Anti Doping Denmark report
Comments
-
With the best will in the world, are these kind of things really worthwhile? x rider doped in 2004, y rider doped in 2006, and so on. Can we not just all admit 'things were really dirty then, it's better now but work is still needed'?It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.0
-
Nah.With the best will in the world, are these kind of things really worthwhile? x rider doped in 2004, y rider doped in 2006, and so on. Can we not just all admit 'things were really dirty then, it's better now but work is still needed'?
Process needs to be done so dopers know that they run the risk of their reputation being tarnished years down the line, even if they got away with it at the time.
Important that that is done, so, hopefully, current dopers will think 'hmm, even if I get passed all the tests today, I'll eventually get ratted out in 10 years".0 -
Agree with Rick Chasey.0
-
And then they look around and see the likes of Hincapie, Hesjedal, Vaughters, O'Grady, Jalabert, Cipollini, Julich etc and think 'it's not so bad'
Nah.With the best will in the world, are these kind of things really worthwhile? x rider doped in 2004, y rider doped in 2006, and so on. Can we not just all admit 'things were really dirty then, it's better now but work is still needed'?
Process needs to be done so dopers know that they run the risk of their reputation being tarnished years down the line, even if they got away with it at the time.
Important that that is done, so, hopefully, current dopers will think 'hmm, even if I get passed all the tests today, I'll eventually get ratted out in 10 years".Twitter: @RichN950 -
-
Maybe. It depends how much it costs. CIRC was a complete waste of money. They would have got more 'truth' by spending it on retroactive testing.Better than nothing though, innit?Twitter: @RichN950 -
-
is there anyone at tinkov who hasn`t been involved with doping :-(0
-
Nicki Sorensen was cheating 10 years ago? My world will never be the same. If I can;t trust Nicki Sorensen, what's left?"In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
What's a rough estimate for the percentage of dopers who've been convicted or confessed?...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0
-
With the best will in the world, are these kind of things really worthwhile? x rider doped in 2004, y rider doped in 2006, and so on. Can we not just all admit 'things were really dirty then, it's better now but work is still needed'?
The problem is that it isn't any better now than it was then. The dirty players from those times are now running teams and using their experience to keep on the right side of the law whilst still using and abusing banned substances and practices.
Why on earth would anyone ride clean when all around they see dirty riders profit from their cheating, keeping their dirty money and in many cases move on into a comfortable post-retirement job running a team or working in TV? the guys who raced against these blokes clean are all long forgotten.0 -
Reports I've seen on Sastre refusing to dope at CSC are a bit of a blow to the 'you can't beat dopers' crowd given he trounced a heroically hopped-up Landis etc in '06....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0
-
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19631984#p19631984]Rodrego Hernandez[/url] wrote:With the best will in the world, are these kind of things really worthwhile? x rider doped in 2004, y rider doped in 2006, and so on. Can we not just all admit 'things were really dirty then, it's better now but work is still needed'?
The problem is that it isn't any better now than it was then. The dirty players from those times are now running teams and using their experience to keep on the right side of the law whilst still using and abusing banned substances and practices.
Why on earth would anyone ride clean when all around they see dirty riders profit from their cheating, keeping their dirty money and in many cases move on into a comfortable post-retirement job running a team or working in TV? the guys who raced against these blokes clean are all long forgotten.
Oh come off it. You genuinely believe cycling is in exactly the same state as it was in 2004? The racing doesn't even look the same, I doubt the UCI would pour money into the bio passport if it had absolutely no effect. What about a team like Garmin? No needles? etc etc.
If you think cycling is no better now than in 2004, you aren't looking for a sensible discussion, you're looking to have your prejudices confirmed."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
- Riis, Johnny Weltz and Alex Petersen admitted knowing there was doping going on in the team. In 2000, a rider stored doping in an apartment which was later used for riders on Team CSC. Weltz delivered the doping. Weltz has admitted to deliver doping to the riders. (can't be prosecuted because of statute of limitations.. surprise surprise..)0
-
- Bjarne Riis knew that Hamilton was a Fuentes client, using blood doping. Riis had used blood doping himself later in his career and knew how it worked.
When Riis admitted using doping in 2007 he didn't mention blood doping. That, he now admits. Lied about the conditions on the team as well on the press release.
- Bjarne Riis encouraged Bo Hamburger to get EPO for Jacksche.0 -
Report here (unfortunately in Danish):
http://www.dif.dk/da/nyt/dif-nyheder/2015/juni/20150623_rapportContador is the Greatest0 -
@mrconde 1m1 minute ago
Quote from a current rider regarding doping in today's peloton. "Our team doesn't want Spanish riders on the team".Contador is the Greatest0 -
- Sastre said Bjarne pressured him to dope in 2008, Sastre refused causing them to eventually split.0
-
Reports I've seen on Sastre refusing to dope at CSC are a bit of a blow to the 'you can't beat dopers' crowd given he trounced a heroically hopped-up Landis etc in '06.
Landis was Juiced, big time. CSC was going through the crisis that involved Basso at that time, but yes, I get that Sastre is widely recognised as being clean.0 -
- Sastre said Bjarne pressured him to dope in 2008, Sastre refused causing them to eventually split.
Well from Clinic this is what I see:
A source, who was part of Team CSC in 2008 and who wish to remain anonymous, have told the study group that the Spanish cyclist and winner of the 2008 Tour de France Carlos Sastre, who rode for Team CSC from 2002 to 2008, told him that Bjarne Riis in 2008 suggested to him (Sastre) to use blood doping with small bags. Riis should have said to Sastre: "I guess you kan still use small blood bags. The others are Using it. We know for sure that Discovery are Using it. "The source also believe that Riis had this knowledge of Discovery from Ivan Basso, who rode for Discovery in 2007. This invitation from Riis to Sastre should, according to the anonymous source have been a contributing factor to Sastre despite his Tour de France victory in 2008 left Team CSC in 2008.
Bjarne Riis has to study the group indicated that it is true that Sastre has told him that he was angry and felt that Riis had encouraged him to use blood doping. Riis says, however, to study the group that Sastre has misunderstood him. According to Riis took the conversation between Riis and Sastre in their common room in connection with training in the Alps up to the Tour de France in 2008 and focused on whether there were still riders who took blood doping. Riis has - according Riis himself - during the interview said that it was still possible to blood dope, and Sastre must according Riis have misunderstood this and taken it as a suggestion to blood dope.
According to Bjarne Riis had Sastre thus perceived "I guess you can still use small blood bags" as biased Sastre personally and not in the sense that Bjarne Riis believed, namely that "I think / guess that you can still use small blood bags "- ie a general view that was not directed specifically at Sastre.
Riis also explained to the study group that it first dawned on him that Sastre must have misunderstood him when he several months later talked to him during the Vuelta in the autumn of 2008. It was here that Sastre said he believed that Riis had encouraged him to take blood doping. Riis explained that he told Sastre that he misunderstood him, but do not know if Sastre accepted progressed as a misunderstanding. Riis also stressed that he has no problem with Sastre today.Contador is the Greatest0 -
Joint Press Release Anti Doping Denmark (ADD) and Sports Confederation of Denmark (DIF)
Doping Report uncovers huge mismanagement in cycling
Danish leaders in the sport has failed to respond to specific knowledge about their own riders' use of doping. There is after the group's assessment talk about criminal violations of anti-doping rules, but because of limitation periods can not be called cases.
Bjarne Riis, Johnny Weltz and Alex Pedersen, all of which have previously been associated with the cycling team, which among other things has been called Team CSC has to study the group admitted that they had knowledge that used doping on the crew. Yet they did not react. Johnny Weltz also admitted to having participated in the supply of doping.
"Unfortunately, the investigation revealed that doping at Team CSC not only can be loaded each of the riders. Management with Bjarne Riis as the Chief has at least had knowledge of doping on the team, but failed to intervene. It is totally unacceptable. It has as leader a particular responsibility and an obligation to act, as they, in our view has not adhered to, "says Michael Ash, director of ADD.
"But when circumstances beyond the limitation periods, we can not travel doping cases," adds Michael Ash.
The study group also notes that several riders have violated anti-doping rules, but that these violations also located outside the limitation period.
Fluctuating cooperation
A total of 50 people from both home and abroad have been interviewed and recorded approximately 100 hours of interviews in connection with work on the report. The interviewees have participated in voluntary conditions and has subsequently had to approve any quotes to the report. Some interviewees have spoken with the requirements of anonymity, and some interviewees have objected to either all or parts of their statements were included in the report.
"We have not had the same opportunities, such as a state commission of inquiry. Everything has taken voluntarily, and it has of course led to some significant limitations of exploration possibilities, but we have had to accept, "says Morten Mølholm Hansen, director of DIF and member of the study group, and adds:
"There has been a swinging cooperation. Some interviewees have contributed very candidly and constructively, while others have not been particularly cooperative or have had a failing memory. But through the work of the report, the study group gained a thorough insight into the culture of doping in professional cycling, providing a good basis for future anti-doping work. "
"Given the many interviews the investigating team's assessment that improved controls are crucial for anti-doping work. One must also work with attitudes and code of ethics, but it is clear that it is effective controls, which have the greatest deterrent effect. It is primarily the risk of being exposed, which plays a role, "says Morten Mølholm Hansen.
Recommendations
Study Group report made a number of recommendations for future anti-doping work in cycling. The recommendations include, inter alia, that anti-doping organizations use the possibility to carry out checks at night by reasonable suspicion, and that information about blood values delayed for athletes or entirely withheld.
In addition, it is also recommended that the teams will have an increased responsibility to keep track of their employees and that the International Cycling Union (UCI) introduces a fit assessment in its licensing of sports directors and doctors.
"Furthermore, we must in future be better to systematically gather intelligence about who sells, distributes, uses, and the second shows the support the use of doping substances and on that basis even initiate actual investigations in cooperation with the police and SKAT" says ADD-director Michael Ask.
Click here to download the 'Report on doping in Danish cycling 1998-2015' (pdf).
Tuesday, June 23 at 12:00 will be held press conference in the House of Sports, Brøndby Stadion 20, 2605 Brondby. Here, representatives from ADD and DIF review the contents of the report and make themselves available for media questions. Neither ADD or DIF have further comments on the report before the press conference.
Registration for the press conference must occur with Lars Hestbech, communication consultant at DIF, on lhe@dif.dk / mobile 23,323,784th
Facts about the report:
Study Group:
The study group was set up administratively in January 2013 under the cooperation agreement with the now former cyclist Michael Rasmussen. The cooperation went out that Michael Rasmussen had reduced its quarantine penalty against providing essential information on its own and others' abuse of doping. The group was tasked to seek verification Michael Rasmussen's information. In continuation of this work, it was decided to prepare a report for the following purposes:
To investigate cases against a number of named and unnamed individuals in order to clarify, first, whether they have violated anti-doping rules, and also to clarify whether that could be raised doping against one or more of the foregoing persons.
To elucidate and possibly uncover doping use in Danish professional cycling since 1998, including general cultural patterns that have been the hallmark of the sport.
To discuss past efforts against doping in cycling environment in the light of section. 1-2.
To make a number of recommendations to the sport in the light of section. 1-2.
The study group consisted of:
Christina Friis Johansen, Senior Consultant, ADD
Morten Mølholm Hansen, Director, DIF
Lone Hansen, Director, Team Denmark (Until February 15, 2015: ADD)
Jesper Frigast Larsen, Legal Adviser, ADD (Until April 1, 2015: DIF)
Interviewees:
Active riders: 11
Former riders: 15
Managers and support staff: 24
Total: 50
The category of "workers and support personnel" includes persons who are interviewed at a time when they have had a leadership function or other support function in relation to the sport of cycling and includes directors, team managers, doctors, communication experts and administrative staff. Of the 24 people interviewed in this category, is a single foreigner, and 9 has a past as elite cyclists. 4 of the former riders who are interviewed, are foreigners. 5 people, all former riders did not want to participate.
Some of the interviewees has decided to study the group, but did not want their opinions reflected in the report. Some interviewees have only wanted to get some of their replies reproduced in the report, while they have declined to get other answers included. This study group had to respect.0 -
Asked whether they even asked about Frank Schleck linked to Fuentes to clarify the truth in the story, several riders told to study the group that they were reluctant to interfere in the matter. As one of the riders study group spoke with put it: "The fact that some riders have been to Fuentes, means that I have a job."0
-
If people still believe Andy was clean then I don't know..0
-
If people still believe Andy was clean then I don't know..
I was just going to ask if mini-schleck was implicated."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
If people still believe Andy was clean then I don't know..
Why?
Is there a direct accusation?
Or just guilt by team association?Contador is the Greatest0 -
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19632054#p19632054]disgruntledgoat[/url] wrote:If people still believe Andy was clean then I don't know..
I was just going to ask if mini-schleck was implicated.
Not in the report, no.0 -
The biggest revelation in all of this is that you look at the Clinic. I would have thought you would avoid it at all costs.Well from Clinic this is what I see:Twitter: @RichN950 -
I never look at it other than if I am trying to find a piece of information related to doping, which is very infrequent.Contador is the Greatest0
-
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19631997#p19631997]disgruntledgoat[/url] wrote:[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19631984#p19631984]Rodrego Hernandez[/url] wrote:With the best will in the world, are these kind of things really worthwhile? x rider doped in 2004, y rider doped in 2006, and so on. Can we not just all admit 'things were really dirty then, it's better now but work is still needed'?
The problem is that it isn't any better now than it was then. The dirty players from those times are now running teams and using their experience to keep on the right side of the law whilst still using and abusing banned substances and practices.
Why on earth would anyone ride clean when all around they see dirty riders profit from their cheating, keeping their dirty money and in many cases move on into a comfortable post-retirement job running a team or working in TV? the guys who raced against these blokes clean are all long forgotten.
Oh come off it. You genuinely believe cycling is in exactly the same state as it was in 2004? The racing doesn't even look the same, I doubt the UCI would pour money into the bio passport if it had absolutely no effect. What about a team like Garmin? No needles? etc etc.
If you think cycling is no better now than in 2004, you aren't looking for a sensible discussion, you're looking to have your prejudices confirmed.
Not far off, just smaller quantities and reduced benefits. That is all the passport has done.0
