Vino

mloc123

Worth a thread of its own? I dunno.

Will he ever race again? Femur will take anything up to 6 months just to repair, did he break his pelvis also? You would have to think that is him finished.

el tel

Breaking the pelvis and femur are awful injuries. If he's lucky he could come back from it but if his mindset was on quitting this year then that's it unless he sees some unfinished business. Though sitting in a room connected up to an IV blood bag must bring back fond memories of his past tours. :rolleyes:

ednwireland

!

BTH

I do like a glass of red now and then....

Chartsengrafs

Like a lot of people I'm not his biggest fan, but why is he held is such low regard by cycling fans (moreso than other convicted dopers?) From what I've heard he was particularly unapologetic at the time he was caught but could anyone fill me in as to how this is / what exactly (if any) his defence was? I didn't follow cycling at the time and Googling hasn't really shed much light. I'm just curious as to why say, Basso doesn't seem to attract the same level of disdain.

ROK ON

I have come out of the closet t admit that I am a Vino fan.

I love his style of racing. Hard balls out effort. Man is fantatsic to watch.
Why should he apologise for doping. He doped (in a sport where doping is systematically part of the culture), he then served a ban. If anyone remembers the game of Sensible Soccer from years ago - well he is like the players where you turn up the aggression levels (violently shaking all over the place).

Move on, nothing to see here. Like an apology makes it ok. F*ck that sh1t.

As I tell my kids - dont apologise, just dont do it again.

Given his age he will probably retire, but he is a loss.
Best of luck to him. I hope to see a team of Vinos in the future - no doubt he will get a role as a DS.

He is a big Gilbert fan and has been trying too get him to move to Astana next year.

happytramp

Actually, I've noticed he's quite a popular figure on many cycling websites. Maybe it's just around here people don't like him.

mahoo

ednwireland wrote: »

!

ah, the wonders of morphine.

im a fan too.. drugs or no drugs, he's still a great aggressive rider to watch. beats watching andy schleck sitting on contadors wheel for 3 weeks

eoghan84

When he won Liege, he was unapologetic about his past. He alluded to doping as the "dark years". He never did what Millar did and list out when he doped and what victories are tainted and should be given back. I think if the sport is to reform what Millar did should be the standard. However I do find myself a Vino fan for the way he races (and di Luca too). The main thing is that he recovers fully and can walk again. Luckily the crash was not any more serious.

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.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/vinokourov-fights-back-against-the-press

petethedrummer

eoghan84 wrote: »

When he won Liege, he was unapologetic about his past. He alluded to doping as the "dark years". He never did what Millar did and list out when he doped and what victories are tainted and should be given back. I think if the sport is to reform what Millar did should be the standard.

I used to think that way but I don't think the riders who were caught should bear this burden alone. There are hundreds who weren't caught. A few were just unlucky.

Anyway he was considering postponing his retirement: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/8982/Alexander-Vinokourov-to-postpone-retirement.aspx

NickDrake

petethedrummer wrote: »

I used to think that way but I don't think the riders who were caught should bear this burden alone. There are hundreds who weren't caught. A few were just unlucky.

Anyway he was considering postponing his retirement: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/8982/Alexander-Vinokourov-to-postpone-retirement.aspx

What has luck got to do with been caught with someone else's blood in you?? Cycling needs to move on from the likes of vino. Life time bans should exist for such major doping issues such as his was.

The sport needs a new breed and it needs to leave the tainted riders behind.

No one wishes injuries in anyone and my post is about his doping past and his reasons no to reveal how he got the blood and his days with t mobile, lib seguros etc.

He showed no remorse at all.

petethedrummer

NickDrake wrote: »

What has luck got to do with been caught with someone else's blood in you??

Loads of riders were doing it and weren't caught.
Is it wrong? Yes.
Was he the only offender? No.

Chips Lovell

I can see him postponing retirement for another year. If only to break out his comeback kit again:

petethedrummer

Zooommmm

not bakunin

He had said that was his last tour anyway, hadn't he?
Seems all the more of a shame that he never caught up with Costa on Saturday now.
He definitely would have made the rest of the tour somewhat more interesting anyway.

Hermy

From the riders point of view it may be considered unlucky but from a spectators point of view it's surely something different.

NickDrake

petethedrummer wrote: »

Loads of riders were doing it and weren't caught.
Is it wrong? Yes.
Was he the only offender? No.

Oh I agree but he doped and just because others did it doesn't mean it is right.

That argument is flawed. in that case people should commit crime after crime because others get away with it.

petethedrummer

NickDrake wrote: »

Oh I agree but he doped and just because others did it doesn't mean it is right.

That argument is flawed. in that case people should commit crime after crime because others get away with it.

You are misunderstanding or misrepresenting my earlier comment. I said the responsibility of admitting and detailing drug taking should not only fall on those who were caught. It should fall on all those who were taking, which is way more than the number who were caught. Don't make me explain it again.

Hermy

petethedrummer wrote: »

A few were just unlucky.

I think the unlucky ones are those who ride clean and never get the recognition they deserve.

petethedrummer

Hermy wrote: »

I think the unlucky ones are those who ride clean and never get the recognition they deserve.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=73242941&postcount=18

Hermy

Pete, you describe those who get caught cheating as unlucky.
What am I misunderstanding or misrepresenting when I disagree with this?

petethedrummer

Hermy wrote: »

Pete, you describe those who get caught cheating as unlucky.
What am I misunderstanding or misrepresenting when I disagree with this?

Ok for absolute clarity. 25-75% of the peloton were doping at the time. Maybe 1% were caught. In the subset of riders who were dopers I would consider those who were caught to be unlucky.

Why should they have to give detailed accounts of what they did when the other 22-74% get away with their reputations intact. It reinforces the notion that it is a few bad eggs that did all the doping and the UCI are catching the dirty ones.

They should serve their time and come back and ride clean, not take the fall for everyone else or give fake apologies.

I like Vino's aggressive style, his withdrawn personality and his big muscly legs but I don't like his doping. You can admire and dislike a person for different reasons at the same time.

Hermy

petethedrummer wrote: »

Why should they have to give detailed accounts of what they did...

I never said they should. I just don't agree with your description of those who get caught as unlucky.

I like Vino's aggressive style, his withdrawn personality and his big muscly legs but I don't like his doping. You can admire and dislike a person for different reasons at the same time.

Like and dislike Vino myself for the same reasons actually.

petethedrummer

Hermy wrote: »

I never said they should. I just don't agree with your description of those who get caught as unlucky.

Well of course, they somewhat made their own luck by doping. But compared to other dopers they are unlucky. Now it could be said they just did more doping and therefore got caught but I don't buy that. Not from reading all the stories eminating from USPS, Puerto, Thomas Frei. Loads of riders doped to the gills got away scott free.


Anyways, if Contador got 2010 TDF taken from him (which I believe should happen), Andy Schleck would inherit it. Then in a few years time if Contador wants to come back he'd be expected to apologise profusely, act all sorry and detail everything he did*, while Andy Schleck gets retrospectively hailed as the champ. That doesn't sit well with me. I don't think that scenario even sits well with Andy Schleck given his comments about the whole thing.

*I know you don't expect this hermy, but others do.

Murph100

Its all very well and righteous to lash Vino ... he's not Irish, but what if he was ?


Do the Kazakhs not hold him with the same regard as we revere our great heroes ?

Murph100

Ironically, depending on which side of the fence you sit on of course, some serious commentators have speculated about the 2009 TDF, that with proper retrospective testing, Contador AND Schelck would quite possibly be stripped of their titles, declaring Lance the winner ! :eek:

petethedrummer wrote: »

Well of course, they somewhat made their own luck by doping. But compared to other dopers they are unlucky. Now it could be said they just did more doping and therefore got caught but I don't buy that. Not from reading all the stories eminating from USPS, Puerto, Thomas Frei. Loads of riders doped to the gills got away scott free.


Anyways, if Contador got 2010 TDF taken from him (which I believe should happen), Andy Schleck would inherit it. Then in a few years time if Contador wants to come back he'd be expected to apologise profusely, act all sorry and detail everything he did*, while Andy Schleck gets retrospectively hailed as the champ. That doesn't sit well with me. I don't think that scenario even sits well with Andy Schleck given his comments about the whole thing.

*I know you don't expect this hermy, but others do.

petethedrummer

:eek:

Nobody who believes....

Murph100 wrote: »

Contador AND Schelck would quite possibly be stripped of their titles,

would believe....

Murph100 wrote: »

declaring Lance the winner ! :eek:

Murph100

Some who are in the loop would disagree ... I'm only throwing it out there ... and I did say IRONICALLY.

petethedrummer wrote: »

:eek:

Nobody who believes....


would believe....

petethedrummer

Brilliant Read: http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2010/07/quiet-goombah.html

petethedrummer

Murph100 wrote: »

Some who are in the loop would disagree ... I'm only throwing it out there ... and I did say IRONICALLY.

The ones wearing a yellow loop round their wrists.

Anyways. back to Vino.

hinault

He is one tough hombre is Vino.

I always liked his style. Yes it was hairbrained at times. I can remember him attacking Ullrich, his own team mate, in 2005 TDF!:D
But he rode with his heart.

The drugs issue didn't come as a surprise although I was disappointed that he did cheat.

leftism

petethedrummer wrote: »

Ok for absolute clarity. 25-75% of the peloton were doping at the time. Maybe 1% were caught. In the subset of riders who were dopers I would consider those who were caught to be unlucky.

While it is nice to hear people refer to the "dark days" of cycling in the past tense, i wonder what evidence there is that it is the correct tense to be using?

You have last years champion riding under the clouds of a confirmed positive test, much speculation surrounding the two Shleck brothers (why any clean athlete needs to pay an endochronologist is beyond my comprehension) and Kolobnev just testing positive today!

I see darker days ahead for cycling...

With regards to Vino, i'm sorry for anyone who suffers a crash like this, but all the stupid attacking in the world won't make me admire an unrepentent doper!

petethedrummer

leftism wrote: »

While it is nice to hear people refer to the "dark days" of cycling in the past tense, i wonder what evidence there is that it is the correct tense to be using?

Yeah I know. Every time the sport supposedly turns a corner (festina, 2008 tour, bio passport) it ends up back in the same place. Although, I do believe that the ridiculous climbing feats have been curtailed and it is cleaner than it has been in a long time. Micro dosing epo has to be less of an advantage than a 50+% hematocrit. Though my hematocrit is naturally high and I'm still useless.:mad:

ColSheehan

http://astanafans.com/tdf-2011.html
Update on Vino's injuries translated

"operation went well
can't step on my leg for six weeks
will have to be in bed for three month
wife's coming tomorrow
will get back to home by the weekend"

Source - @joepabike

ROK ON

petethedrummer wrote: »

Yeah I know. Every time the sport supposedly turns a corner (festina, 2008 tour, bio passport) it ends up back in the same place. Although, I do believe that the ridiculous climbing feats have been curtailed and it is cleaner than it has been in a long time. Micro dosing epo has to be less of an advantage than a 50+% hematocrit. Though my hematocrit is naturally high and I'm still useless.:mad:

Welcome to high hematocrit club.

I have to agree with you. (Usually I dont on doping). Cyclingfans have for a long time hung certain riders out to dry, whilst turning a blind eye to the governing body, team mgt and many other riders.
Kelly, Pantani et al are heros to many and doped, yet others are reviled. The fact that some took EPO or blood products and others took Pot Belge or uppers is irrelevant - the very same intent existed.

Vino served the ban - that is all that he can be expected to do. I mean does he have to be born again or become some evangalist? It is for that reason that I cannot abide David Millar - guy has a strange taste in who is clean and who is not.

Hope Vino has a good recovery, He has made cycling interesting. The reason that we have had a good classics season and a good TDF is that thankfully more and more riders are looking to drill it on the front rather than sit in and allow others to do the work.

doozerie

ROK ON wrote:

Move on, nothing to see here. Like an apology makes it ok. F*ck that sh1t.

As I tell my kids - dont apologise, just dont do it again.

That's a very strange morality you are peddling there. At best it is entirely selfish, arrogant even, by assuming that you have nothing to apologise for, at worst it suggests that you can do whatever you like (since conscious doesn't come into it) as long as you don't get caught. It's a mindset that has crippled professional cyclng for years, in the greater social context it could be described as sociopathic.

ROK ON

doozerie wrote: »

That's a very strange morality you are peddling there. At best it is entirely selfish, arrogant even, by assuming that you have nothing to apologise for, at worst it suggests that you can do whatever you like (since conscious doesn't come into it) as long as you don't get caught. It's a mindset that has crippled professional cyclng for years, in the greater social context it could be described as sociopathic.

Some people cheat in life.
If they get caught they pay the price . . . if they dont they are simply assumed in many cases not to cheat.
As Pete mentions it is illogical to expect those that have been caught and paid the prescribed price to apologise for all of the ills in society.

I live in the real world some some idealised nirvana. Cheaters are not bad people, they are no worse than the average man in my book. They be human is to err.

doozerie

ROK ON wrote:

As Pete mentions it is illogical to expect those that have been caught and paid the prescribed price to apologise for all of the ills in society.

Well for a start no-one expects any rider to apologise for all of the ills of society, just for their own actions. And depending on your point of view an apology has little to do with punishment, the penalty (ban, fine, etc.) is the punishment, the apology gives some idea as to whether you may commit the same crime/practice again - if you genuinely believe that what you did was wrong, then you are less likely to do the same in the future 'cos your conscience will nag you, if you make no acknowledgement that what you did was wrong then the impression you convey is that you don't believe you were in the wrong in which case why would you not repeat it in the future but this time taking more care not to be caught? You could lie of course, and feign repentence, but resolutely refusing to acknowledge that what you did was wrong is a slap in the face of those riders that ride clean, not to mention the fact that is suggests to younger/newer riders that doping is somehow okay but just don't get caught.

An apology is a very powerful thing, whether you believe that or not. Imagine the (greater) hysteria there would have been if the driver of the car that took out Flecha and Hoogerland had not apologised. Whether you believe the apology was genuine or not it was a necessary first step for (representatives of) that driver to take - it doesn't excuse what he did, how could it, but it is intended as some small consolation to the two riders that what the driver did was not deliberate (just stupid, reckless, and criminal, which can and should be dealt with separately).

ROK ON wrote:

I live in the real world some some idealised nirvana.

I live in the real world too. In an idealised nirvana no-one would ever do anything that required an apology, that's not the world I live in.

xz

emmmm, could we get back on topic please

Don't know about any of you lot, but there is no way on earth, that I would have let my team mates pick me up and help me out of those trees, the way Vino's did, given the injuries he had, he must have been in a world of pain. Just goes to show the mindset these guys have of trying to get back onto the bike after a crash, Hoogerland, Boonen and Horner have been prime examples of this.

eoghan84

I think I might have sparked this doping-cheating discussion when I said that I think for the sport to move on, dopers should come clean about when and where they doped so that whatever victories are tainted can be given to other riders etc.

That would be the ideal scenario as it would bring back credibility to the sport after bad publicity from a big doping incident. But its just not possible to look back on the history books and highlight what riders were potentially doping at what time as it would never end.

I wonder do dopers really pay the price when they get caught? Their doping actions have brought them so much fame and fortune at the potential expense of clean riders. They often get the opportunity to come back and continue in the profession while clean riders disillusioned with the sport have already began a new career or they had to finish because they couldn't get a contract based on their career victories. The dopers can be the tip of the ice berg of doping networks that go on uninterrupted because they do not provide any information.

One rider who I seem to continue to dislike is Thomas Dekker - he denied he ever doped and claimed he was set up. Then three months later when his B sample came back positive as well he finally admitted it, saying that if he admitted it at the time he would have been fired immediately and lost three months pay! I recently watched the documentary about the comeback that he is trying to launch and despite being unemployed he is driving around in a Porsche! He announced that he doped and it is the past but that his wins were always clean. He still has a very close relationship with Dr Cecchini, a notorious doping doctor. To believe Dekker again I would like him to come clean about what victories are tainted or who helped him dope, as its not a "personal thing" as he claims!

But at the end of the day I am entertained by Vino and even Dekker when he rode well, so maybe theres no point thinking too deeply about it. My favourite Vino moment was the Vuelta 2006 - totally clean! Hope Vino recovers. Thanks for the update Colsheehan!

Lumen

ROK ON wrote: »

Cheaters are not bad people, they are no worse than the average man in my book.

...says the man who works in finance. :pac:

petethedrummer

eoghan84 wrote: »

I wonder do dopers really pay the price when they get caught? Their doping actions have brought them so much fame and fortune at the potential expense of clean riders. They often get the opportunity to come back and continue in the profession while clean riders

The opportunity they get to come back is given by equally amoral (or more amoral) team directors and governing body. They know who they are hiring and don't give a toss. With the current system they can hire anyone they like, let him dope to the gills and if he gets caught just toss him out. If he's a money earner, just defend him to the hilt and the UCI will submit.

EDIT: How you get treated depends on who you are..

Landis fought the ban: outcast but was given a chance by a small team looking for publicity.
Ricco unapologetic and PR nightmare: outcast but was given a chance by a small team looking for publicity.
Kolobnev: Already fired by his team it seems, after only an A sample positive.
Armstrong, too big to fall: Allowed back dated TUE and suppressed Tour desuisse positive (according to Landis).
Vino is seemingly unapologetic, but took his ban quietly: Allowed back.
Bjarne Riis: Still managing big teams.
Contador: Given 3 months to explain a dodgy clen reading. Still in the sport.

And the biggest hipocrisy is the case of Fuyu Li: Sacked by Radioshack and chucked out by the UCI for the exact same thing as Contador. He's a small fry so he can be sacrificed in order to show their anti-doping stance.
http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderreport/2010/09/30/contador-case-means-hard-choices-for-anti-doping/