"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - Basso says he never doped. He simply "prepared" to dope.

http://www.canada.com/topics/sports/story.html?id=8e4a46c4-1dc2-4565-8203-0dc35c15b0b2&k=74769


I have admitted attempted doping only. I've never taken any doping substance nor undergone any illegal blood transfusions.

Basso said he made contact with Dr. Fuentes, and gave him a blood sample with the intention of doping - but never actually did. :rolleyes:

Doping is dope.

So he didn't inhale?

How many pair of those red stripe shorts do you figure Richard Simmons owns?

i'll buy that for a dollar. woo.

http://www.thefader.com/blog/files/buyfordollar.jpg

So he didn't inhale?

LOL!

So he didn't inhale?

No he didn't exhale! No wait, that was Pres. Clinton... my bad!

He should quit while he's ahead. Talking about something too much can turn people against you.

Talking about something too much can turn people against you.

LOL.

The Cypress, I apologize for having underestimated and under-appreciated your wisdom in the past!

Of course they can't prove Basso wrong on this (he never failed a test) but it looks pretty weak to be claiming at this point. But my question is: if the blood is his yet is shown to have nothing illegal in it, can they actually charge him with anything? They have no evidence he actually used the blood.

Of course they can't prove Basso wrong on this (he never failed a test) but it looks pretty weak to be claiming at this point. But my question is: if the blood is his yet is shown to have nothing illegal in it, can they actually charge him with anything? They have no evidence he actually used the blood.
Well, attempted doping is still against the rules, however, I believe you are right about the doping charge. Unfortunately, it seems there is simply no hard evidence that can prove he was doping, although in my opinion the paper trail going back to 2004 makes it highly, highly likely.

Anyway, what more can the authorities do than give him a two year ban at this point?

-Bullseye

You know what you do not hear right now? The sound of all those people who claimed that Basso was clean, and that most riders do not dope, blah, blah, blah.....

I hope the dose of reality may alter their world view a little bit (granted - it is hoping a bit too much).

i'll buy that for a dollar. woo.

http://www.thefader.com/blog/files/buyfordollar.jpg
is that Dr. Z?

Of course they can't prove Basso wrong on this (he never failed a test) but it looks pretty weak to be claiming at this point. But my question is: if the blood is his yet is shown to have nothing illegal in it, can they actually charge him with anything? They have no evidence he actually used the blood.
Depends on the other paperwork. If all they have is bags of clean blood, they can definitely hit him for a 2 year ban for transfusions anyway (which are against the rules). If they have a paper trail that shows he was a regular customer for several years, in theory they could ban him for life (as that would indicate multiple violations).

Personally I'm slightly disgusted by Basso's "admission," although I guess I shouldn't be surprised. It may actually be the truth, of course, but if so it's awfully convenient. Seems much more likely that he's trying to get a 2 year ban without ratting out the peloton and/or losing his titles/wins.



what more can the authorities do than give him a two year ban at this point?
Depends on what evidence they actually have. They've made the link, so now they can (in theory) go through all of Fuentes' records and see what they have listed for "Birillo" and whatever other nicknames they had for him.

If they can prove multiple violations, then can probably ban him for life.

Is his admission sufficient (by actual UCI rules, not by Internet Discussion Forum Standards) to constitute a doping violation? Or do they still have to proceed with an action against him and prove it?

I'm thinking, he cops to this, takes the 2 year ban, it avoids them digging up a whole bunch of other skeletons (for him and the rest of the ProTour peloton).

Is his admission sufficient (by actual UCI rules, not by Internet Discussion Forum Standards) to constitute a doping violation? Or do they still have to proceed with an action against him and prove it?
The offense is sufficent to qualify as a violation. Presumably, CONI will have a hearing, Basso will plead guilty, and he will get a 2 year ban.



I'm thinking, he cops to this, takes the 2 year ban, it avoids them digging up a whole bunch of other skeletons (for him and the rest of the ProTour peloton).
It's a nice theory, but unfortunately there may be as much as 6,000 pages of evidence on 100 riders (and other athletes) coming out from OP. CONI may be obligated to do another hearing if further OP evidence shows Basso doped prior to summer 2006, or the organizers of the Giro may decide, of their own accord, to revoke his win.

At this point, the public has seen very little of the evidence, and McQuaid indicated it could take them a year to go through it all....

yeah an rev ted haggard bought meth and didn't use it, sure....

Did you see how much money he gave the Dr.?
From '04, for what?
Just freeze a bag of blood....I could have done that.
What I could have not done is clean his blood so that they could not find drugs....
These guys are so stupid it is disgusting.

After watching the 2006 Giro, I don't believe him... but hey that's just my opnion!

He's been so honest, cooperative, and forthcoming so far, why would anyone doubt his latest statements? :rolleyes:

On Monday I was willing to give him credit for doing the stand up thing and admitting the apparent error of his ways. Now it seems like he's just being a weasel and trying to be more slippery than Bill Clinton in a teflon suit.

I don't entirely agree with what Basso has done, especially this last little two-step about "preparing to dope" but not actually doping. On the other hand, I admire his confessing to an association with Fuentes. Moreover, I am repelled by the way in which the UCI has chosen to vilify Basso and Ullrich without similarly pursuing Fuentes' other patrons. It feels like scapegoating to me. At this point, it almost seems like the only judicious move would be to immediately cease all pro tour races, perhaps the whole season. Settle everything and then begin anew in 2008. Sadly I think these shadows are going to linger over the Giro, Tour and Vuelta. It will be a bittersweet season to be sure.

Hey wait a minute...has anyone confirmed that he actually said "prepared to dope" and not "prepared to drope"? At least the latter would make some sense, applying BF Wisdom anyway.

The will to dope is not nearly as important as the will to prepare to dope.

At this point, the public has seen very little of the evidence, and McQuaid indicated it could take them a year to go through it all....

Haven't they already had a year? Whether all of the riders are guilty or not, IMO the way this whole thing has been handled is doing undue damage to the sport.

-D

On the other hand, I admire his confessing to an association with Fuentes.
I disagree. Basso gave the authorities nothing they wouldn't have had with a simple blood test, and he knew it. I think he's trying to be slippery as a snake, and it turns my stomach.

-Bullseye

Haven't they already had a year? Whether all of the riders are guilty or not, IMO the way this whole thing has been handled is doing undue damage to the sport.

-D

I believe there was a second set of documents recently released, about 6,000 pages worth. It supposedly named another 49 riders in addition to the 58 or so previously mentioned. http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/12141.0.html

I agree that this could have been handled better, but I think it is getting better and that progress is being made after all.

There is nothing to admire about a doper- regardless of whether they admit it or not. Basso is not being noble here but is rather spinning the information for his own benefit.


He should quit while he's ahead. Talking about something too much can turn people against you.
Quit what? I very much doubt Basso is primarily worried about a sport suspension. He lives in Italy and is thus subject to Italian sport cheating laws. At this point he is probably more worried about staying out of jail than a ban from cycling. He certainly doesn't seem to be worried about pleasing his fans with this spin.


Depends on the other paperwork. If all they have is bags of clean blood, they can definitely hit him for a 2 year ban for transfusions anyway (which are against the rules). If they have a paper trail that shows he was a regular customer for several years, in theory they could ban him for life (as that would indicate multiple violations).
BS on the current blood but you have a point with the long paper trail. Having blood removed is not doping. Re-injecting said blood is doping. Merely having his blood at Fuentes shows nothing other than an attempt to dope. Having a year of recorded transactions is more damming. I don't believe that Basso wasn't doping but knowing and proving are vastly different things.

Regardless, the standard for the first doping infraction is two years- regardless of the number of individual injections (violations). For example, Millar admitted to doping multiple times and was banned for the standard two years. The first time they get caught counts as their first doping offense and they get the standard two years- regardless of how often or how much they doped. Asserting that each specific time they doped is a separate violation is unsubstantiated nonsense- show where anybody has received a lifetime ban for a single bust (none that I am aware of).

Basso + Basso Lawyer = TOTAL BS

It's a simple equation really. :)


... Brad

Me thinks that sometime in the near future someone is going to rat out the rest and get a reduced sentence. I'm secretly hoping that one of the mighty to fall will be Riis.

Me thinks that sometime in the near future someone is going to rat out the rest and get a reduced sentence. I'm secretly hoping that one of the mighty to fall will be Riis.

No doubt, Riis really pisses me off with his sanctimonious bull$hit. Mr. 60%, the sheet-white cadaver with the rosy little pink cheeks. As if all of this could've gone down on his team without knowing about it.

I think he doped during the Giro....why would he have such a great Giro and then decide he needed to dope for the tour? That doesn't make sense, he just doesn't want to loose his win and give back the prise money....lol

One other thing...I guess I thought this but was not sure.....now I am pretty sure...I guess it is possible for someone to dope and go to drug control and not get caught.....WOW....I would think if the tests were that fallible in that direction then they might not be that great in the other direction.

I personally think WADA's quest for a dope free sport has crossed over to the area of gaining false confessions and wrongly prosecuting innocent people just to get a conviction. Apparently something they are doing is NOT working...

I believe there was a second set of documents recently released, about 6,000 pages worth. It supposedly named another 49 riders in addition to the 58 or so previously mentioned. http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/12141.0.html

I agree that this could have been handled better, but I think it is getting better and that progress is being made after all.

OP was right about Ullrich.
OP was right about Basso.
Others are now admitting use of Fuentes.
OP will be right about the other 49 riders.
Dick Pound was right about Pro cycling.

Basso + Basso Lawyer = TOTAL BS

It's a simple equation really. :)

Little known fact, Basso's lawyer is Lionello Hutzi

http://www.gta-series.com/it/lcstories/eastereggs/lionelhutz.jpg

Little known fact, Basso's lawyer is Lionello Hutzi

http://www.gta-series.com/it/lcstories/eastereggs/lionelhutz.jpg

Worst, lawyer, ever.

I think he doped during the Giro....why would he have such a great Giro and then decide he needed to dope for the tour? That doesn't make sense, he just doesn't want to loose his win and give back the prise money....lol

One other thing...I guess I thought this but was not sure.....now I am pretty sure...I guess it is possible for someone to dope and go to drug control and not get caught.....WOW....I would think if the tests were that fallible in that direction then they might not be that great in the other direction.

I personally think WADA's quest for a dope free sport has crossed over to the area of gaining false confessions and wrongly prosecuting innocent people just to get a conviction. Apparently something they are doing is NOT working...
It has always been possible to dope without getting caught because the levels needed to test positive are set high by design.


In a study to determine the level of caffeine needed to exceed the 15 µg/mL NCAA limit, study participants had to consume 918-999 mg dose of caffeine which is equivalent to 7-8 cups of brewed coffee taken all at once.
http://www.powerbar.com/NutritionResource/ToolsArticles/ArticlesDetails.aspx?id=7F1EF468-0C32-4DA7-BD1A-8D3FFA8C14D0

The guys taking EPO under Fuentes plan are not testing positive because they are microdosing, taking very small amounts at very specific points to maximize the effect. Personally I'm of the opinion that the fear of getting caught forces guys to dope much less than they would have otherwise. As the testing gets better the amounts used will continue to get smaller and smaller...that should be considered a small victory in itself.

Little known fact, Basso's lawyer is Lionello Hutzi

http://www.gta-series.com/it/lcstories/eastereggs/lionelhutz.jpg

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

Hey, for the record guys, i've never inhaled...i only prepared to.

Dick Pound was right about Pro cycling.
Y'know, I am very much in favor of clamping down on doping violations, but even so.... That sentence makes my eyes hurt. ;)



Haven't they already had a year? Whether all of the riders are guilty or not, IMO the way this whole thing has been handled is doing undue damage to the sport.
No, they haven't had a year. UCI and ASO were given very limited information by the Spanish police last year, but I believe the UCI either received the full dossier a week or so ago or hasn't gotten it yet.

In addition, a Spanish judge locked down the evidence in fall 2006, so the UCI was unable to perform any action based on OP until now.

What's doing "undue damage to the sport" is not the enforcement, it's the 50-100 riders who are doping and doing whatever they can not to get caught at it.



BS on the current blood but you have a point with the long paper trail. Having blood removed is not doping. Re-injecting said blood is doping. Merely having his blood at Fuentes shows nothing other than an attempt to dope....
Perhaps I used the wrong words in that specific post (and the correct ones in my following post). Dornhummy's question was, "if Basso's blood is clean, is that still a violation?" The answer is yes, because the presence of his blood there can be used as evidence that Basso attempted to dope, and even this is a violation (per WADA Code S.2.2).

If it was some other doctor who did, for example, testing on blood but did not have a lab littered with EPO and other PED's, Basso could likely fight it.



The first time they get caught counts as their first doping offense and they get the standard two years- regardless of how often or how much they doped. Asserting that each specific time they doped is a separate violation is unsubstantiated nonsense- show where anybody has received a lifetime ban for a single bust (none that I am aware of).
If you're talking about failing a test, you are correct -- at least, that's in line with WADA Code S.10.6.2. E.g. if you failed a test for Stage 10, they notify you, and later on they decided to test Stage 4 and you fail that one as well, it still only counts as one violation.

However, that is a significantly different situation than evidence provided by a criminal investigation that alleges doping activities that extends over multiple years. Also, McQuaid clearly stated that he was looking for a lifetime ban for Ullrich based on OP ( http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/aug06/aug28news - scroll down a bit). I may be wrong, but to my knowledge Ullrich has never been accused, let alone formally sanctioned and banned for 2 years, for a doping violation.

It's possible that McQuaid is wrong (or bluffing), but I suspect he knows the relevant codes and regulations far better than either of us.

Again, it is possible (although unlikely) that Basso first started using Fuentes in mid 2006; e.g. he felt utterly wiped out after the Giro, and wanted to win Le Tour so badly that he hired Fuentes. If that is the case, I'd agree that with or without his cooperation, a single violation is justified. But is that what really happened? I don't think we will know that for awhile.

OP was right about Ullrich.
OP was right about Basso.
Others are now admitting use of Fuentes.
OP will be right about the other 49 riders.
Dick Pound was right about Pro cycling.


Yet how many have blamed Dick Pound or accused him of being the second coming of the devil. The guys is the way he is because he knows a hell of a lot more than you or I about how unclean so many of these sports are. Maybe just maybe, people will finally realize he has the best interest of the sports in mind, and rather than supporting or backing these lying, cheating bastard athletes, we should support the guys trying to clean them up.

No doubt, Riis really pisses me off with his sanctimonious bull$hit. Mr. 60%, the sheet-white cadaver with the rosy little pink cheeks. As if all of this could've gone down on his team without knowing about it.



Well - if sanctimonious is the threshold, let throw Lance Armstrong in this too. Granted, OP has nothing to do with Lance, but at this point, can anyone (ANYONE) honestly doubt that Lance cheated. Or will you still hold out that he was able to beat all of these cheating bafoons with superior genetics and training?

They asked the Spanish goverment to wait until right before the Giro to bring out the new info. That way they would not give the rides time to respond. They could blanket say no to anyone that was on the list or even suspected as to being on the list....sort of a pick and choose as to who will be in your race. Nothing will hapen with it until after the Tour of Spain....:) I believe this is by design....

:)

Well - if sanctimonious is the threshold, let throw Lance Armstrong in this too. Granted, OP has nothing to do with Lance, but at this point, can anyone (ANYONE) honestly doubt that Lance cheated. Or will you still hold out that he was able to beat all of these cheating bafoons with superior genetics and training?

It has more to do with Lance's team....there is still no other team like it built around one guy....when there is you will have another Lance....

Well - if sanctimonious is the threshold, let throw Lance Armstrong in this too. Granted, OP has nothing to do with Lance, but at this point, can anyone (ANYONE) honestly doubt that Lance cheated. Or will you still hold out that he was able to beat all of these cheating bafoons with superior genetics and training?
At the absolute worst he was a doper beating other dopers AFTER beating cancer AND being smart enough to evade positive testing for seven years. At the end of the day he's still the champ.

Unfortunately, specific posts need to be refuted specifically but I will try to be brief for those that dislike point by point refutation.


In addition, a Spanish judge locked down the evidence in fall 2006, so the UCI was unable to perform any action based on OP until now. This assertion is overly simplistic and reveals ignorance of the proceedings and even of this thread. After the conclusion of the Spanish legal case many more documents were released to the various agencies, as cited in a previous post within this thread (HigherGround). Basso was cleared by the Italian authorities (CONI) prior to the Spanish judge's lock down of the evidence, however, the subsequently released documents convinced CONI to reverse that decision..


The answer is yes, because the presence of his blood there can be used as evidence that Basso attempted to dope, and even this is a violation (per WADA Code S.2.2).

If it was some other doctor who did, for example, testing on blood but did not have a lab littered with EPO and other PED's, Basso could likely fight it.
If Fuentes only helped athletes to dope then you may have a point, however, he is a real doctor that could be argued was doing real blood work. Basso's admission here may get him banned but again, I doubt staying in the sport is number one priority for him right now. Intending to dope my be against the WADA code but the vastly more important question is whether it is an Italian crime. Assuming that cycling is the end all and be all of this case is nonsense.


If you're talking about failing a test, you are correct -- at least, that's in line with WADA Code S.10.6.2. E.g. if you failed a test for Stage 10, they notify you, and later on they decided to test Stage 4 and you fail that one as well, it still only counts as one violation.

However, that is a significantly different situation than evidence provided by a criminal investigation that alleges doping activities that extends over multiple years. Also, McQuaid clearly stated that he was looking for a lifetime ban for Ullrich based on OP ( http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/aug06/aug28news - scroll down a bit). I may be wrong, but to my knowledge Ullrich has never been accused, let alone formally sanctioned and banned for 2 years, for a doping violation.
Research a little on Ullrich to fix your ignorance. He was banned for 6 months in 2002 for amphetamine use- a first infraction of the WADA code. While amphetamines are not routinely used as PEDs they are still prohibited and he violated the doping rules. A second infraction would incur a lifetime ban.


Again, it is possible (although unlikely) that Basso first started using Fuentes in mid 2006; e.g. he felt utterly wiped out after the Giro, and wanted to win Le Tour so badly that he hired Fuentes. If that is the case, I'd agree that with or without his cooperation, a single violation is justified. But is that what really happened? I don't think we will know that for awhile. It is irrelevant how much he doped prior to his bust. Again I'll site the Millar case in which he admitted to multiple violations of the rules and was caught with 2 empty EPO vials- which he claimed he used during two different events. He was still given a two year ban. Basso, and every other rider, should be held to the same standard as every other previously doping cyclist- regardless of the publicity of the case. However, I doubt very much that Basso will avoid punishment for working with Fuentes.

Can anyone say what legal punishment he is facing in Italy. If he will serve 5 years in Italian jail then a 2 year cycling ban is irrelevant.


Yet how many have blamed Dick Pound or accused him of being the second coming of the devil. The guys is the way he is because he knows a hell of a lot more than you or I about how unclean so many of these sports are. Maybe just maybe, people will finally realize he has the best interest of the sports in mind, and rather than supporting or backing these lying, cheating bastard athletes, we should support the guys trying to clean them up.
The correctness of Dick Pound does not excuse his behavior. In fact, if he was spouting off with knowledge rather than from ignorance then his behavior is more appalling as he makes a joke of the system by showing his distrust in the procedures. If he knew the truthfulness of his accusations then WADA would be better served by a tactful and responsible leader. His assertions of doping were a safe bet- is anyone really surprised his accusation were correct?


They asked the Spanish goverment [sic] to wait until right before the Giro to bring out the new info. That way they would not give the rides time to respond. They could blanket say no to anyone that was on the list or even suspected as to being on the list....sort of a pick and choose as to who will be in your race. Nothing will hapen [sic] with it until after the Tour of Spain....:) I believe this is by design....

:)
The fact that this post exists, humor or not, is a sad statement for the sport of cycling. The fact that is was meant as sarcasm shows that such manipulation of timing is not without some ironic merit. If such manipulation was completely impossible then such accusations could not be funny at all. I doubt very much that the timing was manipulated but it is sad that anyone has to acknowledge the possibility.

Yet how many have blamed Dick Pound or accused him of being the second coming of the devil....
Again, as someone who supports the anti-doping efforts: the problem with Pound is that he a) assumes everyone is guilty before all the evidence is in; b) shoots his mouth off; and c) fights with several people he should be working with (e.g. McQuaid). It's difficult to defend his behavior sometimes.

I don't think he's as bad as some folks do -- heck, at least he doesn't cave in -- but in the best interests of his goals, he does need to moderate his immediate assumption of guilt.

I think O' Grady in Velonews pretty much got it spot on regarding Basso's confession

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/12221.0.html

I was watching 'Overcoming' the other day while on the rollers and there was an interesting exchange between Riis and another man. He was talking about the alleged connection between his team and Chechini (sp). Riis said that he couldn't name names or he'd be ruined. It got me thinking, in '04 Basso was a very competitive third in the Tour. It's fair to say that most thought Lance was on something other than his bike. Riis has had experience on the dark side and sees that his star rider is lacking that last 10%. So he suggests to Basso some names of helpful docs and here we are. I'd love to see the DS's get in as much trouble as the riders are in.

Again, as someone who supports the anti-doping efforts: the problem with Pound is that he a) assumes everyone is guilty before all the evidence is in; b) shoots his mouth off; and c) fights with several people he should be working with (e.g. McQuaid). It's difficult to defend his behavior sometimes.

I don't think he's as bad as some folks do -- heck, at least he doesn't cave in -- but in the best interests of his goals, he does need to moderate his immediate assumption of guilt.

Wow - perfectly put. +1

... Brad

At the absolute worst he was a doper beating other dopers AFTER beating cancer AND being smart enough to evade positive testing for seven years. At the end of the day he's still the champ.

Sorry to pick on you...

After reading posts like this I have this image of a zombie with blanked out eyes walking around saying "Lance... Lance...Lance..."

Here's soemthing I don't understand. Basso says he's the one who came up with being called Birillo after his dog. If he wanted a codename so he couldn't be traced back to it, why not "rider 267354" i.e. some random number? Idiotic.

Also, according to cyclingnews.com, OP shows that Basso's almost certainly lying about not having used Fuentes' help.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/may07/may08news2

Here's soemthing I don't understand. Basso says he's the one who came up with being called Birillo after his dog. If he wanted a codename so he couldn't be traced back to it, why not "rider 267354" i.e. some random number? Idiotic.

Also, according to cyclingnews.com, OP shows that Basso's almost certainly lying about not having used Fuentes' help.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/may07/may08news2
Exactly. I think we have established (or the offenders have established) that they are not the brightest folks in the world.