There's more than "I was in Mexico" going on here...

[J Jones]

There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he was
in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other instances
of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to be more
evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders and
sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance of
his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
Jeff

[Tony S.]

"J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
news:LXbqi.1911$ij7.213@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he was
> in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
> instances of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to
> be more evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders
> and sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance
> of his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
> Jeff

Why? The doping situation appears to be in a state of hysteria, perhaps for
good reason, but the publicity and instant reaction over any little thing is
not a good thing. Rumor was enough to yank Basso and Ullrich last year
(which happened to be a good thing), but I think that set a very bad
precedent. And, since when is a rider presumed totally guilty after the "A"
sample tests positive? The system is built with some safeguards, and one of
those is that the "B" sample must also test positive for a rider to be found
guilty. This protocol is now completely irrelevant, as Cristian Moreni was
pulled after only his "A" sample tested positive. Now, that's the Tour's
choice, and he is probably guilty, but let's remember that there are good
human and politic-neutral reasons for having the protocols.

-Tony

[RicodJour]

On Jul 26, 9:34 pm, "J Jones" <n...@spammers.net> wrote:
> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he was
> in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other instances
> of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to be more
> evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders and
> sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance of
> his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.

Whitney Richards amongst others.

R

[Tom Kunich]

"J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
news:LXbqi.1911$ij7.213@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he was
> in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
> instances of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to
> be more evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders
> and sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance
> of his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.

So your guess is as good as proof?

[Anthony]

On 27 Jul, 02:34, "J Jones" <n...@spammers.net> wrote:
> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he was
> in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other instances
> of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to be more
> evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders and
> sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance of
> his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
> Jeff

I just think the team should check Rasmussen's passport and that would
end the speculation on that point beyond all doubt. If the team
leaders suspect him of other transgressions, then they should bring
forward evidence of that - it just seems a little superficial to sack
someone on the basis of hearsay. With people thinking something
greater must lie behind their decision, this leads to more suspicion,
when I am sure people want things out in the open to take away the
seediness of the sitiuation.

[Morten Reippuert Knudsen]

J Jones <nfw@spammers.net> wrote:
> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he was
> in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other instances
> of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to be more
> evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders and
> sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance of
> his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
> Jeff

They ditched him because of pressure from the ASO, and only after ASO
started applying pressure directly on the sponsor. Rabobank tried
saving him, but the the sponsor anallyzed press's response to tuesdays
pressconference and decided to dump him. The Casani testamoninal was
the perfect escapepod.

The main reason for the Rasmussen-case exploding durring TDF, was that
he turned ou to be the most convinient bullet yet in ASO's war against
UCI. CSC's pressagent today says to dansish newspaper poltikken, that
Rabobank did just about everyhing wrong in their attempt to contain
the story. He claims that if Rabobank had just held a pressconference
publicing the warnings and the exlusion from the dansih national team
there wouldn't have been a case. I tend to agree.

Saying that, i think that Rasmussen was in Italy working with a one of
Conconi's workbees from the Ferrara university - weather the team
knew about it i don't know.
Officialy the team has had rules tha prevent their riders to work with
other doctors than the official teamdoctors. Its an outcome of last
years TDF where young Thomas Dekker was heavyly criticied for working
with Luigi Ceccini. Back then Rabobank pulled him from the startlist
because of the Ceccini connection.

Funny enogh the ASO seem to turn their blind eye to the fact that
Evans and Leipheimer are still clients of Dr. Michele Ferrari, the most
prominent student of Francesco Conconi.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

[winogrand@yahoo.com]

On 27 jul, 03:34, "J Jones" <n...@spammers.net> wrote:
> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he was
> in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other instances
> of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to be more
> evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders and
> sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance of
> his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
> Jeff

Actually he missed three off season tests, two from the IFC (or
whatever they´re called) and one from the Danish National. Three
missed tests from the same organization is equal to a positive
testing. He technically didn´t have that, but it was enough for the
Danish National team to exclude him, most likely their strongest
cyclist. What I don´t understand is how this information was not known
by the larger cycling community, including the Tour organization. He
also lied about calling the Danish Org. and has been caught in
multiple les all in regards to his training locations, which all pro
riders must provide for off season random testing. It still seems
strange that all this came out so late in the game, but I guess it
takes time for a scandalous pot to come to the boil.

Something else that bothers me is how cycling is singled out as the
most doped up sport while every year there are as many or more
athletes with positive tests from all countries and dozens of sports,
many from national teams. Oh well.
ew

[J Jones]

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote in message
news:Z7cqi.11161$rR.7670@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
> news:LXbqi.1911$ij7.213@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
>> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he
>> was in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
>> instances of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to
>> be more evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team
>> leaders and sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable
>> instance of his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy"
>> comment.
>
> So your guess is as good as proof?
>
>
Common sense. I'm offering no proof, just a common sense view of this
situation. Hard to imagine someone getting canned for 1 single incident of
their integrity coming into question. Especially, if it's based on someone
else's comment that "hey, I saw him in Italy". It just doesn't make any
sense to me that his whereabouts would be enough to ****can him while he's
leading the tour. Would that be enough for you to fire an employee who was
performing at the absolute top of his game?
j

[Simon Brooke]

in message <Jwcqi.4639$P32.3268@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, J Jones
('nfw@spammers.net') wrote:

> Common sense. I'm offering no proof, just a common sense view of this
> situation. Hard to imagine someone getting canned for 1 single incident
> of
> their integrity coming into question. Especially, if it's based on
> someone
> else's comment that "hey, I saw him in Italy". It just doesn't make any
> sense to me that his whereabouts would be enough to ****can him while
> he's
> leading the tour. Would that be enough for you to fire an employee who
> was performing at the absolute top of his game?

Well, there isn't just "I saw him in Italy." There's also the shoebox
story, which, again, is one man's word against another, but doesn't smell
good (hey, used cycling shoes often don't). And missing getting his
whereabouts forms in in time - which I can completely understand, I'm
often fined for getting tax forms in late - can also be seen in a very
dubious light, in the current atmosphere of suspicion.

Having said that, I haven't yet seen enough evidence against Rasmussen to
condemn him; on the evidence we've seen so far, I still think his sacking
is outrageous. That doesn't mean there isn't other evidence we haven't
seen.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Due to financial constraints, the light at the end of the tunnel
has been switched off.

[Tom Kunich]

"J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
news:Jwcqi.4639$P32.3268@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote in message
> news:Z7cqi.11161$rR.7670@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
>> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
>> news:LXbqi.1911$ij7.213@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
>>> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he
>>> was in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
>>> instances of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to
>>> be more evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team
>>> leaders and sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single
>>> questionable instance of his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him
>>> in Italy" comment.
>>
>> So your guess is as good as proof?
>>
> Common sense. I'm offering no proof, just a common sense view of this
> situation.

Jeff, this is the entire point - common sense is just a silly assumption on
your part. Perhaps you're right but the fact is that you're no Gypsy fortune
teller and there's no proof behind any of it. All of the what-ifs are really
screwing this sport up.

Here's the bottom line - you TEST people for drugs. If they're positive you
punish them. Otherwise you leave them alone.

[J Jones]

"Tony S." <email_tonys@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:_ycqi.3098$zJ4.2506@trndny03...
> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
> news:LXbqi.1911$ij7.213@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
>> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he
>> was in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
>> instances of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to
>> be more evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team
>> leaders and sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable
>> instance of his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy"
>> comment.
>> Jeff
>
> Why?
Because he was leading the tour (every team's desire), was at the top of his
game (every team's desire), and tested negative 17 times (again, every
team's desire). Someone says "I saw him in Italy" and he's sacked, simple
as that? No way. There's more here than is being reported.
> The doping situation appears to be in a state of hysteria, perhaps for
> good reason, but the publicity and instant reaction over any little thing
> is not a good thing. Rumor was enough to yank Basso and Ullrich last year
> (which happened to be a good thing), but I think that set a very bad
> precedent. And, since when is a rider presumed totally guilty after the
> "A" sample tests positive? The system is built with some safeguards, and
> one of those is that the "B" sample must also test positive for a rider to
> be found guilty. This protocol is now completely irrelevant, as Cristian
> Moreni was pulled after only his "A" sample tested positive. Now, that's
> the Tour's choice, and he is probably guilty, but let's remember that
> there are good human and politic-neutral reasons for having the protocols.
I heard tonight on the Vs. broadcast that Moreni admitted to doping and thus
forfeited the B sample.

>
> -Tony
>
>

[jyh]

In article <_ycqi.3098$zJ4.2506@trndny03>,
"Tony S." <email_tonys@yahoo.com> wrote:

> And, since when is a rider presumed totally guilty after the "A"
> sample tests positive? The system is built with some safeguards, and one of
> those is that the "B" sample must also test positive for a rider to be found
> guilty. This protocol is now completely irrelevant, as Cristian Moreni was
> pulled after only his "A" sample tested positive.

Cristian Moreni admitted doping and did not request testing of the B
sample. The protocol was respected in this case.

jyh.

[Casey Kerrigan]

In article <_ycqi.3098$zJ4.2506@trndny03>, Tony S.
<email_tonys@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
> news:LXbqi.1911$ij7.213@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
> > There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he was
> > in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
> > instances of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to
> > be more evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders
> > and sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance
> > of his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
> > Jeff
>
> Why? The doping situation appears to be in a state of hysteria, perhaps for
> good reason, but the publicity and instant reaction over any little thing is
> not a good thing. Rumor was enough to yank Basso and Ullrich last year
> (which happened to be a good thing), but I think that set a very bad
> precedent. And, since when is a rider presumed totally guilty after the "A"
> sample tests positive? The system is built with some safeguards, and one of
> those is that the "B" sample must also test positive for a rider to be found
> guilty. This protocol is now completely irrelevant, as Cristian Moreni was
> pulled after only his "A" sample tested positive. Now, that's the Tour's
> choice, and he is probably guilty, but let's remember that there are good
> human and politic-neutral reasons for having the protocols.
>


Remember the Tour promoters want a clean race ( or at least the image
of a clean race) so they don't lose their sponsors. This is part of the
whole battle around the Pro Tour mess. The Grand Tour promtoers want
the ability to run their races as they see fit. They want the ability
to invite only those teams that they want to invite and they want the
ability to kick any rider out that they want out. The Grand Tour
promtoers don;t care about B samples or the fact that a test may be
wrong. They want to protest their sponsors and that means eliminating
any rider who even has a hint of being involved with drugs.

[Simon Brooke]

in message <_ycqi.3098$zJ4.2506@trndny03>, Tony S.
('email_tonys@yahoo.com') wrote:

> Why? The doping situation appears to be in a state of hysteria, perhaps
> for good reason, but the publicity and instant reaction over any little
> thing is not a good thing. Rumor was enough to yank Basso and Ullrich
> last year (which happened to be a good thing), but I think that set a
> very bad precedent. And, since when is a rider presumed totally guilty
> after the "A" sample tests positive? The system is built with some
> safeguards, and one of those is that the "B" sample must also test
> positive for a rider to be found guilty. This protocol is now completely
> irrelevant, as Cristian Moreni was pulled after only his "A" sample
> tested positive.

Not irrelevant. Moreni admitted guilt and did not ask for his B sample to
be tested. But Vino denies guilt and has asked for a B sample test.

This isn't simple. If Vino had been allowed to continue to race, it would
have affected tactics for everyone else. But it's tough on Kloeden
(assuming he wasn't also involved). And it very is tough in Vino if that
was a false positive.

Excluding a whole team because of one rider's doping seems harsh to me, but
pragmatically it also seems more likely to be effective than anything
else. It means the riders on a team are motivated to police one another,
and omerta should die.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Do not sail on uphill water.
- Bill Lee

[Kurgan Gringioni]

On Jul 26, 7:27 pm, "J Jones" <n...@spammers.net> wrote:
>
> Because he was leading the tour (every team's desire), was at the top of his
> game (every team's desire), and tested negative 17 times (again, every
> team's desire). Someone says "I saw him in Italy" and he's sacked, simple
> as that? No way. There's more here than is being reported.

<snip>



Dumbass -


I speculate:

that the team knows he's gonna get busted for <something not yet
disclosed>.

They didn't want to be the sponsor of a rider that gets busted for
<something not yet disclosed> and also wins the GC in the 2007 TdF. A
no win situation for the sponsor and the sponsor chose the lesser of
two evils.


thanks,

K. Gringioni.

[steve]

On 26-Jul-2007, smacked up and reeling, "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> blindly
formulated
the following incoherence:

> Because he was leading the tour (every team's desire), was at the top of
> his
> game (every team's desire), and tested negative 17 times (again, every
> team's desire). Someone says "I saw him in Italy" and he's sacked, simple
>
> as that? No way. There's more here than is being reported.

I believe Phil L. reported that Rasmussen admitted to lying about his
whereabouts once he was confronted with that statement. That would explain
it.

steve
--
"The accused will now make a bogus statement."
James Joyce

[RonSonic]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:53:52 -0400, jyh <nomail@cox.net> wrote:

>In article <_ycqi.3098$zJ4.2506@trndny03>,
> "Tony S." <email_tonys@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> And, since when is a rider presumed totally guilty after the "A"
>> sample tests positive? The system is built with some safeguards, and one of
>> those is that the "B" sample must also test positive for a rider to be found
>> guilty. This protocol is now completely irrelevant, as Cristian Moreni was
>> pulled after only his "A" sample tested positive.
>
>Cristian Moreni admitted doping and did not request testing of the B
>sample. The protocol was respected in this case.

What protocol was respected, the test result was leaked to the press before the
rider or team had been notified.

Ron

"Casey Kerrigan" <casey@caseykerrigan.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
260720071958503408%casey@caseykerrigan.com...
> In article <_ycqi.3098$zJ4.2506@trndny03>, Tony S.
> <email_tonys@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
>> news:LXbqi.1911$ij7.213@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
>> > There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he
>> > was
>> > in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
>> > instances of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has
>> > to
>> > be more evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team
>> > leaders
>> > and sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable
>> > instance
>> > of his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
>> > Jeff
>>
>> Why? The doping situation appears to be in a state of hysteria, perhaps
>> for
>> good reason, but the publicity and instant reaction over any little thing
>> is
>> not a good thing. Rumor was enough to yank Basso and Ullrich last year
>> (which happened to be a good thing), but I think that set a very bad
>> precedent. And, since when is a rider presumed totally guilty after the
>> "A"
>> sample tests positive? The system is built with some safeguards, and one
>> of
>> those is that the "B" sample must also test positive for a rider to be
>> found
>> guilty. This protocol is now completely irrelevant, as Cristian Moreni
>> was
>> pulled after only his "A" sample tested positive. Now, that's the Tour's
>> choice, and he is probably guilty, but let's remember that there are good
>> human and politic-neutral reasons for having the protocols.
>>
>
>
> Remember the Tour promoters want a clean race ( or at least the image
> of a clean race) so they don't lose their sponsors. This is part of the
> whole battle around the Pro Tour mess. The Grand Tour promtoers want
> the ability to run their races as they see fit. They want the ability
> to invite only those teams that they want to invite and they want the
> ability to kick any rider out that they want out. The Grand Tour
> promtoers don;t care about B samples or the fact that a test may be
> wrong. They want to protest their sponsors and that means eliminating
> any rider who even has a hint of being involved with drugs.

Correct !
It is what Patrice Clerc said yesterday.
http://jt.france2.fr/20h/index-fr.php?jt=0&start=493

http://jt.france2.fr/20h/index-fr.php?jt=0&start=603

No doubt that UCI want to take control of the TDF by discrediting ASO.
UCI was aware about Rasmussen Mexican (Italian or whatever) trip and the
no-control.
But THEY DID NOT SAID IT to ASO BEFORE. Why ????
The Danish federation (aware of it MONTH BEFORE) also said nothing BEFORE.
They expected Ras to have the yellow for to declare " Oh guy, I forget to
tell you that he missed some control ...."
And now we are in this mess.
Well done UCI

[Simon Brooke]

in message <huudnR6slpJ2_jTbnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@rcn.net>, steve
('steve@steve.com') wrote:

> On 26-Jul-2007, smacked up and reeling, "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net>
> blindly formulated
> the following incoherence:
>
>> Because he was leading the tour (every team's desire), was at the top of
>> his
>> game (every team's desire), and tested negative 17 times (again, every
>> team's desire). Someone says "I saw him in Italy" and he's sacked,
>> simple
>>
>> as that? No way. There's more here than is being reported.
>
> I believe Phil L. reported that Rasmussen admitted to lying about his
> whereabouts once he was confronted with that statement. That would
> explain it.

Phil L. reported that Theo de Rooij said that Rasmussen admitted lying.
That's a slightly different chain of evidence.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; this is not a .sig

[kaiser]

On Jul 26, 9:11 pm, Anthony <agroup...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 27 Jul, 02:34, "J Jones" <n...@spammers.net> wrote:
>
> > There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he was
> > in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other instances
> > of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to be more
> > evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders and
> > sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance of
> > his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
> > Jeff
>
> I just think the team should check Rasmussen's passport and that would
> end the speculation on that point beyond all doubt.

I've been to Mexico. They generally do not "stamp" it. They scan it
into a computer. That's it.

[Simon Brooke]

in message <1185509468.484326.45330@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.c om>, Anthony
('agroups01@btinternet.com') wrote:

> On 27 Jul, 02:34, "J Jones" <n...@spammers.net> wrote:
>> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he
>> was
>> in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
>> instances
>> of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to be more
>> evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders and
>> sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance
>> of his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
>> Jeff
>
> I just think the team should check Rasmussen's passport and that would
> end the speculation on that point beyond all doubt.

My passport has been stamped precisely twice in its history, and neither of
the stamps is legible. During that time (and on that passport) I have
visited

Iceland
Sweden
Republic of Ireland
Switzerland (several times)
Holland
Monaco
France
United States of America
Japan
Malaysia
Abu Dabi

Stamps on a passport prove nothing. But airline passenger manifests could
be checked, and they do prove something.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; 99% of browsers can't run ActiveX controls. Unfortunately
;; 99% of users are using the 1% of browsers that can...
[seen on /. 08:04:02]

[amit.ghosh@gmail.com]

On Jul 27, 2:31 am, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 26, 7:27 pm, "J Jones" <n...@spammers.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Because he was leading the tour (every team's desire), was at the top of his
> > game (every team's desire), and tested negative 17 times (again, every
> > team's desire). Someone says "I saw him in Italy" and he's sacked, simple
> > as that? No way. There's more here than is being reported.
>
> <snip>
>
> Dumbass -
>
> I speculate:
>
> that the team knows he's gonna get busted for <something not yet
> disclosed>.
>
> They didn't want to be the sponsor of a rider that gets busted for
> <something not yet disclosed> and also wins the GC in the 2007 TdF. A
> no win situation for the sponsor and the sponsor chose the lesser of
> two evils.
>
> thanks,

dumbass,

thank you. that seems obvious to me.

if his only crime was some conflict in his supposed whereabout they
could invoke some magic like armstrong's asscream or simoni's candy.

i figured the UCI had some better evidence on rasmussen we don't read
on cnews yet. mcquaid's commets seemed to suggest that.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:31:55 -0700, Kurgan Gringioni
<kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Jul 26, 7:27 pm, "J Jones" <n...@spammers.net> wrote:
>>
>> Because he was leading the tour (every team's desire), was at the top of his
>> game (every team's desire), and tested negative 17 times (again, every
>> team's desire). Someone says "I saw him in Italy" and he's sacked, simple
>> as that? No way. There's more here than is being reported.
>
>Dumbass -
>
>
>I speculate:
>
>that the team knows he's gonna get busted for <something not yet
>disclosed>.
>
>They didn't want to be the sponsor of a rider that gets busted for
><something not yet disclosed> and also wins the GC in the 2007 TdF. A
>no win situation for the sponsor and the sponsor chose the lesser of
>two evils.

Dumbass. Good guess.

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

[Morten Reippuert Knudsen]

Montesquiou wrote:

I think the conspirecy theories are getting way out of hand here.

No doubt that there is a conflict between ASO and the UCI - it has
been going on for years.
Rasmussens warnings are not the reason for the war, the ASO just used
it as a convinient bullet in their ammunitionchamber and was
wendensday night appointed a victory the the most recent battle.

> Correct !
> It is what Patrice Clerc said yesterday.
> http://jt.france2.fr/20h/index-fr.php?jt=0&start=493

> http://jt.france2.fr/20h/index-fr.php?jt=0&start=603

> No doubt that UCI want to take control of the TDF by discrediting ASO.
> UCI was aware about Rasmussen Mexican (Italian or whatever) trip and the
> no-control.

Speculating that the UCI/DCU knew Rasmussen was in Italy and not in
Mexico between 4th. juni and 12th of june as his whereabouts states is
just plain rediculous. Between 4th of june and 11th of june the UCI
asumed that Rasmussen was in Italy, rightfully, since they did't recive
Rasmussens changed scedule until 11th of june.

It's just as stupid as saying when ASO invited Astana they purpusly
disregarded UCI's public warnings against Astana (especially
against Vinokurov's connection to dr Ferrari in addition to the
connection to Fuentes and Saiz.)

Acording to current rules the ASO couldn't deny Unibet participating
in this years TDF. It's apperant that ASO are by the use of the press
trying to make the UCI cave in and bend the current UCI rulesset. It's
a powerstrugle between the two major orgazitions in cycling.

> But THEY DID NOT SAID IT to ASO BEFORE. Why ????

ASO has no juristiction in doping controls, only WADA, UCI, national
federations and their corosponding antidoping agencies has. If an
athlete comply according to current rules UCI can't do anything,
Michal Rasmussen did comply.

ASO is just another race organizer, argualbly by far the welthiest and
most powerfull one - even big enough to take on the UCI, witch they've
proved by going for Rasmussens throat, denying the participation of
Unibet and supporting Astana.

> The Danish federation (aware of it MONTH BEFORE) also said nothing BEFORE.

Bull****, the danish federation contated UCI and Rabobank after
issuing their warning on jun 28th. By anyone the danish federation and
and the danish press has been Rasmussens most insistent critics.

> They expected Ras to have the yellow for to declare " Oh guy, I forget to
> tell you that he missed some control ...."
> And now we are in this mess.

He didn't miss more controls than what's allowed under current UCI and
WADA rules.

> Well done UCI

You mean well done Dr. Fearari. 2:1 over Dr. Fuentes after having
Cechini's candidates expeld last year. Dr. Ferari is still the most
successfull kingmaker in TDF.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

[Andrew Price]

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:54:24 +0100, Simon Brooke
<simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:

>> I just think the team should check Rasmussen's passport and that would
>> end the speculation on that point beyond all doubt.
>
>My passport has been stamped precisely twice in its history, and neither of
>the stamps is legible.

Effectively, as (presumably) the holder of a Danish passport, it would
not have been stamped on entering Italy. This is normal within the
European Community member states.

But do Mexican immigration authorities stamp passports of foreign
nationals?

[RonSonic]

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:59:41 +0100, Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:

>in message <_ycqi.3098$zJ4.2506@trndny03>, Tony S.
>('email_tonys@yahoo.com') wrote:
>
>> Why? The doping situation appears to be in a state of hysteria, perhaps
>> for good reason, but the publicity and instant reaction over any little
>> thing is not a good thing. Rumor was enough to yank Basso and Ullrich
>> last year (which happened to be a good thing), but I think that set a
>> very bad precedent. And, since when is a rider presumed totally guilty
>> after the "A" sample tests positive? The system is built with some
>> safeguards, and one of those is that the "B" sample must also test
>> positive for a rider to be found guilty. This protocol is now completely
>> irrelevant, as Cristian Moreni was pulled after only his "A" sample
>> tested positive.
>
>Not irrelevant. Moreni admitted guilt and did not ask for his B sample to
>be tested. But Vino denies guilt and has asked for a B sample test.
>
>This isn't simple. If Vino had been allowed to continue to race, it would
>have affected tactics for everyone else. But it's tough on Kloeden
>(assuming he wasn't also involved). And it very is tough in Vino if that
>was a false positive.
>
>Excluding a whole team because of one rider's doping seems harsh to me, but
>pragmatically it also seems more likely to be effective than anything
>else. It means the riders on a team are motivated to police one another,
>and omerta should die.

So why didn't that apply to T-Mobile?

They had a positive result on the team, but unlike Astana or Cofidis were not
given the boot.

Ron

[shayana.kadidal@gmail.com]

On Jul 27, 5:09 am, Simon Brooke <si...@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:
> in message <Jwcqi.4639$P32.3...@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, J Jones
>
> ('...@spammers.net') wrote:
> > Common sense. I'm offering no proof, just a common sense view of this
> > situation. Hard to imagine someone getting canned for 1 single incident
> > of
> > their integrity coming into question. Especially, if it's based on
> > someone
> > else's comment that "hey, I saw him in Italy". It just doesn't make any
> > sense to me that his whereabouts would be enough to ****can him while
> > he's
> > leading the tour. Would that be enough for you to fire an employee who
> > was performing at the absolute top of his game?
>
> Well, there isn't just "I saw him in Italy." There's also the shoebox
> story, which, again, is one man's word against another, but doesn't smell
> good (hey, used cycling shoes often don't). And missing getting his
> whereabouts forms in in time - which I can completely understand, I'm
> often fined for getting tax forms in late - can also be seen in a very
> dubious light, in the current atmosphere of suspicion.
>
> Having said that, I haven't yet seen enough evidence against Rasmussen to
> condemn him; on the evidence we've seen so far, I still think his sacking
> is outrageous. That doesn't mean there isn't other evidence we haven't
> seen.
>
> --
> si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke)http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
>
> Due to financial constraints, the light at the end of the tunnel
> has been switched off.

TWO men's stories -- VeloNews spoke to Taro Smith, the physiology PhD
who identified the drug packets as Hemopure.

Also, lying about speaking to Anne Gripper.--SK

[Tom Kunich]

"Simon Brooke" <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote in message
news:jbpon4-93r.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk...
> in message <Jwcqi.4639$P32.3268@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, J Jones
> ('nfw@spammers.net') wrote:
>
>> Common sense. I'm offering no proof, just a common sense view of this
>> situation. Hard to imagine someone getting canned for 1 single incident
>> of
>> their integrity coming into question. Especially, if it's based on
>> someone
>> else's comment that "hey, I saw him in Italy". It just doesn't make any
>> sense to me that his whereabouts would be enough to ****can him while
>> he's
>> leading the tour. Would that be enough for you to fire an employee who
>> was performing at the absolute top of his game?
>
> Well, there isn't just "I saw him in Italy." There's also the shoebox
> story

When did this "showbox story" supposedly occur?

"Morten Reippuert Knudsen" <spam@reippuert.dk> a écrit dans le message de
news: 5hson4-rb9.ln1@wm.reippuert.dk...
> Montesquiou wrote:
>
> I think the conspirecy theories are getting way out of hand here.
>
> No doubt that there is a conflict between ASO and the UCI - it has
> been going on for years.
> Rasmussens warnings are not the reason for the war, the ASO just used
> it as a convinient bullet in their ammunitionchamber and was
> wendensday night appointed a victory the the most recent battle.
>
I agree !

>> Correct !
>> It is what Patrice Clerc said yesterday.
>> http://jt.france2.fr/20h/index-fr.php?jt=0&start=493
>
>> http://jt.france2.fr/20h/index-fr.php?jt=0&start=603
>
>> No doubt that UCI want to take control of the TDF by discrediting ASO.
>> UCI was aware about Rasmussen Mexican (Italian or whatever) trip and the
>> no-control.
>
> Speculating that the UCI/DCU knew Rasmussen was in Italy and not in
> Mexico between 4th. juni and 12th of june as his whereabouts states is
> just plain rediculous.

Sorry if I expressed in a wrong way : It is the fact that he "missed some
control" and not that he was in Italy.
If ASO were aware of it (missing control), they whould have banned Ras.
According do Prudhomme the agreement between UCI and ASO is "a frank and
open contact, no one concealing any information". ASO complain that UCI
willfully concealed this information.


Between 4th of june and 11th of june the UCI
> asumed that Rasmussen was in Italy, rightfully, since they did't recive
> Rasmussens changed scedule until 11th of june.
>
> It's just as stupid as saying when ASO invited Astana they purpusly
> disregarded UCI's public warnings against Astana (especially
> against Vinokurov's connection to dr Ferrari in addition to the
> connection to Fuentes and Saiz.)
>
> Acording to current rules the ASO couldn't deny Unibet participating
> in this years TDF. It's apperant that ASO are by the use of the press
> trying to make the UCI cave in and bend the current UCI rulesset. It's
> a powerstrugle between the two major orgazitions in cycling.
>
ASO explain it in the link I gave : He says that there is not DIRECT CONTACT
between Vino and Fuentes.
If the name of Vino is in the process, it is not as Client of Fuentes.
Indeed I read here and there that the TDF don't follow any "présomption
d'innocence"... Now ASO must be accused of the opposit ?

>> But THEY DID NOT SAID IT to ASO BEFORE. Why ????
>
> ASO has no juristiction in doping controls, only WADA, UCI, national
> federations and their corosponding antidoping agencies has. If an
> athlete comply according to current rules UCI can't do anything,
> Michal Rasmussen did comply.
>
See my answer above. ASO don't want any juridiction, just all the
informations on all the ridders in order to decide if they can (or cannot)
be invited in the TDF

> ASO is just another race organizer, argualbly by far the welthiest and
> most powerfull one - even big enough to take on the UCI, witch they've
> proved by going for Rasmussens throat, denying the participation of
> Unibet and supporting Astana.
>
>> The Danish federation (aware of it MONTH BEFORE) also said nothing
>> BEFORE.
>
> Bull****, the danish federation contated UCI and Rabobank after
> issuing their warning on jun 28th. By anyone the danish federation and
> and the danish press has been Rasmussens most insistent critics.
>
>> They expected Ras to have the yellow for to declare " Oh guy, I forget to
>> tell you that he missed some control ...."
>> And now we are in this mess.
>
> He didn't miss more controls than what's allowed under current UCI and
> WADA rules.
>

The Danish federation attitude was unfair ( as the UCI). They had
informations on Ras they could have transmited to ASO also.
Yes, I know, they were not obliged to do it. It is why I say it is unfair.
Plus the fact they expected Ras to be in yellow (mont after) for to inform
the press about it !!!
No doubt that it was on purpose


>> Well done UCI
>
> You mean well done Dr. Fearari. 2:1 over Dr. Fuentes after having
> Cechini's candidates expeld last year. Dr. Ferari is still the most
> successfull kingmaker in TDF.
>
> --
> Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>
>
> Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

[Donald Munro]

Morten Reippuert Knudsen wrote:
> Funny enogh the ASO seem to turn their blind eye to the fact that
> Evans and Leipheimer are still clients of Dr. Michele Ferrari, the most
> prominent student of Francesco Conconi.

So now you have to pass a Conconi test before you can ride.

"Morten Reippuert Knudsen" <spam@reippuert.dk> a écrit dans le message de
news: a5uon4-fc9.ln1@wm.reippuert.dk...
>J Jones <nfw@spammers.net> wrote:
>> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he
>> was
>> in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
>> instances
>> of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has to be more
>> evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team leaders and
>> sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single questionable instance of
>> his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him in Italy" comment.
>> Jeff
>
> They ditched him because of pressure from the ASO, and only after ASO
> started applying pressure directly on the sponsor. Rabobank tried
> saving him, but the the sponsor anallyzed press's response to tuesdays
> pressconference and decided to dump him. The Casani testamoninal was
> the perfect escapepod.
>
> The main reason for the Rasmussen-case exploding durring TDF, was that
> he turned ou to be the most convinient bullet yet in ASO's war against
> UCI. CSC's pressagent today says to dansish newspaper poltikken, that
> Rabobank did just about everyhing wrong in their attempt to contain
> the story. He claims that if Rabobank had just held a pressconference
> publicing the warnings and the exlusion from the dansih national team
> there wouldn't have been a case. I tend to agree.
>
> Saying that, i think that Rasmussen was in Italy working with a one of
> Conconi's workbees from the Ferrara university - weather the team
> knew about it i don't know.
> Officialy the team has had rules tha prevent their riders to work with
> other doctors than the official teamdoctors. Its an outcome of last
> years TDF where young Thomas Dekker was heavyly criticied for working
> with Luigi Ceccini. Back then Rabobank pulled him from the startlist
> because of the Ceccini connection.
>
> Funny enogh the ASO seem to turn their blind eye to the fact that
> Evans and Leipheimer are still clients of Dr. Michele Ferrari, the most
> prominent student of Francesco Conconi.
>
Could you pls understand that ASO is, with the peloton, the FIRST victim of
the war UCI (and others, I suspect) is/are fighting against ASO
1 - The TDF, (the main Cyclist competition) to be under the ASO organisation
is a problem for UCI.
2 - The war against dopping that the TDF is fighting is another problem for
UCI.
UCI, reluctantly, pretend to fight the dopping also, but they would like to
be the organizers. As FIFA is of the world cup, as all the others
federations are.
Why do think all this mess about the dopping ? because the TDF (and mainly
the public) don't want doppers anymore.
3 - If there is some one to blame, first blame Ras, then the Danish
Federation, then the UCI.

The TDF is close to explode because UCI mainly and the riders who don't
understand that the public don't accept the cheaters anymore.

To think that ASO whant the mess and/or is happy whis all the mess,
loosing sponsorts, loosing public, loosing TV midia is ridiculous


> --
> Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>
>
> Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

[Morten Reippuert Knudsen]

Montesquiou wrote:


> >> Correct !
> >> It is what Patrice Clerc said yesterday.
> >> http://jt.france2.fr/20h/index-fr.php?jt=0&start=493
> >
> >> http://jt.france2.fr/20h/index-fr.php?jt=0&start=603
> >
> >> No doubt that UCI want to take control of the TDF by discrediting ASO.
> >> UCI was aware about Rasmussen Mexican (Italian or whatever) trip and the
> >> no-control.
> >
> > Speculating that the UCI/DCU knew Rasmussen was in Italy and not in
> > Mexico between 4th. juni and 12th of june as his whereabouts states is
> > just plain rediculous.

> Sorry if I expressed in a wrong way : It is the fact that he "missed some
> control" and not that he was in Italy.

It's a fact that he did recive warnings, but not sufficent warnings to
block him or charge him. Rules are roules either everybody plays by the
roules or they don't.

It's not a fact that he was in Itlay, at least not yet.

> If ASO were aware of it (missing control), they whould have banned Ras.

No, they don't have the juristiction to do so, Rabobank and UCI would
have taken it to court and won.

Besides, the ASO's action by their seceltion of Astana for a wild
card clearly indicate that the ASO doesn't really care about doping
unless it's beeing disoverred.

UCI basicly sendt out a public warning against Astana becuase of the
ties to Operation Puerto, Vinokurov beeing a client with Dr. Michele
Ferrari, Kesselers positive _AND_ Coni's charge against Mazoleini.
In contrast to Rabobank, Astana did not have a legal claim to ride the
Tour. ASO invited Astana themselves.

Secondly ASO's persona non grate label on Bjarne Riis because he
admitted that he used EPO 11 years ago is rediuculous. Riis runs the
tightest antidoping program out there, even stricter than The French
and German federations and WADA and with complete /independant/ and
transperant control. If any team is doing what they can and spends a
huge amount of their resource trying to expose doping anno 2007
it's CSC.

As for the french teams; i aknowlegde that they truely seem to be doing
what they can to prevent their riders from doping - but do the ASO?
ASO don't even try...

> According do Prudhomme the agreement between UCI and ASO is "a frank and
> open contact, no one concealing any information". ASO complain that UCI
> willfully concealed this information.

Never the less, acording to UCI rules Rasmussen was allowed to race,
and ASO was not allowed to deny Rabobank letting Rasmussen race.

> Between 4th of june and 11th of june the UCI
> > asumed that Rasmussen was in Italy, rightfully, since they did't recive
> > Rasmussens changed scedule until 11th of june.
> >
> > It's just as stupid as saying when ASO invited Astana they purpusly
> > disregarded UCI's public warnings against Astana (especially
> > against Vinokurov's connection to dr Ferrari in addition to the
> > connection to Fuentes and Saiz.)
> >
> > Acording to current rules the ASO couldn't deny Unibet participating
> > in this years TDF. It's apperant that ASO are by the use of the press
> > trying to make the UCI cave in and bend the current UCI rulesset. It's
> > a powerstrugle between the two major orgazitions in cycling.
> >
> ASO explain it in the link I gave : He says that there is not DIRECT CONTACT
> between Vino and Fuentes.

There was a known direct contact between Vinokurow and Dr. Michele
Ferrari, the most notorius "prepareteur" in pro cycling for more than
two decades. UCI even warned ASO about it!

> If the name of Vino is in the process, it is not as Client of Fuentes.
> Indeed I read here and there that the TDF don't follow any "présomption
> d'innocence"... Now ASO must be accused of the opposit ?

No, they just have to face charges for applying doubble standarts.

Regarding doubble standarts: If Vincent Laveneu can have at team at
ASO races, there should be no reason why ASO would try to prevent Riis
form taking part. In the late 90's Vincent Lavenou's Casino team
practiced systematic doping only beeing superseeded by Festina.

I do _not_ suspect AGR2 to be a dirty team, on the contary i think
Lavenau runs one of the cleanst atcs i procycling and i do belive he
is sincere about his public stand against doping in procycling.

However welcomming Laneau and declaring Bjarne Riis persona non grata
is applying doubble standarts.

> >> But THEY DID NOT SAID IT to ASO BEFORE. Why ????
> >
> > ASO has no juristiction in doping controls, only WADA, UCI, national
> > federations and their corosponding antidoping agencies has. If an
> > athlete comply according to current rules UCI can't do anything,
> > Michal Rasmussen did comply.
> >
> See my answer above. ASO don't want any juridiction, just all the
> informations on all the ridders in order to decide if they can (or cannot)
> be invited in the TDF

I'm very well aware of what the ASO want's, but i also know what
they can't. As for protour teams, ASO doesn't have anything to say: If
a rider complies to UCI rules and he rides on a protour team, then ASO
just have to comply nad let him race.

> > ASO is just another race organizer, argualbly by far the welthiest and
> > most powerfull one - even big enough to take on the UCI, witch they've
> > proved by going for Rasmussens throat, denying the participation of
> > Unibet and supporting Astana.
> >
> >> The Danish federation (aware of it MONTH BEFORE) also said nothing
> >> BEFORE.
> >
> > Bull****, the danish federation contated UCI and Rabobank after
> > issuing their warning on jun 28th. By anyone the danish federation and
> > and the danish press has been Rasmussens most insistent critics.
> >
> >> They expected Ras to have the yellow for to declare " Oh guy, I forget to
> >> tell you that he missed some control ...."
> >> And now we are in this mess.
> >
> > He didn't miss more controls than what's allowed under current UCI and
> > WADA rules.
> >

> The Danish federation attitude was unfair ( as the UCI). They had
> informations on Ras they could have transmited to ASO also.

No those informatios are confidential, and since ASO does not have any
juristriction under WADA they can't access informations regarding
warnings - Plain and simple.

In fact DDA can expect a lawsuit for publicing confidential
information about Michael Rasmussen's warnings without Michael
Rasmussens concent.

If the ASO relley felt about it they would demand every rider in TDF
to share information about prior and standing warnings, and publicising
weather their national federations or UCI has done any out of
competition tests - However ASO haven't because they don't wan't
those informations.

> Yes, I know, they were not obliged to do it. It is why I say it is unfair.
> Plus the fact they expected Ras to be in yellow (mont after) for to inform
> the press about it !!!
> No doubt that it was on purpose

It's no secret in Denmark that Jesper Worre and Michael Rasmussen
arrent exacltly the best of friends. Worre has been criticiing
Rasmussen for years for not racing Danish Championship and DCU's own
HC1.1 race "Danmark Rundt".
Their friendship didn't improve last year when Michael Rasmussen agreed
to race "Danmark Rundt" and Rasmussen left durring the stage race in
order to ride a crit and Classica San Sebastain.

Worre was, while on vacation, asked if Rasmussen had any warnings and
if he had been excluded from the danish national team by a reporter
from DR (National non-commercial TV station). Worre answard the
questions.
Incidently it was also a DR reporter who found the Cassani story, DR
has a long reputation for exposing doping in danish cycling and
exposed systematic use of dpoing by Gewis Ballan back in 1997 and has
prduced features regarding the Ferrara institute and other
sportdoctors involved in amateur and pro cycling.

However knowning danish cycling it's unlikely that DCU planned to
publicice Rasmussens exclusion durring the TDF, or even that they
waited until he wore the Yellow jearsy. Denmark isn't excatly a banana
republic, in fact its proberbly the most law-abiding country in all of
Europe. Finally no one in danish cycling expected Rasmussen to wear the
Yellow og go for the GC.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

[Morten Reippuert Knudsen]

Donald Munro <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Morten Reippuert Knudsen wrote:
> > Funny enogh the ASO seem to turn their blind eye to the fact that
> > Evans and Leipheimer are still clients of Dr. Michele Ferrari, the most
> > prominent student of Francesco Conconi.

> So now you have to pass a Conconi test before you can ride.

If UCI and ASO really wan't to fight doping among the top athletes
Conconi's Ferarra institute would be the place to start.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

[Michael Press]

In article <46a9e410$0$5084$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr>,
<Montesquiou> wrote:

> The TDF is close to explode because UCI mainly and the riders who don't
> understand that don't accept the cheaters anymore.

I disagree. If by `the public' you mean folks who line
the TdF route and followers of cycling world-wide.
Mostly we, maybe not you, would be perfectly content if
the doping scandals disappeared from notice.

--
Michael Press

[teaser4ever@gmail.com]

On Jul 27, 2:18 pm, <Montesquiou> wrote:
> Could you pls understand that ASO is, with the peloton, the FIRST victim of
> the war UCI (and others, I suspect) is/are fighting against ASO

*Cough* Bull**** mkay?

The butter on the head of the Aso is so thick it drips all over the
place. the Uci isnt a hair better... but to say that Aso fights for a
fair sport is laughable. They fight for themselves, but gladly
slamnder a man who stil hasn't proven to be guilty. Prudhomme is one
of the self-proclaimed Grand-inquisitors who are just looking how to
gain power.


> 1 - The TDF, (the main Cyclist competition) to be under the ASO organisation
> is a problem for UCI.

Yeah... imagine that, a racing organisation wich doesn't want to work
with the International Cyling Organisation... imagine that giving
problems *rolls eyes*.

> 2 - The war against dopping that the TDF is fighting is another problem for
> UCI.
> UCI, reluctantly, pretend to fight the dopping also, but they would like to
> be the organizers. As FIFA is of the world cup, as all the others
> federations are.
> Why do think all this mess about the dopping ? because the TDF (and mainly
> the public) don't want doppers anymore.

Ahhh yes the TdF with its public Lynching and leaking of tests is the
epitome of Dope fighting. Thank you, I will pass.
> 3 - If there is some one to blame, first blame Ras, then the Danish
> Federation, then the UCI.
>

And it is A-Okay if Prudhomme slags riders without proof. Or that
leaked tests circulate.

> The TDF is close to explode because UCI mainly and the riders who don't
> understand that the public don't accept the cheaters anymore.
>

The public isn't nearly as hypocritical as the Press, Uci and Aso.

> To think that ASO whant the mess and/or is happy whis all the mess,
> loosing sponsorts, loosing public, loosing TV midia is ridiculous
>

And the gain of wrecking the Uci certainly is not a goal for
Prudhomme, who is after all only doing his utmost for the image of
cycling. '

As a sidenote, I have a bridge to sell you.

<teaser4ever@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
1185540096.187053.56470@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.co m...
> On Jul 27, 2:18 pm, <Montesquiou> wrote:
>> Could you pls understand that ASO is, with the peloton, the FIRST victim
>> of
>> the war UCI (and others, I suspect) is/are fighting against ASO
>
> *Cough* Bull**** mkay?
>
> The butter on the head of the Aso is so thick it drips all over the
> place. the Uci isnt a hair better... but to say that Aso fights for a
> fair sport is laughable. They fight for themselves, but gladly
> slamnder a man who stil hasn't proven to be guilty. Prudhomme is one
> of the self-proclaimed Grand-inquisitors who are just looking how to
> gain power.
>
>
>> 1 - The TDF, (the main Cyclist competition) to be under the ASO
>> organisation
>> is a problem for UCI.
>
> Yeah... imagine that, a racing organisation wich doesn't want to work
> with the International Cyling Organisation... imagine that giving
> problems *rolls eyes*.
>
>> 2 - The war against dopping that the TDF is fighting is another problem
>> for
>> UCI.
>> UCI, reluctantly, pretend to fight the dopping also, but they would like
>> to
>> be the organizers. As FIFA is of the world cup, as all the others
>> federations are.
>> Why do think all this mess about the dopping ? because the TDF (and
>> mainly
>> the public) don't want doppers anymore.
>
> Ahhh yes the TdF with its public Lynching and leaking of tests is the
> epitome of Dope fighting. Thank you, I will pass.
>> 3 - If there is some one to blame, first blame Ras, then the Danish
>> Federation, then the UCI.
>>
>
> And it is A-Okay if Prudhomme slags riders without proof. Or that
> leaked tests circulate.
>
>> The TDF is close to explode because UCI mainly and the riders who don't
>> understand that the public don't accept the cheaters anymore.
>>
>
> The public isn't nearly as hypocritical as the Press, Uci and Aso.
>
>> To think that ASO whant the mess and/or is happy whis all the mess,
>> loosing sponsorts, loosing public, loosing TV midia is ridiculous
>>
>
> And the gain of wrecking the Uci certainly is not a goal for
> Prudhomme, who is after all only doing his utmost for the image of
> cycling. '
>
> As a sidenote, I have a bridge to sell you.
>
>

What about a Tour Eiffel you are interrested in (it seems) ? ;)


>
>

[Kurgan Gringioni]

On Jul 27, 7:00 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

>
> Here's the bottom line - you TEST people for drugs. If they're positive you
> punish them. Otherwise you leave them alone.



That's part of his point, jackass.

The rest of it being that there's more than meets the eye here,
otherwise Rasmussen would still have his job.


thanks,

K. Gringioni.

[Davey Crockett]

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> writes:


> Jeff, this is the entire point - common sense is just a silly assumption on
> your part. Perhaps you're right but the fact is that you're no Gypsy fortune
> teller and there's no proof behind any of it. All of the what-ifs are really
> screwing this sport up.
>
> Here's the bottom line - you TEST people for drugs. If they're positive you
> punish them. Otherwise you leave them alone.
>
My sentiments entirely
--
Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply

[J Jones]

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote in message
news:1Umqi.12337$Od7.5298@newsread1.news.pas.earth link.net...
> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
> news:Jwcqi.4639$P32.3268@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>> "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote in message
>> news:Z7cqi.11161$rR.7670@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
>>> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
>>> news:LXbqi.1911$ij7.213@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
>>>> There is no way possible that this single instance of Ras declaring he
>>>> was in Mexico is the only thing going on here. There has to be other
>>>> instances of Ras's credibility coming into question. Plus, there has
>>>> to be more evidence that he's been doping. Hard to imagine that team
>>>> leaders and sponsors would ****-can him based on 1) a single
>>>> questionable instance of his integrity, and 2) one person's "I saw him
>>>> in Italy" comment.
>>>
>>> So your guess is as good as proof?
>>>
>> Common sense. I'm offering no proof, just a common sense view of this
>> situation.
>
> Jeff, this is the entire point - common sense is just a silly assumption
> on your part. Perhaps you're right but the fact is that you're no Gypsy
> fortune teller and there's no proof behind any of it. All of the what-ifs
> are really screwing this sport up.
>
> Here's the bottom line - you TEST people for drugs. If they're positive
> you punish them. Otherwise you leave them alone.
>
>
Sounds like we're saying the same thing...
j

[jyh]

In article <ft3ka39m8imt3afcu33ihmuq8ueth5spsa@4ax.com>,
RonSonic <ronsonic@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 22:53:52 -0400, jyh <nomail@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <_ycqi.3098$zJ4.2506@trndny03>,
> > "Tony S." <email_tonys@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> And, since when is a rider presumed totally guilty after the "A"
> >> sample tests positive? The system is built with some safeguards, and one
> >> of
> >> those is that the "B" sample must also test positive for a rider to be
> >> found
> >> guilty. This protocol is now completely irrelevant, as Cristian Moreni was
> >> pulled after only his "A" sample tested positive.
> >
> >Cristian Moreni admitted doping and did not request testing of the B
> >sample. The protocol was respected in this case.
>
> What protocol was respected, the test result was leaked to the press before
> the
> rider or team had been notified.

Sorry, I thought that you were complaining the lack of testing of the
"B" sample before Moreni was pulled out of the race. I apologize for
failing to read your mind and thus not understanding that you were in
fact *****ing about "A" results being leaked to the press.

jyh.

[Simon Brooke]

in message <e54ka3hq00023pafg99v99euth4tju1b5k@4ax.com>, RonSonic
('ronsonic@tampabay.rr.com') wrote:

>>Excluding a whole team because of one rider's doping seems harsh to me,
>>but pragmatically it also seems more likely to be effective than anything
>>else. It means the riders on a team are motivated to police one another,
>>and omerta should die.
>
> So why didn't that apply to T-Mobile?

Very good question. Astana were asked to leave and agreed to. Cofidis seem
to have volunteered to leave (before all being arrested anyway). But T-Mo
either weren't asked to leave or chose to ignore the request, and no-one
seems to have been arrested.

Odd.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; IE 3 is dead, but Netscape 4 still shambles about the earth,
;; wreaking a horrific vengeance upon the living
;; anonymous

[Tuschinski]

On Jul 27, 7:04 pm, Simon Brooke <si...@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:
> in message <e54ka3hq00023pafg99v99euth4tju1...@4ax.com>, RonSonic
>
> ('ronso...@tampabay.rr.com') wrote:
> >>Excluding a whole team because of one rider's doping seems harsh to me,
> >>but pragmatically it also seems more likely to be effective than anything
> >>else. It means the riders on a team are motivated to police one another,
> >>and omerta should die.
>
> > So why didn't that apply to T-Mobile?
>
> Very good question. Astana were asked to leave and agreed to. Cofidis seem
> to have volunteered to leave (before all being arrested anyway). But T-Mo
> either weren't asked to leave or chose to ignore the request, and no-one
> seems to have been arrested.
>
> Odd.
>
> --
> si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke)http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
>
> ;; IE 3 is dead, but Netscape 4 still shambles about the earth,
> ;; wreaking a horrific vengeance upon the living
> ;; anonymous


I find it not so odd.

Astana/Cofidis was during the TdF, The T-Mobile incident was due to an
out of competition test (and the rider was already dropped out). Also,
I suspect T-Mobile probably would have stepped out if it had happened
after the Vino incident. If Vino and the further crap hadnt happened
it would have stopped at the indignation of German Television. Now
with all the extra happenings it has become a lot bigger.

Astana had to go because the bloodhounds were at their heels nipping
(and if it were switched bloodbags, we know there would be another),
Aso, police and Uci. I think Astana knew the gig was up (it smells
like organised dope). Cofidis had to go because the hypocrisy of their
protest was shamefuly exposed (seems not so organised, the indignation
seems pretty natural, not played).

T-Mobile, already one of the teams with the best name (since
Stapleton) took things in their own hands and did all the moves needed
to remain believable. Kuddos to Stapleton that he managed that.

The more I look at it, the more I admire how well Stapleton is
handling the crises around his team. He seems to live up to his name
as crises manager quite well. if you look at how Rabobank botched
it.... *rolls eyes*

[Tom Kunich]

"J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
news:Zsxqi.3973$RQ5.1251@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>
> Sounds like we're saying the same thing...

I didn't think we were. I don't like the idea of "out of competition
testing" and feel that it imposes virtual slavery on bicycle racers. If the
drugs don't show up on race day they we shouldn't be haunting these guys in
the Italian Alps.

[Simon Brooke]

in message <1185589737.919013.208280@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.c om>,
amit.ghosh@gmail.com ('amit.ghosh@gmail.com') wrote:

> i figured the UCI had some better evidence on rasmussen we don't read
> on cnews yet. mcquaid's commets seemed to suggest that.

If that is true they ought to reveal it. The way things are it looks like a
lynch mob, and it smells like a lynch mob.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

' ' <------- this blank intentionally spaced left

[Steven L. Sheffield]

On 07/27/2007 09:36 PM, in article
rRyqi.12683$zA4.2437@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink. net, "Tom Kunich"
<cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
> news:Zsxqi.3973$RQ5.1251@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>>
>> Sounds like we're saying the same thing...
>
> I didn't think we were. I don't like the idea of "out of competition
> testing" and feel that it imposes virtual slavery on bicycle racers. If the
> drugs don't show up on race day they we shouldn't be haunting these guys in
> the Italian Alps.


So you're saying it's okay for them to dope their Hct levels up to 60 during
training, so that by the time the actual races roll around, their Hct has
dropped back down to 49.9 and there's no longer any residual EPO in their
systems ... Right?



--
Steven L. Sheffield
stevens at veloworks dot com
bellum pax est libertas servitus est ignoratio vis est
ess ay ell tea ell ay kay ee sea eye tee why you ti ay aitch
aitch tee tea pea colon [for word] slash [four ward] slash double-you
double-yew double-ewe dot flahute dot com [foreword] slash

[Kurgan Gringioni]

On Jul 27, 8:36 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "J Jones" <n...@spammers.net> wrote in message
>
> news:Zsxqi.3973$RQ5.1251@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>
>
>
> > Sounds like we're saying the same thing...
>
> I didn't think we were. I don't like the idea of "out of competition
> testing" and feel that it imposes virtual slavery on bicycle racers. If the
> drugs don't show up on race day they we shouldn't be haunting these guys in
> the Italian Alps.



Dumbass -


You're strawmanning.


thanks,

K. Gringioni.

[Simon Brooke]

in message <C2D02D95.5F367%stevens@veloworks.com>, Steven L. Sheffield
('stevens@veloworks.com') wrote:

> On 07/27/2007 09:36 PM, in article
> rRyqi.12683$zA4.2437@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink. net, "Tom Kunich"
> <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
>> news:Zsxqi.3973$RQ5.1251@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>>>
>>> Sounds like we're saying the same thing...
>>
>> I didn't think we were. I don't like the idea of "out of competition
>> testing" and feel that it imposes virtual slavery on bicycle racers. If
>> the drugs don't show up on race day they we shouldn't be haunting these
>> guys in the Italian Alps.
>
>
> So you're saying it's okay for them to dope their Hct levels up to 60
> during training, so that by the time the actual races roll around, their
> Hct has dropped back down to 49.9 and there's no longer any residual EPO
> in their systems ... Right?

Suppose they got their haematocrit up to 49.9 by using an altitude tent.
That would be legit. How come one method of artificially manipulating
haematocrit is legal and another isn't?

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; For in much wisdom is much grief; and he that increaseth
;; knowledge increaseth sorrow.." - Ecclesiastes 1:18

[Carl Sundquist]

"Steven L. Sheffield" <stevens@veloworks.com> wrote in message
news:C2D02D95.5F367%stevens@veloworks.com...
>
> So you're saying it's okay for them to dope their Hct levels up to 60
> during
> training, so that by the time the actual races roll around, their Hct has
> dropped back down to 49.9 and there's no longer any residual EPO in their
> systems ... Right?

I can't imagine how much of a confidence destroyer that practice would
create.

[Tom Kunich]

"Steven L. Sheffield" <stevens@veloworks.com> wrote in message
news:C2D02D95.5F367%stevens@veloworks.com...
> On 07/27/2007 09:36 PM, in article
> rRyqi.12683$zA4.2437@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink. net, "Tom Kunich"
> <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
>> news:Zsxqi.3973$RQ5.1251@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>>>
>>> Sounds like we're saying the same thing...
>>
>> I didn't think we were. I don't like the idea of "out of competition
>> testing" and feel that it imposes virtual slavery on bicycle racers. If
>> the
>> drugs don't show up on race day they we shouldn't be haunting these guys
>> in
>> the Italian Alps.
>
> So you're saying it's okay for them to dope

For such a little slime ball you sure seem to think you're big. Hopefully
the Gestapo will pull up to your door and check your blood three times a
month for as long as your employed in the stock market.

[RonSonic]

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 12:24:35 +0100, Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:

>in message <1185589737.919013.208280@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.c om>,
>amit.ghosh@gmail.com ('amit.ghosh@gmail.com') wrote:
>
>> i figured the UCI had some better evidence on rasmussen we don't read
>> on cnews yet. mcquaid's commets seemed to suggest that.
>
>If that is true they ought to reveal it. The way things are it looks like a
>lynch mob, and it smells like a lynch mob.

From here it looks like a great sponsor was bullied by a screaming mob that it
didn't know how to ignore.

Ron

[Bike Mike]

Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:

>in message <1185589737.919013.208280@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.c om>,
>amit.ghosh@gmail.com ('amit.ghosh@gmail.com') wrote:
>
>> i figured the UCI had some better evidence on rasmussen we don't read
>> on cnews yet. mcquaid's commets seemed to suggest that.
>
>If that is true they ought to reveal it. The way things are it looks like a
>lynch mob, and it smells like a lynch mob.

Many problems with this whimsy.

1. The UCI infractions were known to Rabo weeks before the sacking.

2. Rabo knew about the missed tests and UCI schedule probs and had
fined him 10k, but took no further action.

3. News of both became public the day MR put on Yellow, yet Rabo kept
him onboard for what, a week a more afterwards.

4. At least publicly, UCI has been careful to say that a) MR tested
clean when they finally found him and b) they adamantly disagree with
TdF that MR's missed test should prevent him from starting.

5. The timing of dimissing MR comports perfectly with the reasons
Rabo has given. a) Apparently MR's response to his whereabouts in
late June was to say he was in Mexico w/ Mrs MR. Now, who can get
angry over that? b) It wasnt until the day of MRs last mountain stage
that Cassani mentions seeing him in Italy. The press perks up, and
Cassani agrees say so on sworn statement. c) When Rabo becomes aware
of this they investigate and then sack him.

It almost doesnt matter if he admits to lying. After a pattern of
suspicious behavior (which may include scads of stuff we dont know,
like the report from the US MTBer), Rabo decides Cassani is more
believable and/or there is just too damn much smoke for there not to
be some fire.

The only new violations, infractions or suspicious behavior known to
the public seems to be pretty firm confirmation that MR lied to
mitigate his UCI woes.

[Michael Press]

In article
<jklrn4-0fe.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk>,
Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:

> in message <1185589737.919013.208280@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.c om>,
> amit.ghosh@gmail.com ('amit.ghosh@gmail.com') wrote:
>
> > i figured the UCI had some better evidence on rasmussen we don't read
> > on cnews yet. mcquaid's commets seemed to suggest that.
>
> If that is true they ought to reveal it. The way things are it looks like a
> lynch mob, and it smells like a lynch mob.

I would rather they not announce it. I want racing, not
scandal. Scandal I can find in venues that do not
otherwise interest me. A round of omerta for the house
on me.

--
Michael Press

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <golrn4-0fe.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk>,
Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:

> in message <C2D02D95.5F367%stevens@veloworks.com>, Steven L. Sheffield
> ('stevens@veloworks.com') wrote:
>
> > On 07/27/2007 09:36 PM, in article
> > rRyqi.12683$zA4.2437@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink. net, "Tom Kunich"
> > <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> >
> >> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
> >> news:Zsxqi.3973$RQ5.1251@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
> >>>
> >>> Sounds like we're saying the same thing...
> >>
> >> I didn't think we were. I don't like the idea of "out of competition
> >> testing" and feel that it imposes virtual slavery on bicycle racers. If
> >> the drugs don't show up on race day they we shouldn't be haunting these
> >> guys in the Italian Alps.
> >
> >
> > So you're saying it's okay for them to dope their Hct levels up to 60
> > during training, so that by the time the actual races roll around, their
> > Hct has dropped back down to 49.9 and there's no longer any residual EPO
> > in their systems ... Right?
>
> Suppose they got their haematocrit up to 49.9 by using an altitude tent.
> That would be legit. How come one method of artificially manipulating
> haematocrit is legal and another isn't?

One accurately simulates training in Colorado. The other accurately
simulates training in East Germany.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

[Tom Kunich]

"Simon Brooke" <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote in message
news:golrn4-0fe.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk...
> in message <C2D02D95.5F367%stevens@veloworks.com>, Steven L. Sheffield
> ('stevens@veloworks.com') wrote:
>
>> On 07/27/2007 09:36 PM, in article
>> rRyqi.12683$zA4.2437@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink. net, "Tom Kunich"
>> <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>>
>>> "J Jones" <nfw@spammers.net> wrote in message
>>> news:Zsxqi.3973$RQ5.1251@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like we're saying the same thing...
>>>
>>> I didn't think we were. I don't like the idea of "out of competition
>>> testing" and feel that it imposes virtual slavery on bicycle racers. If
>>> the drugs don't show up on race day they we shouldn't be haunting these
>>> guys in the Italian Alps.
>>
>>
>> So you're saying it's okay for them to dope their Hct levels up to 60
>> during training, so that by the time the actual races roll around, their
>> Hct has dropped back down to 49.9 and there's no longer any residual EPO
>> in their systems ... Right?
>
> Suppose they got their haematocrit up to 49.9 by using an altitude tent.
> That would be legit. How come one method of artificially manipulating
> haematocrit is legal and another isn't?

Or what if they lived at high altitude all the time like Ned Overend and so
had a natural AND LEGAL hematocrit of 54%?

Yet someone who used blood packing or EPO to obtain 50% is doping.

The real dopes are the loudmouths here.

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <mPGqi.3671$Uz4.3135@newsfe19.lga>,
"Carl Sundquist" <carlsun@cox.net> wrote:

> "Steven L. Sheffield" <stevens@veloworks.com> wrote in message
> news:C2D02D95.5F367%stevens@veloworks.com...
> >
> > So you're saying it's okay for them to dope their Hct levels up to 60
> > during
> > training, so that by the time the actual races roll around, their Hct has
> > dropped back down to 49.9 and there's no longer any residual EPO in their
> > systems ... Right?
>
> I can't imagine how much of a confidence destroyer that practice would
> create.

Screw EPO. Under the Kunichian "no testing out of competition" regime,
it's roids for everyone!

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

[Morten Reippuert Knudsen]

John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetremove@jt10000.com> wrote:

> >They didn't want to be the sponsor of a rider that gets busted for
> ><something not yet disclosed> and also wins the GC in the 2007 TdF. A
> >no win situation for the sponsor and the sponsor chose the lesser of
> >two evils.

> Dumbass. Good guess.

Bad guess

Apperantly ASO talked to the sponsor, my guess they toldt the sponsor
that if Rabobank didn't sack Rasmusen they would never ever enter a
ASO, Unipublic or RSC race.
After ASO today puclliy announced that ASO from now on won't host UCI
races a threat like that is very real.

Rabobank proberbly told Theo De Roy afterwards that if he didn't fire
Rasmussen. Rabobank would end its sponsorship. Rabobank is the single
biggest sponsor in cycling.

With ASO leaving UCI TDF is no longer a sport, its's a show like
Harlem Globetroters. Expect Unipublic and RCS to follow suit before
the end of the year. from now on ASO can and will decide who's gonna
participate in their racs and who's gonna win.

The first victim was Unipublic, the second vitim was Rasmussen and
Rabobank, the third victim will be pro cycling as a sport.
The paradox is ghat when pro cycling stops beeing a sport, there is no
longer an ethical argument to fight dopong i pro cycling. The press
will stop worrying about it as well. Pro Cycling will still be a huge
industri, proberly an even bigger one but it will have the same
credibility as Pro Wrestling.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

[Morten Reippuert Knudsen]

Bike Mike <none@> wrote:
> Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:

> >in message <1185589737.919013.208280@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.c om>,
> >amit.ghosh@gmail.com ('amit.ghosh@gmail.com') wrote:
> >
> >> i figured the UCI had some better evidence on rasmussen we don't read
> >> on cnews yet. mcquaid's commets seemed to suggest that.
> >
> >If that is true they ought to reveal it. The way things are it looks like a
> >lynch mob, and it smells like a lynch mob.

> Many problems with this whimsy.

> 1. The UCI infractions were known to Rabo weeks before the sacking.

Yes, and according to UCI and ADD rules (and by that TDF's own rules!)
those infractions where not enoughto prevent him form racing. (ADD is
the danish WADA organisation)

By organizing a UCI even ASO has agreed to follow the current rules
under UCI. That is the way a sporting event works, and ASO has to
comply to the laws of that sport as well as civil laws.

Durring the race ASO suddenly desciedes that thaty won't comply to
those laws.

> 2. Rabo knew about the missed tests and UCI schedule probs and had
> fined him 10k, but took no further action.

Again, Rabobank acted acording the rules.

> 3. News of both became public the day MR put on Yellow, yet Rabo kept
> him onboard for what, a week a more afterwards.

Rabobank acted acording the rules. Unfortunatly they where finaly
bullied to take him out of the race.

> 4. At least publicly, UCI has been careful to say that a) MR tested
> clean when they finally found him and b) they adamantly disagree with
> TdF that MR's missed test should prevent him from starting.

Rasmussen passed _two_ out-of-competition test within 45 days proier
to the TDF, witch is why article 220 can't be applyed. There was
no case from the begining, there might be a case if UCI/ADD can prove
that Rasmussen was in Italy, when he should have been in Mexico. If
they can prove that Rasmussen will get a third warning. After a third
warning UCI/ADD can build a diciplinary case, not a doping case. A
diciplinary case can lead to a 3-12 months quarenteene.

There is still no legal reason to prevent Rasmussen from either
starting or finnishing TDF.

rasmussen might be a lier, but that isn't enugh to prevent him form
racing or convicting him for doping.

ASO's today made it public, that they are leaving sport and entering
showbuissnes.

> 5. The timing of dimissing MR comports perfectly with the reasons
> Rabo has given. a) Apparently MR's response to his whereabouts in
> late June was to say he was in Mexico w/ Mrs MR. Now, who can get
> angry over that? b) It wasnt until the day of MRs last mountain stage
> that Cassani mentions seeing him in Italy. The press perks up, and
> Cassani agrees say so on sworn statement. c) When Rabo becomes aware
> of this they investigate and then sack him.

Rabobanks sackes him because their sponsor was told to pull him or
never ever enter a ASO, RSC or Unipublic race. Yesterday ASO admits that
they talked directly to the sponsor (the biggest single sponsor in
cycling). Today ASO publicied that ASO won't host UCI events again,
Unipublic and RSC will follow in the comming months. By doing that ASO
is also leaving the laws of sport and the juristiction of CAS
<http://www.tas-cas.org/>, from now on TDF is to be considered as a
show, not a sporting event. Hust like Wold Wrestling.

ASO is more interested in protectin TDF as an institution and the
revenue it genrates, than protecting cycling.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

[Sandy]

Dans le message de news:rcousine-8028C9.12103828072007@news.telus.net,
Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> In article <mPGqi.3671$Uz4.3135@newsfe19.lga>,
> "Carl Sundquist" <carlsun@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> "Steven L. Sheffield" <stevens@veloworks.com> wrote in message
>> news:C2D02D95.5F367%stevens@veloworks.com...
>>>
>>> So you're saying it's okay for them to dope their Hct levels up to
>>> 60 during
>>> training, so that by the time the actual races roll around, their
>>> Hct has dropped back down to 49.9 and there's no longer any
>>> residual EPO in their systems ... Right?
>>
>> I can't imagine how much of a confidence destroyer that practice
>> would create.
>
> Screw EPO. Under the Kunichian "no testing out of competition" regime,
> it's roids for everyone!

A legal way to do it - take out the licence on March 1, and deposit it with
a resignation on November 1. Tell me why this won't work.

[Michael Press]

In article
<rcousine-8028C9.12103828072007@news.telus.net>,
Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote:

> In article <mPGqi.3671$Uz4.3135@newsfe19.lga>,
> "Carl Sundquist" <carlsun@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > "Steven L. Sheffield" <stevens@veloworks.com> wrote in message
> > news:C2D02D95.5F367%stevens@veloworks.com...
> > >
> > > So you're saying it's okay for them to dope their Hct levels up to 60
> > > during
> > > training, so that by the time the actual races roll around, their Hct has
> > > dropped back down to 49.9 and there's no longer any residual EPO in their
> > > systems ... Right?
> >
> > I can't imagine how much of a confidence destroyer that practice would
> > create.
>
> Screw EPO. Under the Kunichian "no testing out of competition" regime,
> it's roids for everyone!

The female tennis stars make me look puny(er).

--
Michael Press

[Tom Kunich]

"Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote in message
news:rcousine-8028C9.12103828072007@news.telus.net...
>
> Screw EPO. Under the Kunichian "no testing out of competition" regime,
> it's roids for everyone!

Yeah, that Arnold Schwartzenkennedy is such a great cyclist.

[Bike Mike]

Morten Reippuert Knudsen<spam@reippuert.dk> wrote:

>> 4. At least publicly, UCI has been careful to say that a) MR tested
>> clean when they finally found him and b) they adamantly disagree with
>> TdF that MR's missed test should prevent him from starting.
>
>Rasmussen passed _two_ out-of-competition test within 45 days proier
>to the TDF, witch is why article 220 can't be applyed. There was

Actually, he DID miss an ADD test when he couldnt be found. This led
to him being dropped from the dutch team. It appears that UCI caught
up to him the next day and tested him.

So, on the one hand it does appear that rule 220 could apply. The
rule does NOT state you can miss some tests as long as you pass some
other ones. Since a test was in fact given the next day, it seems
fair to have let him start.

>no case from the begining, there might be a case if UCI/ADD can prove
>that Rasmussen was in Italy, when he should have been in Mexico. If

I cant find where he said he would be, but it wasnt Italy or Mexico
otherwise he would have been found for testing. Mexico was the
location he gave when he couldnt be found.

UCI/ADD might need to prove it to take further actions but his sponsor
just needs to feel that Cassani and other evidence is more credible
than MR to boot him.

>
>There is still no legal reason to prevent Rasmussen from either
>starting or finnishing TDF.

His actions have the appearance of trying to skate along the very edge
of what is allowed. Given the current atmosphere, I cant blame Rabo
for booting him giving the publicity around the case. I do hope he is
able to come back though.

[Morten Reippuert Knudsen]

shayana.kadidal@gmail.com wrote:

> Also, lying about speaking to Anne Gripper.--SK

Unfortunate mixup of persons, he has had a lot of dealings with
gripper in 2007. However he did talk to UCI on after returing from
Critterium International, and he did send in the quarterly whereabouts
as requested in the written warning.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

[Donald Munro]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>> Screw EPO. Under the Kunichian "no testing out of competition" regime,
>> it's roids for everyone!

Michael Press wrote:
> The female tennis stars make me look puny(er).

So you'd like Amelie to serve you up ?

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <bcSqi.11850$rR.3669@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

> "Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote in message
> news:rcousine-8028C9.12103828072007@news.telus.net...
> >
> > Screw EPO. Under the Kunichian "no testing out of competition" regime,
> > it's roids for everyone!
>
> Yeah, that Arnold Schwartzenkennedy is such a great cyclist.

Roids + lifts = Mr Universe

Roids + intervals = Green Jersey, Worlds, maybe the Giro.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

[Simon Brooke]

in message <eveoa3pfrl8vi3rvh1eueet6hd40b0e97h@4ax.com>, Bike Mike
('none@') wrote:

> Morten Reippuert Knudsen<spam@reippuert.dk> wrote:
>
>>> 4. At least publicly, UCI has been careful to say that a) MR tested
>>> clean when they finally found him and b) they adamantly disagree with
>>> TdF that MR's missed test should prevent him from starting.
>>
>>Rasmussen passed _two_ out-of-competition test within 45 days proier
>>to the TDF, witch is why article 220 can't be applyed. There was
>
> Actually, he DID miss an ADD test when he couldnt be found. This led
> to him being dropped from the dutch team. It appears that UCI caught
> up to him the next day and tested him.

Errr.... some mistake. He wouldn't qualify for the Dutch team, not being
Dutch.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/


... a mild, inoffensive sadist...

[Tom Kunich]

"Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote in message
news:rcousine-A38535.03105029072007@news.telus.net...
> In article <bcSqi.11850$rR.3669@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
> "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, that Arnold Schwartzenkennedy is such a great cyclist.
>
> Roids + lifts = Mr Universe
>
> Roids + intervals = Green Jersey, Worlds, maybe the Giro.

I wonder if you write just to see your name in print?

[Donald Munro]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> Roids + lifts = Mr Universe
>
> Roids + intervals = Green Jersey, Worlds, maybe the Giro.

Probably more the correct steroids+intervals == quicker recovery ==
useful for both climbers and sprinters.

[Donald Munro]

Bike Mike wrote:
>> Actually, he DID miss an ADD test when he couldnt be found. This led
>> to him being dropped from the dutch team. It appears that UCI caught
>> up to him the next day and tested him.

Simon Brooke wrote:
> Errr.... some mistake. He wouldn't qualify for the Dutch team, not being
> Dutch.

Unless Holland invaded Denmark.

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <9k1ri.11953$rR.1634@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

> "Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote in message
> news:rcousine-A38535.03105029072007@news.telus.net...
> > In article <bcSqi.11850$rR.3669@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
> > "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Yeah, that Arnold Schwartzenkennedy is such a great cyclist.
> >
> > Roids + lifts = Mr Universe
> >
> > Roids + intervals = Green Jersey, Worlds, maybe the Giro.
>
> I wonder if you write just to see your name in print?

No.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

[Morten Reippuert Knudsen]

Donald Munro <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > Errr.... some mistake. He wouldn't qualify for the Dutch team, not being
> > Dutch.

> Unless Holland invaded Denmark.

Well, my grand grand grandfather did. Apperently he forgot to tell his
homeies that he succeded.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <rcousine-9E6CFD.10413929072007@news.telus.net>,
Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote:

> In article <9k1ri.11953$rR.1634@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
> "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> > "Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote in message
> > news:rcousine-A38535.03105029072007@news.telus.net...
> > > In article <bcSqi.11850$rR.3669@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
> > > "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Yeah, that Arnold Schwartzenkennedy is such a great cyclist.
> > >
> > > Roids + lifts = Mr Universe
> > >
> > > Roids + intervals = Green Jersey, Worlds, maybe the Giro.
> >
> > I wonder if you write just to see your name in print?
>
> No.

I realized in retrospect that (shock!) I owed Tom a small apology for
the ambiguity in my first post.

I don't think the current wearers of the green, rainbow, or pink jerseys
are popping anabolic steroids. Indeed, the testing regimens seem to have
mostly forced riders to move to alternatives (testosterone, blood
fiddling).

What I meant was that steroids definitely would make a cyclist faster,
because of the recovery-from-training thing, which is to say that riders
in virtually every discipline (probably even including climbers) would
see performance increases from using them.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos