Tour de France - Page 11

Aggie · 25-07-2007, 11:13

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by socralynnek

...OTOH, it's kind of strange that Rasmussen does better than great doped drivers like Vino.

Vino is injured. Otherwise he would lead the TdF.

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by socralynnek

And Rasmussen shouldn't have been allowed to start the tour in the first place.
It seems he received 4 warnings for not telling his location.
Normally, it is counted as being tested positive already on third warning. But it seems, that a formal error (writing wrong date on a warning) might rescue him.
So, in my eyes, he is guilty for not following the anti-doping-rules. Whether he has actually doped or not.

He only got 2 formal warnings from the UCI, the warnings that count, and one of them is the questionable one where he sent a fax one day after the deadline. I can't tell if he doped or not, but let's keep facts from suggestions. He got his story straight and hasn't been caught.

That said, I was a big cycling fan but don't care anymore because of the cheating in the peleton. Almost all winners of the Tour, Vuelta and Giro of the last 10 years doped.

Lt. Killer M · 25-07-2007, 11:22

@Darkness, aggie: I could say that given the history of doping in cycling, suspicious behaviour (e.g. attempts to evade dope testing) alone convinces me of the guilt. But Rasmussen - have you seen the TV interviews??? - is doing such a word-twisting stunt that to me it is obvious that he INTENTIONALLY evaded tests. But even if you discount that: he was warned three times, and AFTER TWO WARNINGS 'a day late' is too late! You can't give him probation again and again when a pattern is already visible.

@Robboo: yep, he used doping to improve his cycling. Really a pity, and possibly (a very slim possibility) he did not do so intentionally (medication mistake), but I seriously doubt that.

As for 'not betrayed' - that is exactly what Jaksche said, too: All use it, so it is fair.

Aggie · 25-07-2007, 11:33

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by Lt. Killer M
[br...he was warned three times, and AFTER TWO WARNINGS 'a day late' is too late! ...

I tend to agree with everything else you say, but Rasmussen was warned 'only' twice.

socralynnek · 25-07-2007, 11:40

AFAIk, Rasmussen got 3 warnings from the UCI for missed tests. Rasmussen and his lawyer only attack one of them but not because it was untrue but because having a wrong date.
He even receive a fourth warning, this one from the Danish anti-doping association, but for some strange reason, coincidence or whatever, it didn't result in a formal warning but only him being excluded from the World Championship race and Olympia.

That's not enough t convince me from him being doped but enough to convince me that he has broken the rules which is in some way the same.

What really shocked me, was that Snkewitz has been tested positive. I mean, no one would have expected anything from him this season as T-Mobile said that they want to ride clean. So even if he would have been 100th, no one would have complained. That shows, how deep-seated doping is in the cycling system.

socralynnek · 25-07-2007, 11:45

There is some contradictory info there...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...s_ASO_claims07

They talk about 2 warnings by UCI and 2 by Danish association.
Some other sites about 3 from UCi and 1 from Danish.

3 from Danish association would also necessarily result in being taken out of competition.

Still it's four missed tests, which is enogh for me but maybe not enough for a court.

Aggie · 25-07-2007, 11:54

Well ynnek, the info you got there (Cyclingnews) is the info that is correct. It also states why he can't be punished very well.

Aggie · 25-07-2007, 11:57

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by socralynnek

...What really shocked me, was that Snkewitz has been tested positive. I mean, no one would have expected anything from him this season as T-Mobile said that they want to ride clean. So even if he would have been 100th, no one would have complained. That shows, how deep-seated doping is in the cycling system.

I agree. It is terrible to see this happen.

Shabbaman · 25-07-2007, 12:47

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by socralynnek

AFAIk, Rasmussen got 3 warnings from the UCI for missed tests. Rasmussen and his lawyer only attack one of them but not because it was untrue but because having a wrong date.
He even receive a fourth warning, this one from the Danish anti-doping association, but for some strange reason, coincidence or whatever, it didn't result in a formal warning but only him being excluded from the World Championship race and Olympia.

Apparently there's a difference between a warning and a recorded warning. It's the recorded warning that counts, of which he got one (that was actually recorded warning #1 and #2) and that one says that he's out if he gets another recorded warning.

EDIT:

It's about time they start talking about the other riders that missed their tests. I wonder what happens if Moreau is among them.

Aggie · 25-07-2007, 13:17

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by Shabbaman

...It's the recorded warning that counts, of which he got one (that was actually recorded warning #1 and #2) and that one says that he's out if he gets another recorded warning.

Yes, they failed to give him a recorded warning in April and then gave him two recorded warnings at once end of June (for the April case and the June case).

And he is indeed not the only rider with this problem, but the only one of which this went out in the open, despite regulations that this should be kept confidential. They did this with all other riders, but not with the one in the yellow jersey. Ever since I follow cycling the one in the yellow was made a suspect. This was already true in this 70's. That doesn't mean that Rasmussen doesn't use doping, but that is a totally different story and not proven.

Shabbaman · 25-07-2007, 14:11

It wouldn't be prudent to assume he's clean, but if you follow l'equipe's guidelines of determining who's clean, you end up with no one.

25-07-2007, 11:22	#102
Lt. Killer M Emperor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: HAWK!. Posts: 4,365	@Darkness, aggie: I could say that given the history of doping in cycling, suspicious behaviour (e.g. attempts to evade dope testing) alone convinces me of the guilt. But Rasmussen - have you seen the TV interviews??? - is doing such a word-twisting stunt that to me it is obvious that he INTENTIONALLY evaded tests. But even if you discount that: he was warned three times, and AFTER TWO WARNINGS 'a day late' is too late! You can't give him probation again and again when a pattern is already visible. @Robboo: yep, he used doping to improve his cycling. Really a pity, and possibly (a very slim possibility) he did not do so intentionally (medication mistake), but I seriously doubt that. As for 'not betrayed' - that is exactly what Jaksche said, too: All use it, so it is fair. __________________ One more turn..... just one more turn... one MORE!

25-07-2007, 11:40	#104
socralynnek Moderator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USS Defiant Posts: 3,827	AFAIk, Rasmussen got 3 warnings from the UCI for missed tests. Rasmussen and his lawyer only attack one of them but not because it was untrue but because having a wrong date. He even receive a fourth warning, this one from the Danish anti-doping association, but for some strange reason, coincidence or whatever, it didn't result in a formal warning but only him being excluded from the World Championship race and Olympia. That's not enough t convince me from him being doped but enough to convince me that he has broken the rules which is in some way the same. What really shocked me, was that Snkewitz has been tested positive. I mean, no one would have expected anything from him this season as T-Mobile said that they want to ride clean. So even if he would have been 100th, no one would have complained. That shows, how deep-seated doping is in the cycling system. __________________ Being without a signature since November 2004.

25-07-2007, 11:45	#105
socralynnek Moderator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USS Defiant Posts: 3,827	There is some contradictory info there... http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...s_ASO_claims07 They talk about 2 warnings by UCI and 2 by Danish association. Some other sites about 3 from UCi and 1 from Danish. 3 from Danish association would also necessarily result in being taken out of competition. Still it's four missed tests, which is enogh for me but maybe not enough for a court. __________________ Being without a signature since November 2004.

25-07-2007, 14:11	#110
Shabbaman Administrator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Costa La Haya Posts: 8,494	It wouldn't be prudent to assume he's clean, but if you follow l'equipe's guidelines of determining who's clean, you end up with no one. __________________ "Our spam is backed with COMETS!"

25-07-2007, 11:54	#106
Aggie Emperor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: N/A Posts: 4,490	Well ynnek, the info you got there (Cyclingnews) is the info that is correct. It also states why he can't be punished very well.