Forum home› Road cycling forum› Pro race

Pantano Positive

blazing_saddlesblazing_saddles Posts: 20,676
edited June 2019 in Pro race
Not a big name, but certainly not a nobody, either.
Trekkie Jarlinson Pantano caught for good old EPO.

https://www.uci.org/inside-uci/press-re ... tano-gomez
"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
«1

Posts

  • gweedsgweeds Posts: 2,471
    And so it continues.

    Arseholes.
    Napoleon, don't be jealous that I've been chatting online with babes all day. Besides, we both know that I'm training to be a cage fighter.
  • bobmcstuffbobmcstuff Posts: 10,630
    He's got some good results, a big enough name on a big enough team for it to warrant being a big deal, no?
  • rozzer32rozzer32 Posts: 3,740
    You're a bit silly if you think doping in the peloton isn't still as big as it used to be. It's just moved on to different drugs and being smarter about it. It's only the stupid ones that get caught. The passport is easily beaten.

    Disclamer: I'm not saying that Sky are doping.

    Look at Team Skys budget and how much of that budget they must spend on "Sport Science". I bet the UCI anti doping budget is a fraction of the Sky budget alone, yet alone the other top teams budgets as well. I have no numbers to back up, just my thoughts. Happy to be proven wrong.
    ***** Pro Tour Pundit Champion 2020, 2018, 2017 & 2011 *****
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 26,748
    That's a shame, I liked him

    Any riders called Pantana, Pantane, Pantanu should probably be suspended as a precaution
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 26,748
    rozzer32 wrote:
    You're a bit silly if you think doping in the peloton isn't still as big as it used to be. It's just moved on to different drugs and being smarter about it. It's only the stupid ones that get caught. The passport is easily beaten.
    What are these different drugs? Whenever anyone gets caught or confesses its the same old drugs that have been around for decades. There's been nothing new since EPO.

    The idea that it is still as bad as ever isn't substantiated by any data and just encourages doping.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • AlejandrosdogAlejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    part of me feels sorry for the sponsors and then i think well its cycling, they know the risks. and lets face it, as far as drugs problems go trek has faced worse.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 26,748
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    part of me feels sorry for the sponsors and then i think well its cycling, they know the risks. and lets face it, as far as drugs problems go trek has faced worse.
    I'd suggest that few have profited from doping more than Trek
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • No_Ta_DoctorNo_Ta_Doctor Posts: 12,219
    RichN95 wrote:
    That's a shame, I liked him

    Any riders called Pantana, Pantane, Pantanu should probably be suspended as a precaution

    They should at the very least be placed on the anti-doping watchlist, colour coded in Pantone 1495 C

    GG1511-pantone-graphics-starter-guide-pms-spot-color-selections-product-1.jpg
    “Road racing was over and the UCI had banned my riding positions on the track, so it was like ‘Jings, crivvens, help ma Boab, what do I do now? I know, I’ll go away and be depressed for 10 years’.”

    @DrHeadgear

    The Vikings are coming!
  • nickicenickice Posts: 2,439
    rozzer32 wrote:
    You're a bit silly if you think doping in the peloton isn't still as big as it used to be. It's just moved on to different drugs and being smarter about it. It's only the stupid ones that get caught. The passport is easily beaten.

    Disclamer: I'm not saying that Sky are doping.

    Look at Team Skys budget and how much of that budget they must spend on "Sport Science". I bet the UCI anti doping budget is a fraction of the Sky budget alone, yet alone the other top teams budgets as well. I have no numbers to back up, just my thoughts. Happy to be proven wrong.


    As long as there's cash to be made then there will be doping and if your job is on the line... Though, I think it's maybe not quite as bad as it used to be. I'd imagine it's the same in all sports. The thing I'll never understand is when amateurs dope.
  • ShutupJensShutupJens Posts: 1,373
    rozzer32 wrote:
    Happy to be proven wrong.

    Obviously you'll never be proven wrong. Saying it's not changed is wildly inaccurate though in my eyes.

    Shame about Pantano, entertaining rider who picked up a couple of handy wins
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 67,631 Lives Here
    Shame, i liked him, especially after his Tour escapades.

    Who’s the Dr?
    _
  • blazing_saddlesblazing_saddles Posts: 20,676
    Anybody remember which WT team had the last positive test?
    Yup, you guessed it, Trek.

    https://www.uci.org/inside-uci/press-re ... A9-cardoso
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • rozzer32rozzer32 Posts: 3,740
    ShutupJens wrote:
    rozzer32 wrote:
    Happy to be proven wrong.

    Obviously you'll never be proven wrong. Saying it's not changed is wildly inaccurate though in my eyes.

    Shame about Pantano, entertaining rider who picked up a couple of handy wins

    The reason there’s not as many positives/busts now is people are just being a lot smarter about it. It’s not that less people are doping.

    If lance hasn’t come back racing then I doubt we’d know about the US postal doping ring. Time has moved on, more is known about medical science, sport science, different drugs. Obviously a top doping ring needs big money but doping is still big business in the peloton.
    ***** Pro Tour Pundit Champion 2020, 2018, 2017 & 2011 *****
  • inseineinseine Posts: 5,786
    rozzer32 wrote:

    Disclamer: I'm not saying that Sky are doping.

    Look at Team Skys budget and how much of that budget they must spend on "Sport Science". I bet the UCI anti doping budget is a fraction of the Sky budget alone, yet alone the other top teams budgets as well. I have no numbers to back up, just my thoughts. Happy to be proven wrong.
    Well Sky claim about 300k for medical expenses (seems low) while UCI spend about 5.3 million, so yes, you’re wrong ;)
    http://cyclinganddesign.blogspot.fr/
  • topper_harleytopper_harley Posts: 597
    EPO, old school style...I like it, no fannying about with this stupid asthma treatment.
  • carbonclemcarbonclem Posts: 1,387
    Pantano > Trek > Porte > Sky

    Boom! :lol:
    2020/2021/2022 Metric Century Challenge Winner
  • cougiecougie Posts: 22,512
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Anybody remember which WT team had the last positive test?
    Yup, you guessed it, Trek.

    https://www.uci.org/inside-uci/press-re ... A9-cardoso

    Not Astana ? Blimey.
  • blazing_saddlesblazing_saddles Posts: 20,676
    cougie wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Anybody remember which WT team had the last positive test?
    Yup, you guessed it, Trek.

    https://www.uci.org/inside-uci/press-re ... A9-cardoso

    Not Astana ? Blimey.

    Hard to believe isn't it?
    They aren't that far off, with Iglinskiy probably being the previous biggest name caught.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • AlejandrosdogAlejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    cougie wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Anybody remember which WT team had the last positive test?
    Yup, you guessed it, Trek.

    https://www.uci.org/inside-uci/press-re ... A9-cardoso

    Not Astana ? Blimey.

    Hard to believe isn't it?
    They aren't that far off, with Iglinskiy probably being the previous biggest name caught.

    Does this mean Trek are in line for some suspension or loss of licence?
  • AlejandrosdogAlejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    RichN95 wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    part of me feels sorry for the sponsors and then i think well its cycling, they know the risks. and lets face it, as far as drugs problems go trek has faced worse.
    I'd suggest that few have profited from doping more than Trek

    I think youre right there.
  • ddraverddraver Posts: 25,592
    Trek have had major issues for years now...ever since Bertie came...

    No one cares though because they aren't Sky...
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • AlejandrosdogAlejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    ddraver wrote:
    Trek have had major issues for years now...ever since Bertie came...

    No one cares though because they aren't Sky...

    I think their issues were bigger prior to bertie
  • ddraverddraver Posts: 25,592
    Yes...Trek the team outfit...thing....I meant.

    Not the bike company specifically
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • jimmythecuckoojimmythecuckoo Posts: 4,678
    bobmcstuff wrote:
    He's got some good results, a big enough name on a big enough team for it to warrant being a big deal, no?
    He was quite the revelation a few summers ago in the grand tours. Agreed.
    http://fendrieneu.home.blog
    My blog and pod...
    Beers of Belgium Cycling Club UK
  • gregster04gregster04 Posts: 1,585
    I'm very disappointed to read this. I don't know why its any surprise really though.

    He seemed very likeable in the Tour a couple of years ago when he won a stage and hit the breakaways. I can only assume he was struggling to get back to that level.
  • AlejandrosdogAlejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    gregster04 wrote:
    I'm very disappointed to read this. I don't know why its any surprise really though.

    He seemed very likeable in the Tour a couple of years ago when he won a stage and hit the breakaways. I can only assume he was struggling to get back to that level.

    Yes I thought he was ace, looked great on his bike too
  • sherersherer Posts: 2,457
    he must either be stupid or desperate. There's a test for EPO so why take the risk. Decent rider who looked to be progressing well.
  • gweedsgweeds Posts: 2,471
    Announces retirement.

    https://www.velonews.com/2019/06/news/p ... ive_494684
    Napoleon, don't be jealous that I've been chatting online with babes all day. Besides, we both know that I'm training to be a cage fighter.
  • AlejandrosdogAlejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    inseine wrote:
    rozzer32 wrote:

    Disclamer: I'm not saying that Sky are doping.

    Look at Team Skys budget and how much of that budget they must spend on "Sport Science". I bet the UCI anti doping budget is a fraction of the Sky budget alone, yet alone the other top teams budgets as well. I have no numbers to back up, just my thoughts. Happy to be proven wrong.
    Well Sky claim about 300k for medical expenses (seems low) while UCI spend about 5.3 million, so yes, you’re wrong ;)

    Sky/ Ineos have three retained doctors, facilities and a pharmacy plus experts popping in to show miraculous medical reasons for unrepeatable / testable aaf. They courier things round Europe in Jiffy bags.

    I would take 300k with a pinch of salt.
  • blazing_saddlesblazing_saddles Posts: 20,676
    Gweeds wrote:
    Announces retirement.

    https://www.velonews.com/2019/06/news/p ... ive_494684

    By the time he finished serving his ban, he'd be on his way to being 35, so it's probably the easiest and best way to keep a low profile. It's a choice he can re-visit at a later date.
    A decision about as surprising as Vino trolling up a thread about a Trek rider, with his usual Sky/Ineos bait.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
Sign In or Register to comment.