L-B-L (contains spoilers)

bcmf

great last 20km but then NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO:(

Slideshowbob

when u look at top 10 its demoralising to see the amount of guys with doping questions about the career

Derek Zoolander

Happy enough myself had a few quid on after the breakaway and final 2 km was never in doubt

Home:Ballyhoura

bcmf wrote: »

great last 20km but then NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO:(

+1

drogdub

Home:Ballyhoura wrote: »

+1

did i hear booing at the end?

niceonetom

Careful now.

Lots of folk that were on spins today have this race waiting for them in their magic tv box. You wouldn't want to ruin the surprise now would you?

/sanctimony

This will require discussion though.

Lumen

niceonetom wrote: »

This will require discussion though.

It's a 1-day and the thread is new, so you would have to be a bit special to open the thread if you hadn't watched the race yet.

If the thread had been titled "Kolobnev wins L-B-L" it would have been a different story.

RobFowl

Can this be moved to the pharmaceutical forum

Del1888

Drugs 1 cycling 0

redmaxi

He was just unlucky enough to get caught before, they're all it anyway.
Fair play to him - the fastest druggie of the day !

leftism

Del1888 wrote: »

Drugs 1 cycling 0

Clearly you missed the previous 50 or so goals that drugs has put past cycling over the last 25 years.... The actual scoreline is much more depressing!

sy

The result everyone feared The guy is an animal on the bike but should never have bene allowed back in the peleton as for the guy who finished 3rd I reckon it will be his last classic for a few years.

Mr Second is the one guy I would dearly love to see win a major race.

ROK ON

leftism wrote: »

Clearly you missed the previous 50 or so goals that drugs has put past cycling over the last 25 years.... The actual scoreline is much more depressing!

The history of pro cycling going back to very first TDF is one of doping. Can people not just accept it. An analogy I heard from a friend into boxing is that pro boxing has always and will always be rigged whereas amateur boxing is by all. Accounts relatively clean.

Lumen

ROK ON wrote: »

The history of pro cycling going back to very first TDF is one of doping. Can people not just accept it.

No.

blobbie

Was out earlier so only flicked it on with 5k to go.

Didn't bother watching it out :mad:

leftism

Lumen wrote: »

No.

+1.

I don't see why fans should just accept this crap just because "its the way its always been". The booing at the end just highlights that! Nobody wanted to see

Vino

win that. Apart from maybe himself and his parents...

ROK ON

Lumen wrote: »

No.

I am of the opinion that people need to live in the real world. Keep your hopes firmly in the camp of stuff that may actually come true given a set of circumstances such as effort, luck etc. There seem to be many pro cyclists that are actively anti-doping, but there are as many dopers I reckon.
I reckon that repentant dopers a la David Millar are the exception in the sport rather than the rule.

Anyway good to see that

Roche seemed to do reasonably well. He wanted to finish up toward the front having been =30mins the last few times.

ROK ON

leftism wrote: »

+1.

I don't see why fans should just accept this crap just because "its the way its always been". The booing at the end just highlights that! Nobody wanted to see

Vino

win that. Apart from maybe himself and his parents...

I am not saying that we should accept it, but despite the scandals of the late 90's when a lot of TV and corporate interest left the sport, things have come back even bigger. Despite that, dopers still exist. It is part of the history of the sport regardless of whether we like it or not. Other than turn away from the sport, there is not a lot that folks can do. It is part of the culture of sport, particularly in certain countries. It cannot be erradicated, anymore than cheating on your tax/wife, taking recreational drugs, use of prostitutes etc etc etc.

petethedrummer

Most of the top ten have dodgy histories, he just happened to be caught.

He has MASSIVE legs. If Evans doesn't win the Giro, I hope he does.

Lumen

ROK ON wrote: »

I am not saying that we should accept it, but despite the scandals of the late 90's when a lot of TV and corporate interest left the sport, things have come back even bigger. Despite that, dopers still exist. It is part of the history of the sport regardless of whether we like it or not. Other than turn away from the sport, there is not a lot that folks can do. It is part of the culture of sport, particularly in certain countries. It cannot be erradicated, anymore than cheating on your tax/wife, taking recreational drugs, use of prostitutes etc etc etc.

It is perfectly possible to reduce doping to merely an annoyance level in professional cycling. All you have to do is shift the penalties up and reduce the advantages (through better testing cutting down the number of effective doping methods) such that for most riders the benefits cannot outweigh the costs for any appreciable length of time, like playing "double or quits" at the roulette table. At that point, you have a situation where there is a minority of doping and clean riders can compete, whilst dirty riders gain only short term advantage until they're caught.

Here's an idea: lodge 50% of rider salary into a UCI pension scheme which matures at age 40 but gets forfeit if you get caught doping. That ought to focus minds a bit.

petethedrummer

Eh ROK_On I'm not on your side. I deplore doping and don't think its vaguely acceptable. The reason I'd like to see him win the Giro is for the massive headache it would give the UCI and the mealy mouthed statements that would ensue.

One of the most notorious dopers coming back and winning a GT while getting booed. Where would they go then? Man this sport is some soap opera.

ROK ON

petethedrummer wrote: »

Eh ROK_On I'm not on your side. I deplore doping and don't think its vaguely acceptable. The reason I'd like to see him win the Giro is for the massive headache it would give the UCI and the mealy mouthed statements that would ensue.

One of the most notorious dopers coming back and winning a GT while getting booed. Where would they go then? Man this sport is some soap opera.

Its not about sides. I deplore doping, I just accept reality ratther than hoping for some fantasy existence in where the world is pure and we all smell of roses.
I think that the idea posed by Lumen is a perfectly sensible idea, and is simple to implement. But why hasn't it been implemented - more than likely because there is absolutely no will in the sport to do it.

FFS, the winner today has not even paid the fine of a years salary, yet he is allowed race. If the sport wanted to reduce doping to a mere annoyance level, then Vino would not be allowed to race. As for Valv, well that is just getting more and more farcical as time goes by. The sh1t will hotthe fan on that one if/when he starts challenging for the maillot jeune in the TDF, which given his current form, he is well capable of

.

When the sport puts some simple procedures in place to reduce doping then I will belive that it is trying earnestly to be clean. Until then, I will try to enjoy the racing, but accept that doping is and alwats has been prevalent.

Chips Lovell

Anyone who felt sorry for today's runner-up should probably read this. (Obviously don't click on the link if you don't want to know the result).

Chips Lovell

Great ride by Roche today, he finished 22nd , right up with riders like Cunego and Garzelli.

leftism

Lumen wrote: »

It is perfectly possible to reduce doping to merely an annoyance level in professional cycling. All you have to do is shift the penalties up and reduce the advantages (through better testing cutting down the number of effective doping methods) such that for most riders the benefits cannot outweigh the costs for any appreciable length of time, like playing "double or quits" at the roulette table. At that point, you have a situation where there is a minority of doping and clean riders can compete, whilst dirty riders gain only short term advantage until they're caught.

Here's an idea: lodge 50% of rider salary into a UCI pension scheme which matures at age 40 but gets forfeit if you get caught doping. That ought to focus minds a bit.

Thats a fantastic idea!

Mcquaid out! Lumen for UCI presidency!!!!

TinyExplosions

el tonto wrote: »

Anyone who felt sorry for today's runner-up should probably read this. (Obviously don't click on the link if you don't want to know the result).

It's in foreign!

Slideshowbob

ROK ON wrote: »

The history of pro cycling going back to very first TDF is one of doping. Can people not just accept it. An analogy I heard from a friend into boxing is that pro boxing has always and will always be rigged whereas amateur boxing is by all. Accounts relatively clean.

As someone passionate about the sport I don't accept it. If you do you are on a slippery slope to make cycling into the mechanical version of WWF/Britains got Pharmacists.

It's also the wrong message to give to kids who show an interest in the sport.

I'd like to see the UCI increasing their punitive measures on cheats.

Home:Ballyhoura

TinyExplosions wrote: »

It's in foreign!

Now it isn't!

jwshooter

kimmage stopped very short of saying kelly and roche were doping ,did he not .

alcyst

gang, not enough of you have hung around gyms, the stuff is there if you want it. Cycling just got caught bigger, noisier, more publicly. Have a read of some of the obituaries of ex-IOC chief Samaranch.

IM0

didn't vino crash during that tour, and then doped days later when he dropped out of the top GC race, or were his samples from before the crash tested positive too not that its right, but at least he had some basis for it rather than some scumbag like ricco who just doped to win, not excusing it by any means though

Slideshowbob

me@ucd wrote: »

didn't vino crash during that tour, and then doped days later when he dropped out of the top GC race, not that its right, but at least he had some basis for it rather than some scumbag like ricco who just doped to win, not excusing it by any means though

UCI Rule 33.4.2.B If you crash then it's ok to dope

jeeeez i dunno!

Lumen

Interesting coverage on Velonews with reference to Vaughter's twitter.

Velonews wrote:

Twitter.com/vaughters: Phil Liggett: “so, Jonathan, how is it these guys can come back from suspension and still ride so well?” JV: “Ummmmm…. Uhhhh….”

- Garmin-Transitions team manager Jonathan Vaughters quoted himself shortly after Alexander Vinokourov won Sunday’s Liège-Bastogne-Liège.

:pac:

biker_joe

Brutal !!! That Vino has no shame !!!

I had a 10er on Kolobnev at 25/1 !!! I should have put it each way !!

Anyways the finger is already being pointed towards that famous fast doctor !

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/vinos-victory-overshadowed-by-questions-about-his-past

Biker Joe

TinyExplosions

alcyst wrote: »

gang, not enough of you have hung around gyms, the stuff is there if you want it. Cycling just got caught bigger, noisier, more publicly. Have a read of some of the obituaries of ex-IOC chief Samaranch.

Nobody here is saying that it's just cycling that has a drug problem. In fact, I suspect many people share my view that any sport with a monetary reward for winning will have people who try to cheat. I suspect the level of doping in many (if not most sports) is at least as high as in Pro Cycling at the moment, if not higher. Yes, it's got more headlines, but that doesn't mean that other sports are clean -hell, just look at baseball -there's not even tough sanctions when you get caught with that!

ROK ON

+1 to that Tiny. Doping and cheating is rife in sports and there is no real willingness to do anything about it. Ask yourself from continual jerseytugging and feigning injury in ball sports up to the more serious doping nothing is done.

A UK rugby international was banned last year for cocaine usage, however nothing is ever said about allegations of doping.
Cycling is the most visible due to the history of the sport. But look at athletics - never really treated seriously.

It would be easy to impose proper sancyions, but they never di. Why - there is no will there to do it.
Ask Anne Grieper.

TinyExplosions

ROK ON wrote: »

It would be easy to impose proper sancyions, but they never di. Why - there is no will there to do it.
Ask Anne Grieper.

I've often wondered why there isn't the will to tackle it head on... if you impose tough enough sanctions (lifetime bans, hefty fines etc etc), and basically make it so that the fear of getting caught isn't worth the risk of doping, you could go a long way towards cleaning it up (though I guess that hasn't worked in athletics with the lifetime olympic bans for athletes).

I wonder is it a fear of the first couple of years of losing big names that prevents this?

ROK ON

TinyExplosions wrote: »

I've often wondered why there isn't the will to tackle it head on... if you impose tough enough sanctions (lifetime bans, hefty fines etc etc), and basically make it so that the fear of getting caught isn't worth the risk of doping, you could go a long way towards cleaning it up (though I guess that hasn't worked in athletics with the lifetime olympic bans for athletes).

I wonder is it a fear of the first couple of years of losing big names that prevents this?

There isn't the will because the folks charged with administering the sport came through the same system. I think that plus the point you made - fear of washing dirty linen publicly.
It won't ever change. I mean the clean athletes - we only really have their word on it.

RobFowl

TinyExplosions wrote: »

I've often wondered why there isn't the will to tackle it head on... if you impose tough enough sanctions (lifetime bans, hefty fines etc etc), and basically make it so that the fear of getting caught isn't worth the risk of doping, you could go a long way towards cleaning it up (though I guess that hasn't worked in athletics with the lifetime olympic bans for athletes).

I wonder is it a fear of the first couple of years of losing big names that prevents this?

It's the fear of litigation mainly. Lifetime bans would be open to challenge in the courts and would probably not hold up.

UK athletics was bankrupted by the Diane Modahl case.

I'm surprised that sponsors are prepared to take the risk TBH, not so much with Vino as Astana are his baby pretty much but the likes of Caisse D'Espagne especially.

Lumen

TinyExplosions wrote: »

I've often wondered why there isn't the will to tackle it head on... if you impose tough enough sanctions (lifetime bans, hefty fines etc etc), and basically make it so that the fear of getting caught isn't worth the risk of doping, you could go a long way towards cleaning it up (though I guess that hasn't worked in athletics with the lifetime olympic bans for athletes).

I wonder is it a fear of the first couple of years of losing big names that prevents this?

Lifetime bans do not necessarily work. Professional athletes are under enormous pressure to succeed and will not always respond to (dis)-incentives.

In a doped peleton (where you have to dope to be competitive) a rider has the choice of either staying clean and dropping out now or doping and risking dropping out later. Either way, riders are they are just replaced with fresh meat who face the same choices.

Added to that is the thing about olympic contenders who would choose a gold medal + death over no gold medal and a long life (don't remember the exact quote).

You have to get the level of doping down to a manageable level where the choices are different. I think the pro tour is probably at this level now (for the time being), but I've heard that U23 cycling is still doped.

Occasionally something like EPO/CERA will come along which boosts the incentives so far that it becomes impossible to resist, but eventually the testing catches up.

BryanL

el tonto wrote: »

Anyone who felt sorry for today's runner-up should probably read this. (Obviously don't click on the link if you don't want to know the result).

Wow, one line from that link

"tachycardias and 237 pulses for half an hour. " :eek::eek::eek:

Zipp101

No doubt in my mind he doped to win yesterday.

Without any glimpses of form before LBL and suddenly he can put serious time into the favourites.The way Vino was able to attack and attack again....far too good to be true I'd say..
Kolobnev too..

Junior

Vino release this letter to the press

"While reading the press comments regarding my last victory in Liège - Bastogne - Liège I was deeply saddened. I don't understand this persecution against me. "I can't do anything against the doubts hanging over me since the 2007 case, but I reject all the accusations brought against me today, without any evidence."Since my return in August, I have always been honest with the press, I responded to all requests for interviews, I have hidden nothing. Ironically, my victory in Liège seems to revive old jealousies for which I am not responsible.

"The media comments contrast with the hundreds of congratulatory messages from fans that I keep getting on my website and my Facebook page. I don't understand this discrepancy. As if I had to be forbidden of success on my bike to leave everyone with a clear conscience. "In which sport are we allowed to be at the start of a competition without the right to win? I love cycling, it gave me everything and I want to give it good things in return. "I paid two years on suspension for the dark years of my career. If I repeated that I didn't want to talk about it, it's only for the sake of my sport. I don't think cycling needs to reconsider all these dirty stories to move forward.

"This is my personal vision of this problem, everybody is not obliged to share it. Obviously my attitude that I consider the most correct and most respectful way possible is one more time misinterpreted. I'm sorry. Again, I have nothing to hide. "Since my comeback I have been the subject of more than 30 doping tests, all negatives, including 21 in the context of the ADAMS. This allows me to validate my biological passport and therefore to race. "In Tenerife, where I had my recent training before the Tour of Trentino that raised the indignation of some journalists, I was subject to two unannounced blood and urine tests in two weeks.

"I can't do more than what the sport regulations ask me, to prove my honesty. Today, I only wish to be respected as I respect everyone, my colleagues in the peloton as the journalists. I don't want to be the only and too easy target for all the ills of cycling. "
-Alexandre Vinokourov

DirkVoodoo

I did feel a bit sorry for him as he crossed the line to celebrate and there was no rapturous applause (I think I even heard some of the boo/hissing mentioned earlier).

Did he just secure this win out of nowhere? I see he won the Tour of Trentino (just beating Ricco) but it looks like he was in good form for this race.

So people may not like him (I admittedly don't know much about him, before my "time") but if he has paid for his crime and is ready to ride out the last years of his cycling career cleanly (which according to him he has been doing so far) then he should at least be cheered when he wins a race.

I don't know why I feel sorry for the guy, it's possibly because 90% of my sporting anger is reserved for Ashley Cole.

DirkVoodoo

EDIT:Argh! Double post.

ROK ON

This is a joke. The amount of hate that I have read on various sites today about vino was crazy.

Maybe he is still a dopes maybe he isn't. The evidence regardless of peoples opinion on it is all we have. It says he is ok to race.

If people want lifetime bans fair enough but until then he has done the crime and done the time.

Once a doper is allowed back are they supposed to fail? Maybe the dopes that have were crap anyway and dope helpedthem a lot.
Maybe the guys who come back and do well are in the thoroughbred rather than donkey stable?

Who knows.

Also a lot of comment on various websites concentrates on the fact he has never apologised. Big deal. I wouldn't either. Sorry don't change anything. As I keep telling my daughter - don't say sorry, just don't do IT again.

I do think cycling doesn't do enough to reduce doping. However ifthere is a second chance allowed, then people should avail of it.
Where is the love?

Lumen

Vino wrote:

I can't do anything against the doubts hanging over me since the 2007 case

Maybe tell the truth about the case?

Vino wrote:

Since my return in August...I have hidden nothing.

Ah right, no small qualifications there then.

Vino wrote:

I paid two years on suspension for the dark years of my career. If I repeated that I didn't want to talk about it, it's only for the sake of my sport. I don't think cycling needs to reconsider all these dirty stories to move forward.

How convenient.

Vino wrote:

This is my personal vision of this problem, everybody is not obliged to share it.

So stop moaning then.

Vino wrote:

Obviously my attitude that I consider the most correct and most respectful way possible is one more time misinterpreted.

Imagine that?

Slideshowbob

ROK ON wrote: »

Maybe he is still a dopes maybe he isn't. The evidence regardless of peoples opinion on it is all we have. It says he is ok to race.

Was he supposed to return his salary or something but he didnt!?

mcgratheoin

If I repeated that I didn't want to talk about it, it's only for the sake of my sport. I don't think cycling needs to reconsider all these dirty stories to move forward.

This is the biggest piece of bull that he's spouted so far. "I'm not talking about it for the good of cycling" is just a cop out for a guy who apparently has no regrets about doping (always denied it but now wants to prove he can win clean).
What cycling needs is for everyone caught doping to talk incessantly about it. Why they did it, how they got away with it, who helped them, who knew and did nothing, who else is doing it - but Vino doesn't give a toss about cycling or the good of the sport. All he cares about is himself - ffs he had a team built specifically for him that has never really been had a serious anti-drugs stance and I for one would like to see him fail spectacularly.

I would add to this that I have no time for any former dopers, even ones like Millar who (even to my cynical mind) appear to be a reformed character.

RobFowl

Slideshowbob wrote: »

Was he supposed to return his salary or something but he didnt!?

He signed up to the UCI commitment to pay a years salary if he tested positive but to date has not p[aid a cent.

AFAIK he's being persued legally for it but is exploiting a legal loophole .....

I feel his attitude in general stinks. He was caught but never admitted any wrongdoing. "Retired" and so was off the out of competition trsting pool then attempted to reappear as the Kazak federation only gave him a 1 year ban. It was only then that the UCI was forced to go down the expensive appeal route to ensure he got his 2 year ban.

The fact that he was off the testing radar means he could have continued to train using illegal aids up til Aug 2008.

When he did reappear his performances contrasted with those of Basso, Rasmussen, Landis et al who all seem at a lower level now they are "clean".
Throw in the training in Tenerife where Ferrari and Fuentes are active and his equivical comments on doping and refusal to discuss his past then he deserves all the vitriol he is getting.

petethedrummer

"I'm winning now because I've got the class to do it. I served my time. I've been suspended for two years but I've turned that dark page. I don't want to talk about that subject once again, it's behind me now. Now there's a Vino without doping.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/vinos-victory-overshadowed-by-questions-about-his-past

I thought he said he hadn't doped before.