PDM dopage

RichN95.

micron wrote:

Poor Steve de Jongh - guess Knaven just has a better poker face, eh

Neither of them rode for PDM. They were both at school in 1988.

Those of us who know about cycling and not just doping know that PDM 88 and TVM 98 where actually separated by a decade.

Still, everything has to be connected to Sky or it's not interesting, eh?

Pross

Ouch!

Richmond Racer

Masterful cyber slap there

FJS

frenchfighter wrote:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/bishop-i-was-the-clean-rider-in-the-1988-pdm-tour-team

Was he really? His name was still on that soigneur's list. http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2698/Spo ... loeg.dhtml (scroll down)
Knetemann was the only on that year's PDM tdf team who's name was not on the list

esafosfina1

After a brief glance at the soigneur's list it looks pretty bleak for Andy... Kokers (usually caffeine) and Bentelan ('celestone' or cortisone) and Andriol at night... not good.

micron

Silly me, getting my initials mixed up 1988, those were the days - theunisse popped for testosterone and getting a 10 minute penalty, simpler, more innocent times

Rich, a question: when PDM dropped out of the TdF in 1991, what were your feelings at that time? Did you buy the 'food poisoning' line or did you cry foul? I agree with your points upthread about drawing the line but time and again the sport has been embroiled in scandal and wilfully turned a blind eye - as Robert Millar says, if you want to trace it back to the source you need to go back to Adam & Eve. Doping is a part of the sport - knowledge of doping scandals isn't somehow inseparable from knowledge of the sport.

For professional riders, time and again, their sport has intersected with doping, has become synonymous with doping. I used to have a couple of young British riders staying with me in France who had taken Duffield's advice and come to chance their arm - they were faced with 'the choice'. Tell them that the history of their sport is noble and untainted. And how many others, and how many others?

I'm heartened by the stance of riders like Taylor Phinney who refuse to take pills, like Marco Pinotti who publish their SRM data and are open to even the most difficult questions. I think the sport is getting there. I'd like to see stronger leadership from within the sport itself, rather than expecting the shower of shoot that are the UCI to do anything meaningful. I think Sky could play a leading role in encouraging a clean sport by being transparent about methods, by publishing data - these are extraordinary times that need extraordinary leadership.

Would you sooner that it was easier to turn a blind eye? What would be - from your own direct experience of the sport - the time when you were happiest watching? Was that because it was 'cleaner' or because you were happier to accommodate the dark heart of the sport?

So when you were sat on your sofa at home, watching the 1991 Tour de France, hearing news that the number 1 team in the world had retired from the race because of a 'bacteriological infection', how did it make you feel?

dish_dash

micron wrote:

these are extraordinary times that need extraordinary leadership

I completely agree on this point (and much of the rest of your post). What the sport needs is some calm, strategic and transparent leadership. The UCI's erratic and disjointed response to doping is both part of the problem as well as accentuating the challenges within the sport...

Richmond Racer

micron wrote:

Silly me, getting my initials mixed up 1988, those were the days - theunisse popped for testosterone and getting a 10 minute penalty, simpler, more innocent times

Rich, a question: when PDM dropped out of the TdF in 1991, what were your feelings at that time? Did you buy the 'food poisoning' line or did you cry foul? I agree with your points upthread about drawing the line but time and again the sport has been embroiled in scandal and wilfully turned a blind eye - as Robert Millar says, if you want to trace it back to the source you need to go back to Adam & Eve. Doping is a part of the sport - knowledge of doping scandals isn't somehow inseparable from knowledge of the sport.

For professional riders, time and again, their sport has intersected with doping, has become synonymous with doping. I used to have a couple of young British riders staying with me in France who had taken Duffield's advice and come to chance their arm - they were faced with 'the choice'. Tell them that the history of their sport is noble and untainted. And how many others, and how many others?

I'm heartened by the stance of riders like Taylor Phinney who refuse to take pills, like Marco Pinotti who publish their SRM data and are open to even the most difficult questions. I think the sport is getting there. I'd like to see stronger leadership from within the sport itself, rather than expecting the shower of shoot that are the UCI to do anything meaningful. I think Sky could play a leading role in encouraging a clean sport by being transparent about methods, by publishing data - these are extraordinary times that need extraordinary leadership.

Would you sooner that it was easier to turn a blind eye? What would be - from your own direct experience of the sport - the time when you were happiest watching? Was that because it was 'cleaner' or because you were happier to accommodate the dark heart of the sport?

So when you were sat on your sofa at home, watching the 1991 Tour de France, hearing news that the number 1 team in the world had retired from the race because of a 'bacteriological infection', how did it make you feel?

You are clearly a big fan of Phinney. I note that he interacts with you on Twitter which must be very satisfying. He's very close to Max Sciandri and works very closely with him. You were very nudge-nudge, wink-wink about Sciandri when reports came out a couple of months ago re UKAD looking at the Linda McCartney team. I believe you expressed views that this could be very bad for BC/Sky specifically in relation to Sciandri, citing the fact that he ran the Quarrata camp for the Academy. So...somehow if something came out it could only taint Sky/BC and the Academy guys like Cav, Swift etc al, but not...Phinney? After all he's a young rider, impressionable. You clearly have question marks over Sciandri from his pro days but somehow you can square this away with his connection to Phinney?

Pross

micron wrote:

Rich, a question: when PDM dropped out of the TdF in 1991, what were your feelings at that time? Did you buy the 'food poisoning' line or did you cry foul? I agree with your points upthread about drawing the line but time and again the sport has been embroiled in scandal and wilfully turned a blind eye - as Robert Millar says, if you want to trace it back to the source you need to go back to Adam & Eve. Doping is a part of the sport - knowledge of doping scandals isn't somehow inseparable from knowledge of the sport.

Come on, no-one believed the food poisoning story. I was 18 at the time and had been following cycling properly for just 2 years and even I knew vaguely what the likely problem was. From memory even Bert and Ernie more or less said (or as close as they could without the lawyers pulling the plug on them) that it was doping gone wrong and they usually do ostrich impressions at the very mention of the D word. For me it was the first big disappointment as Kelly was a big hero (although as I have double standards he still is, along with Pantani who was my next let down!). I hadn't realised until just now that PDM were taken over by none other than Festina after that '91 debacle though!

jerry3571

Phil and Paul never mentioned the D word only when Gert-Jan Theunisse (Hiawatha- as Mr Liggett called him)
got done for being naughty.
You mean to tell me 22 years later that Phil and Paul were having me on about the food poisoning malarkey!
"Dear God!!"

Sean never seems to talk about this on the Euro channel. Hmmm...??

Jerry

RichN95.

Pross wrote:

micron wrote:

Rich, a question: when PDM dropped out of the TdF in 1991, what were your feelings at that time? Did you buy the 'food poisoning' line or did you cry foul? I agree with your points upthread about drawing the line but time and again the sport has been embroiled in scandal and wilfully turned a blind eye - as Robert Millar says, if you want to trace it back to the source you need to go back to Adam & Eve. Doping is a part of the sport - knowledge of doping scandals isn't somehow inseparable from knowledge of the sport.

Come on, no-one believed the food poisoning story. I was 18 at the time and had been following cycling properly for just 2 years and even I knew vaguely what the likely problem was. From memory even Bert and Ernie more or less said (or as close as they could without the lawyers pulling the plug on them) that it was doping gone wrong and they usually do ostrich impressions at the very mention of the D word. For me it was the first big disappointment as Kelly was a big hero (although as I have double standards he still is, along with Pantani who was my next let down!). I hadn't realised until just now that PDM were taken over by none other than Festina after that '91 debacle though!

To be honest, and I'mone year older than you, I wouldn't have had a clue. I only saw cycling on TV during the Tour on Channel 4 and read Winning - no Eurosport, no internet. But then, unlike you, I have never been a competitive cyclist so wouldn't have been exposed to those in the know. Food poisoning would have seemed fairly legit to me - we'd had it a school once. East German runners on the other hand left me in little doubt.

esafosfina1

The word in the peloton at the time was that the soigneur had simply left his 'valise' in the sun for too long... never a good thing with pharmacueticals... :shock: Curiously said soigneur didn't get much work for the remainder of the year!