc for some time now. That's where the interest lies.

They don't have what the Americans or Danes or Germans have with one rider dominating the cycling world in their country - where the bulk of the interest lies with the individual rather than the sport. They field pretty much exactly the same amount as all the other big nations, French, Spanish, Belgians etc. They actually like the sport and the racing - rather than the success. Kinda have to when you have 50 riders in the World Tour regularly year on year and still can't win a Tour stage for 7 years.

ocdupalais

Richmond Racer wrote:

To be frank there's so much denial and finger-pointing going on at the moment...

Rick Chasey wrote:

The impression I get from watching Wilfred de Jong and de Wereld draait door is no-one in Holland is enormously surprised.

All dat.

All this self-righteous anti-Sky bullsh!t

The idea that a bunch of hoary old geezers like Brailsford and Sutton, etc, should be Masters of the FuKcing Universe when it comes to PR and management - ok, so they dropped a bollock or two...

Well done you on working faultlessly for a perfect company.

They've won the fuKcing TDF with one of the shouty-ist clean GC riders of the last decade.

The Tour De France!
Remember when the merest hint of a GB rider in a semi-Classic gave you a semi?

A British rider in a British team won the Tour De France...

That's all the passion I need right there.

"Unexciting",
"no panache",
...Etc...

Fukc off.

ddraver

You ve done well to get round the swear filter there bud!

nic_77

ddraver wrote:

I think the truth is simpler nic - they suddenly needed a cycling doctor half way through the last GT of the season when they were in short supply. So they picked up this innocent looking dutch bloke who told them how to treat Eddie Bos' saddle sores. They had few options and zero time as the team was being layed low by a nasty, contagious virus, not dissimilar to one that had killed off one.of their poor staff weeks earlier.

During the off season they started doing a bit more work, realised they'd made a big mistake and quietly let him go and hired someone more appropriate

Funnily enough that matches exactly what they said happened too...

It was an awful, massive PR disaster, but until someone, Kimmage or otherwise, finds something...you know...real, that's all it was.

Maybe. That would be nice... but you have to admit that any team (especially one with a reputation for attention to detail) would be nuts to come into pro cycling without at least researching the issue of doping. Even if the team is vehemently anti-doping you have to know what you are up against.

I don't buy the 'he was the only doctor available' excuse. Sports doctors aren't brain surgeons Recruit from another sport, use the Team GB doctor.

Don't get me wrong I think it is 'only' a PR issue too. I don't believe that Sky have doped or had/have any intention to dope. But... I would question their approach if they didn't at least find out about what doping might be going on elsewhere.

ddraver

They tried that but they did nt have the required expertise, there are issues that cyclist get that arent covered by your standard medical school (can't imagine why :roll:). I believe he came from swimming, but I might be getting mixed up with Tim Kerrison.

You re asking them to have uncovered something that at that point no one else, not police, not anti-doping agencies had uncovered, when they were in desperate need of someone.

nic_77

ddraver wrote:

They tried that but they did nt have the required expertise, there are issues that cyclist get that arent covered by your standard medical school (can't imagine why :roll:). I believe he came from swimming, but I might be getting mixed up with Tim Kerrison.

You re asking them to have uncovered something that at that point no one else, not police, not anti-doping agencies had uncovered, when they were in desperate need of someone.

Think you are still missing my point. If you want a doctor to treat someone who is ill, hire a doctor.
If you want a doctor who knows about doping, advertise for a doctor with experience in cycling and then hire the one that admits to knowing what is what. You don't need him to help you dope, you just what him to explain how it is done so you can work out how to exploit your opposition and beat them.
Yes I think Kerrison came from swimming.

rick_chasey

What's Kimmage's record on riders who aren't Tour winners?? Or even riders who don't speak English?

FransJacques

Rick Chasey wrote:

What's Kimmage's record on riders who aren't Tour winners?? Or even riders who don't speak English?

I know. You don't see him going after Caja Rural or Saur Sojasun. Never will. No one cares. He's a newspaper man - he knows what sells.

Afterall, it's called the "Emperor's New Clothes", not "The lowly domestique from middle of nowhere Spain on a Pro Continental team earning a measly EUR 45,000 with zero pro wins clothes".

iainf72

Rick Chasey wrote:

What's Kimmage's record on riders who aren't Tour winners?? Or even riders who don't speak English?

You mean like Vino? Or Basso?