I see nothing wrong with my logic from my post. The athletes are just pawns in any sport so the top folks can get money and power. If a race team knows that if one of their races tests positive for doping, then the entire team management will never be allowed in the sport anymore, that might get their attention. And yes, I do not believe anyone start into a sport, in general, wanting to dope. Now, once egos start, peer pressure, etc., then it gets tough. But again, if the folks running a team knew they would be out also, well… Now, when we have sports like baseball, football, etc. that basically give, at best, a person a slap on the hand for doping, well, I will not be waiting for any sport to become clean. Guess this is why I do not follow or support with my money any professional sport. I have better ways to get my entertainment.
Do you believe that if everyone was clean, no one entering the sport would be tempted to and would dope?
Depends on the risk vs reward. Today, in our sport, basically no one gets tested, so I think plenty dope at all levels. But, and I know my thinking is stupid, but, if the penalties for EVERYONE involved were such that the risk was no longer worth the reward, then I hope sports could be clean. Will it ever happen, nope. I know folks I race against probably dope. But, would I ever consider it even if it were free. Nope. I guess this is why I do not drink, gamble, take drugs, etc. I just like to be different. :o)
That’s how I read Dave’s statement, and I agree with you, Fraussie…that is patently false.
Need an analogy, Dave? How much crime is there that is unrelated to organized crime?
Good on 'ya for trying to take the optimistic viewpoint…but it definitely fails the logic test.
**Ironically, he’s never tested positive. **
I wonder why no one is defending him or blaming the results on a French lab?
more importantly, does this mean alberto contador has a team to sign for next year since caisse d epargne won’t have a big GC rider on their roster (no insult to david arroyo, mr man enough to pull off a pink bike)?
they certainly will have the team to support a GC bid, since they’re not much of a sprinters team.
more importantly, does this mean alberto contador has a team to sign for next year since caisse d epargne won’t have a big GC rider on their roster (no insult to david arroyo, mr man enough to pull off a pink bike)?
they certainly will have the team to support a GC bid, since they’re not much of a sprinters team.Were they focusing on the Giro this year? They didn’t seem to have a very solid team there.
more importantly, does this mean alberto contador has a team to sign for next year since caisse d epargne won’t have a big GC rider on their roster (no insult to david arroyo, mr man enough to pull off a pink bike)?
they certainly will have the team to support a GC bid, since they’re not much of a sprinters team.
Replace Valverde with another Puerto doper.
Like someone else posted, they need to start holding team doctors and managers accountable, and passing out lifetime bans for obvious violations.
I know this is an old case, but people are still doping, so obviously the punishment is not a deterrant. Since the rewards for doping are so great (think domestique to GC winner), the punishment has to be harsh to be effective.
wasn’t contador proven not associated with the operacion puerto case? same as allan davis? just because he was on liberty seguros does it mean that he would have doped with the others on the team?
by that logical leap, given that landis (admitted that he) was doping at discovery, does that mean his other teammates LA, hincapie, et al were doping too?
huge leap.
anyway, was just a theoretical question. not a doping question. innocent until proven guilty. right?
by that logical leap, given that landis (admitted that he) was doping at discovery, does that mean his other teammates LA, hincapie, et al were doping too?
We will likely find out the answer to that question soon enough.
wasn’t contador proven not associated with the operacion puerto case? same as allan davis? just because he was on liberty seguros does it mean that he would have doped with the others on the team?
by that logical leap, given that landis (admitted that he) was doping at discovery, does that mean his other teammates LA, hincapie, et al were doping too?
huge leap.
anyway, was just a theoretical question. not a doping question. innocent until proven guilty. right?
I think it ended up that they didn’t have enough evidence to associate him, and he would not submit for DNA testing to see if his DNA matched the bags marked “AC”.
wasn’t contador proven not associated with the operacion puerto case? same as allan davis? just because he was on liberty seguros does it mean that he would have doped with the others on the team?
by that logical leap, given that landis (admitted that he) was doping at discovery, does that mean his other teammates LA, hincapie, et al were doping too?
huge leap.
anyway, was just a theoretical question. not a doping question. innocent until proven guilty. right?
I think it ended up that they didn’t have enough evidence to associate him, and he would not submit for DNA testing to see if his DNA matched the bags marked “AC”.
This.
AC stands for Andrew Coogan, which automatically identified Frank Day as the person trying to get Dr C. convicted of doping since he’s the only one on this forum still writing Coogan rather than Coggan.
It’s always the simplest explanation that stands 
**It’s always the simplest explanation that stands **
Now you have gone and done it. How long before posts start popping up talking about suspicious results.
“… never tested positive” !!!
Apositive match in a DNA test on a blood doping doctors bag of blood. The blood in the bag tested positive for EPO.
Sure sounds like a pretty positive test to me.
I hope people still have a bit of common sense and know that any post mentioned AC and FD is a joke
.
Valverde must be a bit confused and annoyed about him being relentlessly pursued by the UCI years after the event compared to treatment of Armstrong where they just seem to want to sweep it all under the carpet. It is almost as if someone has paid for a bit of lenient treatment… hang on, what was that about $100k?