Whistleblowers - David Walsh & Paul Kimmage

trihead

For anyone who couldn't get a ticket back in January in the Pavilion theatre there is another show coming up......should be a bit easier to get tickets but I'd say there will sell out soon.

Whistleblowers -

David Walsh & Paul Kimmage

In Conversation with Alan English

Sat 20 Apr 2013, 19:30

Bord Gáis Energy Theatre

Dublin,

http://www.bordgaisenergytheatre.ie/whistleblowers-2.html

Surinam

Looking forward to this tonight.

Tobyglen

Thought it was interesting. More time should have been given to a Q&A.

DW idea that Lance Armstrong's cancer wasn't detected from doping control (should have been because of an excessive testosterone level) and he may have used it as a trump card against the UCI was interesting. Supposedly he felt that he could have launched a big lawsuit against them and that might explain why he seemed to have such a strong influence from an early stage with the UCI.

Surinam

Yes was really quite interesting; some things I had never heard before (like the drug tests not uncovering the hormone levels indicative of testicular cancer). Also interesting to hear their very differing views on the current sky team.

Surinam

Also interesting the viewpoint that nationalism is a real scourge of cycling (and most sports I suppose), we saw that last week with McQuaid getting endorsed. The Theater was almost full, good to see.

mloc123

I went last night. It wasn't bad.

Walsh comes across very well, Kimage not so much.

To me he seemed to personally involved, he no longer cared about facts and was happy to rely on opinion and speculation.

He seemed quite bitter at times an towards to end I felt he wanted Sky not to be clean if only to give him something to exploit for the next 10 years.

Lance is done, he will never race anything again... They are profiting off his misery at this stage.

Surinam

mloc123 wrote: »

Lance is done, he will never race anything again... They are profiting off his misery at this stage.

I think they're entitled to tell their story. They were one of the few to stand up to that monster and he threatened to crush their livelihoods. They outed one of the world's greatest ever frauds (and bullies) so frankly I think they are entitled to 'profit' off that. Btw kimmage is still unemployed and it remains to be seen whether the uci lads will continue their defamation claim against him: he isn't exactly profiting from anything right now.


They are human beings so of course it has become personal for them - and if you remember what David was saying about his own son and how Lance tried to take advantage of that.

Finally, Lance hasn't shown any true remorse for what he's done and still seems to be in some degree of defensive denial.

trihead

Was there last night too - thought it was very good!:cool:

bazermc

Surinam wrote: »

Also interesting to hear their very differing views on the current sky team.

What sort of views? Does Walsh not think the team is 100% clean?

Surinam

bazermc wrote: »

What sort of views? Does Walsh not think the team is 100% clean?

Yep David thinks they're clean but admits he has lots of work to do over the summer (he will be embedded within team sky) whereas Kimmage is very sceptical about Wiggins and Froome.

There was also an interesting discussion about how skeletal looking some of the top guys are, increasingly so, and how it is physiologically possible to sustain the level of performance they do. They mentioned a new drug called 'Aykar' (have no idea how it's spelt but it sound like that).

elnino23

No way Wiggins is on drugs he had wo be the most tested guy on the tour last year. anyone saying he isnt clean is just bitter

elduggo

mloc123 wrote: »

Lance is done, he will never race anything again... They are profiting off his misery at this stage.

15 years they spent chasing him. He was found out last October. I'd say they're entitled to have gotten what they have out of it and I'd expect/hope theres a fair bit of road left.

elnino23

When Armstrong was getting away with it they didnt have the biological passport that they do now. It would be very hard for high profile riders to get away with it now. The sad thing is that ever rider now that wins a big tour is being questioned because of the past. Ex riders coming out and questioning current riders does nothing to help the sport. Do they love the sport or not?? thats why I say it sounds bitter. For the sport to move on people need to stop accusing great riders or sponsors will leave the sport.

couerdelion

Surinam wrote: »

They mentioned a new drug called 'Aykar' (have no idea how it's spelt but it sound like that).

It's spelt "Aicar". I looked into it after hearing them mention it at the show (but not too deeply). It's only been tested in Rats from what I could tell and if a human was to take the same dosage levels you would be looking at 0.5 million for a course. Not quite sure the risk/reward is there at that price.

I thought they both came across pretty well but Kimmage still seems bitter about cycling in general and is spoiling for a fight with sky.

The bloke/doctor who mentioned that he didnt think it was physioligically possible what Wiggins did last year had a point till my wife mentioned that doctors had said that Bannister getting a 4 minute mile was impossible and women were also barred from running more than 200m at the olympics for a long time because they weren't deemed to be physioligcally able for it.

Shelflife

mloc123 wrote: »

Lance is done, he will never race anything again... They are profiting off his misery at this stage.

I was one of those people who wanted DW and PK to **** or get off the pot with regards to LA. I was fed up with the Chinese whispers that I felt they were involved in.

Now that the truth is out I think that they are perfectly entitled to "profit" on the total **** that is LA.

Good luck to them I say , they are entitled to their day in the sun.

Surinam

elnino23 wrote: »

When Armstrong was getting away with it they didnt have the biological passport that they do now. It would be very hard for high profile riders to get away with it now. The sad thing is that ever rider now that wins a big tour is being questioned because of the past. Ex riders coming out and questioning current riders does nothing to help the sport. Do they love the sport or not?? thats why I say it sounds bitter. For the sport to move on people need to stop accusing great riders or sponsors will leave the sport.

The point Kimmage was trying to say last night was that *because* he loves the sport he has to keep questioning the status quo. Drugs scandals are still happening today (operation puerto, for instance) so I think he's entitled to be suspicious. He is a journalist after all remember.

It was because no one questioned the status quo in the past that people like Armstrong were allowed to get away with so much.

Your sentence I have highlighted above seems to be saying that everyone should just shut up and accept that all the pros are now clean as a whistle?? Remember EPO was once undetectable, god knows how many other substances are out there which are also immune from testing.

elnino23

Questioning is one thing harping on constantly about it is another. Ever since sky came about they have been questioned because they have been successful.
There are ways and means to go about checking on riders and teams and saying it in the press is not one of them.

If you have proof go to the authorities don't go round giving talks spreading rumours. If a rider is doping report your suspicions to authorities and let them check. By gobbing off in the press and at talks all you do is bring into questions peoples reputation. Is it not unfair on clean riders if they wins races by hard work and training if they are forever under a cloud of suspicion just because others have ruined the sports rep and bitter ex riders just gob off in the press.
Unless people have proof then yes come forward but on a hunch is ridiculous

Fr D Maugire

Surinam wrote: »

The point Kimmage was trying to say last night was that *because* he loves the sport he has to keep questioning the status quo. Drugs scandals are still happening today (operation puerto, for instance) so I think he's entitled to be suspicious. He is a journalist after all remember.

It was because no one questioned the status quo in the past that people like Armstrong were allowed to get away with so much.

Your sentence I have highlighted above seems to be saying that everyone should just shut up and accept that all the pros are now clean as a whistle?? Remember EPO was once undetectable, god knows how many other substances are out there which are also immune from testing.

Puerto was actually 2006 but it has taken this long for anything proper to be actioned and even now, ain't much going to happen. Regardless, the info contained in the Puerto files relates to pre 2006 TDF so things have most likely changed since then but yes there are still doping busts happening.

Beasty

A general warning - even if it's originally said by someone else, repeating doping allegations here is no different from making such allegations yourself so far as application of the Charter is concerned

Unsubstantiated allegations against specific riders and/or teams are not permitted

Kimmage can look after himself. Boards does not permit any such allegations to be made (and does not have the resource to defend any legal action)

Any questions, PM me - don't respond in-thread

Thanks

Beasty

mikehammer67

elnino23 wrote: »

No way Wiggins is on drugs he had wo be the most tested guy on the tour last year. anyone saying he isnt clean is just bitter

“We’ve been here eight times and only once have the testers come. It’s only a two-hour flight from Spain, a 50-minute drive from the airport. Once in eight visits here is pretty disappointing.”


brailsford talking to walsh i think for the ST about the tenerife training camp

Beasty

No more specific team/rider talk (unless you are referring to proven dopers) - final warning

thebionicdude

To be fair to Kimmage he stated very clearly that he did NOT know whether certain riders were doping or not. In addition, I think specific doping questions came from the floor first?

The bigger point on this issue was Kimmage and Walsh's different approach to journalism. Kimmage is happy to follow his hunches to see where they might lead him, whereas Walsh wants the evidence to come to him. Walsh prefers to wait for the Betsy Andreus and the Emma O'Reillys of this world to come to him, once they do he knows he has a story and will start to investigate.

I think the numerous journalistic accolades both have received over the years suggest endorsement of their respective methods.

LennoxR

Personally I thought that Kimmage came out of the talk better than Walsh.

You sense that for Kimmage it's about the sport of cycling whereas for Walsh, by his own admission what's important to him is 'journalism' -a great story. You can't fault him for that I suppose, it is his job but it seems to be about him and quests a bit too much. I thought his book 7 Deadly Sins got extremely tedious as it went on. It wasn't really about the Armstrong story at all but about Walsh's quest to find THE TRUTH.

Having said that, they both do have a point. Pro cycling has always been dirty, though let's be honest and as cycling fans the truth is that we put up with it because we like the spectacle. It was just in the EPO years that it got so blatant (thinking of Landis here) that it got ridiculous.

But still I would like to see Kimmage and/or Walsh write the odd story about cycling that was not only about doping.