Linda McCartney team doping investigation

Matt_as

They got some pretty big names from 90's cycling so it is not really a surprise some other them were using drugs. It seems a bit pointless in a way because it is highly unlikely there was proper systematic doping like at Postal/Discovery bearing in mind they didn't have a massive budget but it comes of no surprises that some of the riders were using stuff. Also interesting that a couple of the riders became ill after the prologue and were unable to start the next stage.

disgruntledgoat

FransJacques wrote:

Yates' past is catching up with him faster than Motoman delivering some vials of edgar.

But what's the gain here? McCarney's was a sheit team with sheit results, kinda like Lampre in 2012.

Nailing someone for what happened 11 years ago will not prove that Bradley is clean now, just because the UK anti-doping agency kicks ass.

We won't know for sure if Bradley doped or not for another 6-7-8 years. Going after LM will not prove that British cyclists today are lilly-white.

Give it up.

Also he was on a team with a doping positive in 2007! Burn the witch! :roll:

Trev The Rev

As yet there is no evidence Brailsford, BC or Sky have ever done anything wrong. However there are people linked to them who have dodgy pasts. Brailsford was wrong to employ those who have left. His wool over eye pulling does not fool any but the most naive.

Hayles failing the 50% hematocrit rule some years ago defies belief. We are asked to accept it was a mistake, that British Cycling were not even checking hematocrit levels before major events, that the extra long taper and other factors caught Hayles out. I can not accept Brailford's team was not checking riders hematocrit levels and other blood levels on an extremely regular basis. One assumes they train and or sleep at altitude or simulated altitude - to allow a rider to fail a very simple 50% rule is highly incompetent, or a case of a 'marginal gain too far".

We are also asked to believe Wiggins did not do the required training in 2010 and got a rollicking from Brailsford. This is your GC contender paid a massive salary, and we are told not one of Brailsford's staff was able to spot that Wiggins was not training properly. Not one of Brailsfords staff could see anything wrong in all the power meter data or blood tests or any training sessions. This does not stand up.

Now we have several riders linked to Linda McCartney squad who may or may not have been using EPO. Some of these riders are still part of the BC / Sky set up, they need to be cleared or fired asap.

We must apply the same rules to UK riders as we do foreign riders

Richmond Racer

Trev The Rev wrote:

As yet there is no evidence Brailsford, BC or Sky have ever done anything wrong. However there are people linked to them who have dodgy pasts. Brailsford was wrong to employ those who have left. His wool over eye pulling does not fool any but the most naive.

Hayles failing the 50% hematocrit rule some years ago defies belief. We are asked to accept it was a mistake, that British Cycling were not even checking hematocrit levels before major events, that the extra long taper and other factors caught Hayles out. I can not accept Brailford's team was not checking riders hematocrit levels and other blood levels on an extremely regular basis. One assumes they train and or sleep at altitude or simulated altitude - to allow a rider to fail a very simple 50% rule is highly incompetent, or a case of a 'marginal gain too far".

We are also asked to believe Wiggins did not do the required training in 2010 and got a rollicking from Brailsford. This is your GC contender paid a massive salary, and we are told not one of Brailsford's staff was able to spot that Wiggins was not training properly. Not one of Brailsfords staff could see anything wrong in all the power meter data or blood tests or any training sessions. This does not stand up.

Now we have several riders linked to Linda McCartney squad who may or may not have been using EPO. Some of these riders are still part of the BC / Sky set up, they need to be cleared or fired asap.

We must apply the same rules to UK riders as we do foreign riders

You tell 'em, Trev

disgruntledgoat

Trev The Rev wrote:

As yet there is no evidence Brailsford, BC or Sky have ever done anything wrong. However there are people linked to them who have dodgy pasts. Brailsford was wrong to employ those who have left. His wool over eye pulling does not fool any but the most naive.

Hayles failing the 50% hematocrit rule some years ago defies belief. We are asked to accept it was a mistake, that British Cycling were not even checking hematocrit levels before major events, that the extra long taper and other factors caught Hayles out. I can not accept Brailford's team was not checking riders hematocrit levels and other blood levels on an extremely regular basis. One assumes they train and or sleep at altitude or simulated altitude - to allow a rider to fail a very simple 50% rule is highly incompetent, or a case of a 'marginal gain too far".

We are also asked to believe Wiggins did not do the required training in 2010 and got a rollicking from Brailsford. This is your GC contender paid a massive salary, and we are told not one of Brailsford's staff was able to spot that Wiggins was not training properly. Not one of Brailsfords staff could see anything wrong in all the power meter data or blood tests or any training sessions. This does not stand up.

Now we have several riders linked to Linda McCartney squad who may or may not have been using EPO. Some of these riders are still part of the BC / Sky set up, they need to be cleared or fired asap.

We must apply the same rules to UK riders as we do foreign riders

Any evidence that "we" don't?

bompington

Somehow it doesn't surprise me that Trev has moved on to this... I wondered how long it would take him to move from power meters to burn the witch :roll:

Trev The Rev

bompington wrote:

Somehow it doesn't surprise me that Trev has moved on to this... I wondered how long it would take him to move from power meters to burn the witch :roll:

So you believe Brailsford about Wiggins in 2010 and Hayles' hematocrit?

Richmond Racer

Whats this about believing Brailsford? Its the same account from everyone including Sutton and Wiggins. Trev, did you see the condition of Wiggins in the 2010 Tour? For him, he was lardy and simply not fit enough in the mountains. It was Tim Kerrison who set the entire training programme from Oct 2010 onwards, using your hated power meters etc. Sky farked up properly with Wiggins in their first season, and he farked up properly for the team and for himself. If you could be bothered to read the accounts in either On tour or My Time, he gives his account of what happened. Doesnt mean to say that you have to believe it, but at least you'd have more input. Or is that too reasonable to expect?

Hayles' haemocrit was 50.03% if my memory's correct?

bigmat

Trev The Rev wrote:

bompington wrote:

Somehow it doesn't surprise me that Trev has moved on to this... I wondered how long it would take him to move from power meters to burn the witch :roll:

So you believe Brailsford about Wiggins in 2010 and Hayles' hematocrit?

Re Wiggins, its a more diplomatic line than "every other f***er was back on the sauce", which is how it looked to me. Plus hus race / training plan wasn't right - easy to see with benefit of hindsight.
Re Hayles, it doesn't look good. Benefit of the doubt and all that, but if he was Spanish or Kazakh I know what mg suspicions would be.

disgruntledgoat

I think I made my suspicions clear on Hayles at the time. However, my approach with riders of all nationalities is that if overwhelming evidence or failed test does not present itself, I'm not goign to convince myself they're dirty. There's no enjoyment in the sport for me then.

As for Wiggins, yes. I believe what was presented to me. As I have no reason not to. Remember he rode a pretty good Giro that year, in which he went full on for the first 2 weeks.

Trev The Rev

Richmond Racer wrote:

Whats this about believing Brailsford? Its the same account from everyone including Sutton and Wiggins. Trev, did you see the condition of Wiggins in the 2010 Tour? For him, he was lardy and simply not fit enough in the mountains. It was Tim Kerrison who set the entire training programme from Oct 2010 onwards, using your hated power meters etc. Sky farked up properly with Wiggins in their first season, and he farked up properly for the team and for himself. If you could be bothered to read the accounts in either On tour or My Time, he gives his account of what happened. Doesnt mean to say that you have to believe it, but at least you'd have more input. Or is that too reasonable to expect?

Hayles' haemocrit was 50.03% if my memory's correct?

Yes I did see the condition of Wiggins in the 2010 Tour and I emailed Brailsford about it. I do not hate power meters when they are working. I assume Wiggins was using a power meter in 2010 because his numbers were referred to and, if I recall correctly, Brailsford said Wiggins would have been right up there with the leaders if he had just 10% more power on the steeper climbs.

Hayles' hematocrit was only 'marginally over 50%' but Brailsford's team deal in marginal gains.

rick_chasey

inkyfingers wrote:

LeicesterLad wrote:

inkyfingers wrote:

I wonder if they'll use the contaminated steak excuse?




I'm here all week.

A clever steak joke I can handle.

Lucky Rick's not about much these days!

All of you. Scum.

rick_chasey

So a '90s cycling is being investigated for doping?



No. Way.

ddraver

Trev The Rev wrote:

Yes I did see the condition of Wiggins in the 2010 Tour and I emailed Brailsford about it

Hah Awesome!

Can imagine that meeting in Manchester, Guys we had this plan but Sh1t this bloke called Trev has just e-mailed, ok so we re some of the best minds in sports science and this bloke is utterly incapable of reading a scientific paper at all but hey, lets just do what he says shall we?

Christ you really are deluded arent you! Did you tell them to stop using clipless pedals too?

Trev The Rev

ddraver wrote:

Trev The Rev wrote:

Yes I did see the condition of Wiggins in the 2010 Tour and I emailed Brailsford about it

Hah Awesome!

Can imagine that meeting in Manchester, Guys we had this plan but Sh1t this bloke called Trev has just e-mailed, ok so we re some of the best minds in sports science and this bloke is utterly incapable of reading a scientific paper at all but hey, lets just do what he says shall we?

Christ you really are deluded arent you! Did you tell them to stop using clipless pedals too?

He did reply, so one has to assume the questions I asked were worth answering.

ddraver

Ohh Ohh tell us!

disgruntledgoat

ddraver wrote:

Ohh Ohh tell us!

"You wanna get him on some drugs"

Trev The Rev

ddraver wrote:

Ohh Ohh tell us!

Hi Trevor,




Thanks for your email I will try and respond after the Tour as you can imagine I have my hands full right now.

Cheers Dave


Sent from my iPhone

On 22 Jul 2010, at 11:58,

Hi Trevor,


A few comments as promised below.


These are for your eyes only and please do not publish them - you asked me a question and I have answered them giving my personal opinion to you in the belief that they are not for public consumption - I hope you can respect this please.


Cheers
Dave


Dave Brailsford CBE
Performance Director
British Cycling

RichN95.

Have you e-mailed anyone else Trev?

Maybe Chelsea to tell them Torres probably isn't worth £50m?
Or Steven Spielberg to tell him a fourth Indiana Jones film was a bad idea?
Perhaps you informed George Bush that the Iraq War wasn't going quite as well as planned?

ddraver

Well I'm so convinced!

Richmond Racer

Trev, can you also write to Wenger to ask him what the hell he's doing with Gervinho, and can he please swap him for a free ticket for me to see Kraftwerk.

Ta.

Trev The Rev

Richmond Racer wrote:

Trev, can you also write to Wenger to ask him what the hell he's doing with Gervinho, and can he please swap him for a free ticket for me to see Kraftwerk.

Ta.

I'm not interested in football but I think they should be drug tested as much as cyclists. Wenger has stated he has had players come to Arsenal from abroad with very high hematocrits.

Richmond Racer

Trev, look, as you're so thick with Brailsford you should apply for this job. You'd be a shoe-in

http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/gbcycl ... Director-0

mididoctors

disgruntledgoat wrote:

Trev The Rev wrote:

As yet there is no evidence Brailsford, BC or Sky have ever done anything wrong. However there are people linked to them who have dodgy pasts. Brailsford was wrong to employ those who have left. His wool over eye pulling does not fool any but the most naive.

Hayles failing the 50% hematocrit rule some years ago defies belief. We are asked to accept it was a mistake, that British Cycling were not even checking hematocrit levels before major events, that the extra long taper and other factors caught Hayles out. I can not accept Brailford's team was not checking riders hematocrit levels and other blood levels on an extremely regular basis. One assumes they train and or sleep at altitude or simulated altitude - to allow a rider to fail a very simple 50% rule is highly incompetent, or a case of a 'marginal gain too far".

We are also asked to believe Wiggins did not do the required training in 2010 and got a rollicking from Brailsford. This is your GC contender paid a massive salary, and we are told not one of Brailsford's staff was able to spot that Wiggins was not training properly. Not one of Brailsfords staff could see anything wrong in all the power meter data or blood tests or any training sessions. This does not stand up.

Now we have several riders linked to Linda McCartney squad who may or may not have been using EPO. Some of these riders are still part of the BC / Sky set up, they need to be cleared or fired asap.

We must apply the same rules to UK riders as we do foreign riders

Any evidence that "we" don't?

I think of it as a evolving process or creeping clearout.... moving the culture into a zero tolerance mode is broadly achievable in the long run.

it is messy and asymmetrical in how justice is applied. so what? when isn't it?


I would be happy with a contrite confession... if they can not get there then they should go. There is a window of opportunity for minds to get onboard and that window will be variable in length depending on who, where and what but it will not be indefinite.

The hypocrisy of the situation(which we both agree on i think) will never go away until the majority of perceived opinion is that these guys are clean and the odd doper really is an aberration. Note the perception is the thing not the reality which may [already] be that the majority are clean(er)

Trev The Rev

It will take decades before cycling is ever perceived by anyone but the extremely naive as clean.

mididoctors

Trev The Rev wrote:

It will take decades before cycling is ever perceived by anyone but the extremely naive as clean.

well that is to be seen

I didn't think we would be here this soon but in hindsight?

One or the reason to dredge up the past is too assess exactly how dirty and pervasive it was... to inform us on how we got into this mess in the first place.

the thing that strikes me about the armstrong case is how low rent "the program" was despite being labeled the most "sophisticated".

the reality of it all seems to rely on peer pressure and corruption just a much as science

Trev The Rev

Yes the Armstrong story reads more like an organised crime or gangster novel than a scientific program as put in place by the Soviets and East Germans.

One thing in favour of Brailsford's set up is that given the rather shambolic nature of even Armstrong's teams methods, it is very possible a clean set up which is up to date and organised with good funding can beat a bunch of cheating shysters.

mididoctors

The depth of this problem is highlighted by how we now ask how the narratives produced by the team management as a explanation for performance (or lack of) stand up.

that is now part and parcel of the viewer/fan experience. the management interview extend beyond tactical or even strategic concerns into the realm of teh clean

Historically reviewing my memory of coverage from the 80's 90's this started on a small scale in the mid 90's. I remember a interview with Roger Legeay before the 98 festina affair and the methods used by the team culture to control doping..


the rise of the internet as a integral part of the fan experience has widened this process into a sort of intermeshed semi functional feedback on the sport itself... which despite falling victim to USI is undeniable in effect.. cyber mob law, which is far from infallible eg the Lord Mcalpine pedo accusation etc. It was a component of the armstrong case. Where it (perhaps)has some validity is where the bun fight has a sustained longevity that grows despite opposition as if this represents by proxy some sort of consensus forming debate.

Trev The Rev

Interesting article here.

Paul Kimmage on Bradley Wiggins & Sky.

http://nyvelocity.com/content/features/ ... mageseaton

PK: It's a legitimate question to ask how the team that set up its stall by saying that there would be no doctors working from within the sport; all the doctors would be from outside cycling. So when they set out their goals and principles in 2009, and they made this one of the cornerstones of what they were about, and then suddenly, it emerges that they've employed Geert Leinders, and he's been working with them since 2010 -- and he is not just a doctor from within the sport, but a doctor who's been very closely associated with a doping program at Rabobank ... I think it's a legitimate question to ask how that happened, who made that decision?

That is a question that has not actually been addressed yet: who made the decision to hire Geert Leinders? What happened to the principles that we were given in 2009?

The question I get asked nine times out of ten is "do you believe Bradley [Wiggins is clean]?" And my answer is, because of that, "I don't know." I look at that and I actually don't know. And this is something that could have been avoided; this is a mess of their own making. Had they stuck to their principles, all those fine principles of 2009 they sold us with -- of transparency, about doctors, and how they are going to go about things -- there would not be any questions now. Paul Kimmage would not be here saying "I don't know"; he'd be saying, "Yeah, you know, I think I can buy that. Definitely."

And look what's happened since: they've lost three directeurs, four directeurs now? Four key members of that Tour de France team will not be with them next year. You're looking at that and wondering if that's grounds that add to the question [about Bradley Wiggins]. It's difficult.

ddraver

Yawn...