Professional Cycling For the Fans - Good Article on Simeoni

There's a good article on Simeoni, his doping admissions, and the whole TdF situation on The Daily Peloton...

http://www.dailypeloton.com/displayarticle.asp?pk=6762

One look at the palmares listed and it is no contest. Simeoni is a neophyte in comparison.

Sounds like a severe case of jealosy to me.....

One look at the palmares listed and it is no contest. Simeoni is a neophyte in comparison.

Sounds like a severe case of jealosy to me.....

Unfortunately, you appear to have missed the point of the article. It's a nice piece on Simeoni, for those who know nothing about the guy. The palmares? Who cares? LA has more impressive palmares than just about everyone! Does this mean that everyone who accuses a doctor of providing him with EPO is jealous of LA? Please explain this to me, because I'm not understanding your logic.

OK....

Is the article correct in asserting that a USPS rider spit on Simeoni after the chasedown on the final stage? Who was it??

Wait so this guy has admitted to doping, tried to implicate his coach with little more than circumstantial evidence, and now wants to sue Armstrong for calling him a liar?

wow.

Is the article correct in asserting that a USPS rider spit on Simeoni after the chasedown on the final stage? Who was it??

I could be wrong, but I thought I saw Eki toss one up to Simeoni as Simeoni tried one of his "attacks" on the final, and largely ceremonial, day of racing. Again, I could be wrong. Anyone else see this???

There is a thread floating around that says Eki did a farmers blow, I didn't realize that it was towards simeoni..LOL! things are getting ugly in the peloton!

Wait so this guy has admitted to doping, tried to implicate his coach with little more than circumstantial evidence, and now wants to sue Armstrong for calling him a liar?

wow.


my thinking exactly Jeff.
And The doctor was implicated because in 1994 he supported the use of EPO in a controlled manner.

Good Article on Simeoni.
Unfortunately everyone wants to see him as the bad guy, and Lance as
the good guy. Sorry, There is no black and white here (at least IMHO).
I respect Simeoni for his standing up and saying that doping exists,
and his coping to his own doping.
I can't comment on the original Lance statement, I haven't read Le Monde
I'm not sure if I agree with the court case for libel (actually is it defamation
of character?).
It only gets more bizarre after this.
Lance chases down simeoni (who repeatedly stated he wanted to break to
make a statement, which from above article we can see he has done before).
Lance in a move seen as petty, mean etc. shut it down.
Eki aledgedly spits (blows snot?) on Simeoni (Eki is really out of line here if true).
Now the italian court wants to haul Lance in for sporting fraud, Violence and
intimidating a witness.
Someone help me here, coz I don't see any violence, Lance did say he'd destroy
Simeoni (in court?) but violence? again I don't see fraud (unless LA is proven to
have been doping) Intimidation? yeah in the peloton, not anywhere else.

So, here's my final take on this:
Simeoni is a whiner, Lance is a bully and the Italian prosecutor who
is gonna charge lance is an http://www.serotta.com/forum/images/smilies/mad2.gif

Marty

Marty,

2 things: First how did you make that icon? That's classic. If you want to keep it secret PM me, I pledge my recently acquired Motobecane that I'll keep silent.

Second, how far do you think this court case against LA will go? I don't think very. I've heard LA is friends with one of the Giro organizers. LA has indicated a willingness to ride the Giro and the Giro desperately wants the man who has owned the TdF so I'm thinking pressure on prosecutor to shut up as LA won't come if he feels slighted or that he's going to get subpoenaed.

Rereading this it does all sound more than a bit soap-operaish doesn't it?

:beer:

This whole thing has gone so far into the realm of absurdity that I'm starting to suspect it was orchestrated by the late Andy Kaufman. I agree with what lotek has said.

Walter,

Its a special Test Icon, there are a few others that we are thinking about!
The other one I really like is:
http://www.serotta.com/forum/images/smilies/bike.gif
Right now I'm just importing them.
I'm hoping the case against lance (by the italian court, not Simeoni) doesn't go
anywhere. I think it would be hard to prove at best.
But then look at what the Italian Court did to Pantani
makes you think, doesn't it?

It's all pretty pathetic. Not too much honorable happening with any of these guys in this situation.

As for Ferrari, some of his explanations for things border on bizarre. Donating blood in the winter to lower your iron because it's too high? What?

Simeoni seems a little suspect as well. But I'm not sure that I see what his motivation would be to bring down Ferrari if there weren't some truth to it all.

Armstrong. . . well, I tell you, I'm a huge fan of his. I'm a little mixed up on how to feel about his behavior with Simeoni at the Tour. As a great champion he probably should have risen above it all and let Simeoni go. However, you need to understand that this kind of personal vendetta crap happens every day in the peloton, both in domestic US racing and in Europe. This one just happened to involve the Maillot Jaune, so everyone noticed it and discussed it.

I don't think the donate blood decrease Iron is too out of whack. I
bet that what is replaced by the body does have lower iron content etc.
One has to remember that alot of medical practice that we (the U.S) think is
bizarre, or antiquated is common practice in Europe and elsewhere.
We (the US) don't have a monopoly on medical treatments.

Marty

Test2

http://www.serotta.com/forum/images/smilies/mad2.gif


COOL!!!!

I owe you Marty.

:beer:

I don't think the donate blood decrease Iron is too out of whack. I
bet that what is replaced by the body does have lower iron content etc.
One has to remember that alot of medical practice that we (the U.S) think is
bizarre, or antiquated is common practice in Europe and elsewhere.
We (the US) don't have a monopoly on medical treatments.

Marty

You can lower your iron with your diet.

You can lower your iron with your diet.

You can control how much iron you ingest through diet.

Your body will not remove the iron from your system by itself though. The only way to reduce your level of iron is by loosing blood. That is one of the major reasons that men and women have different vitamins - women loose iron during menstruation so they need to include it in their vitamins. Men don't bleed regularly so we don't need to ingest it.

Men don't bleed regularly so we don't need to ingest it.

Years ago, I remember reading that the dead red blood cells are what makes your s**t brown. So I imagine that everyone (men and women) is constantly dumping old blood and making new.

So, here's my final take on this:
Simeoni is a whiner, Lance is a bully and the Italian prosecutor who
is gonna charge lance is an http://www.serotta.com/forum/images/smilies/mad2.gif

Marty

Nice Summary. My take, taken from another thread, is:

When LA called Simeoni a liar, they were off the race course, so Simeoni can fairly respond off the race course. None of us know for sure whether Simeoni was telling the truth. If Simeoni wants to go to court to argue his honesty, let the chips fall where they may.

LA's move against Simeoni in the TdF did taint the win a little, but it also falls in the long tradition of athletes settling scores in competition. And the whining of Italian fans falls in the long tradition of, well, whining by fans of all sports.

Daily Commute state: "...If Simeoni wants to go to court to argue his honesty, let the chips fall where they may...."

At least under US/British defamationi laws, Simeoni needn't prove his honesty nor even his statements to be honest. Lance is alledged to have made the remarks-Simeoni needs to prove Lance made them. Lance needs prove that Simeoni lied/or can rebut allegations that he made those remarks. Simeoni CAN rebut Lance's evidence on the accuracy of Simeoni statements, but ultimately Lance needs prove that Simeoni was lying to prevail. Simeoni needs prove how much defamatory remarks damaged his reputation to compute damages. I presume the burden of proof on the accuracy of the defamatory remarks remains with the person making the allegations rather than the plaintiff, else Simeoni would have selected a differing legal forum to file his suit.

Hmmm...it's been a while, but I'll dust off the law school cob webs...
In the US, the burden of proof in a civil trial is on the Plaintiff, and the standard is "preponderance of the evidence"..so just over 50% will do. Simeoni is the plaintiff here as he is suing Armstrong for slander (Lance calling Simeoni a liar). So Simeoni has to prove that Lance called him this with the intent to injure his reputation. Lance, on the other hand can try to show either (1) Simeoni IS a liar.. (truth is a defense), (2) there was not intent to injure reputation.

With (1) burden of proof would be on Lance...with (2) burden would still be on Simeoni.

I think that's how it would work in the US...not sure about other countries. If I'm off base in my legal analysis, you'll know why I dropped out of practicing law.

Daily Commute state: "...If Simeoni wants to go to court to argue his honesty, let the chips fall where they may...."

At least under US/British defamationi laws, Simeoni needn't prove his honesty nor even his statements to be honest. Lance is alledged to have made the remarks-Simeoni needs to prove Lance made them. Lance needs prove that Simeoni lied/or can rebut allegations that he made those remarks. Simeoni CAN rebut Lance's evidence on the accuracy of Simeoni statements, but ultimately Lance needs prove that Simeoni was lying to prevail. Simeoni needs prove how much defamatory remarks damaged his reputation to compute damages. I presume the burden of proof on the accuracy of the defamatory remarks remains with the person making the allegations rather than the plaintiff, else Simeoni would have selected a differing legal forum to file his suit.

I don't know who has the burden of proof under Italian law. But that shouldn't matter. As Lance said himself, when you make a serious allegation (like calling someone a liar), you'd better be able to back it up.

Lance should back up his allegation with facts. If he can, he's done cycling a service. If he can't, he's just a bully.

You can control how much iron you ingest through diet.

Your body will not remove the iron from your system by itself though. The only way to reduce your level of iron is by loosing blood. That is one of the major reasons that men and women have different vitamins - women loose iron during menstruation so they need to include it in their vitamins. Men don't bleed regularly so we don't need to ingest it.

You lose iron when you sweat, actually. That's where some folks develop exercise induced anemia. So the idea that their iron levels suddenly spike when they increase their exercise during the season is counterintuitive.

If we didn't (men that is) lose iron other than bleeding, we'd have to never eat anything with iron it, because when your iron content reaches a certain level it becomes toxic.

Walter,

Its a special Test Icon, there are a few others that we are thinking about!
The other one I really like is:
http://www.serotta.com/forum/images/smilies/bike.gif
Right now I'm just importing them.

OT,
but you should import this one too :p
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/images/smilies/ttiwwp.gif

Hmmm...it's been a while, but I'll dust off the law school cob webs...
In the US, the burden of proof in a civil trial is on the Plaintiff, and the standard is "preponderance of the evidence"..so just over 50% will do. Simeoni is the plaintiff here as he is suing Armstrong for slander (Lance calling Simeoni a liar). So Simeoni has to prove that Lance called him this with the intent to injure his reputation. Lance, on the other hand can try to show either (1) Simeoni IS a liar.. (truth is a defense), (2) there was not intent to injure reputation.

With (1) burden of proof would be on Lance...with (2) burden would still be on Simeoni.

I think that's how it would work in the US...not sure about other countries. If I'm off base in my legal analysis, you'll know why I dropped out of practicing law.

Likewise, tort is not my specialty-having worked 13 years as an engineer before entering law school-I naturally went toward patent law. My tort cobwebs from law school/bar exams are under a decade old and but for the omission of the reckless disregard of truth as an alternate malice element I concur with your US analysis.

The malice element is present in public persons with the burden of proof on the plaintiff per NYTimes vs. Sullivan. Under US defamation laws, Simeoni would probably qualify as a public person under at least a Gertz public person threshold. The malice standard didn’t exist under traditional common law, but came about as a Supreme Court balance of defamation vs. the publics interest in free debate under our first amendment to the Constitution. Given the derivation, I suspect the malice standard might be unique to the US, although it is possible the Court adapted it from other countries without expressly citing foreign law as a practical implementation of our first amendment objects.

Malice is not limited to intent to injure the other party-it also includes a reckless disregard of the truth- i.e., didn’t attempt to corroborate the validity of the assertion.

If a malice element exists under Italian law it doesn’t appear stage 18 helped Lance’s case-even though it occurred after the alleged defamation.

It seems Lance now has an even bigger problem with the Italian prosecutors because (excuse me if my English isn't that good) they consider his actions during the final Tour de France stages as being "intimidation of a witness".

It seems Lance now has an even bigger problem with the Italian prosecutors because (excuse me if my English isn't that good) they consider his actions during the final Tour de France stages as being "intimidation of a witness".

He intimidated everyone in the field this year! :)

He intimidated everyone in the field this year! :)
...yes, but not everybody was intimidated in the way Simeoni was dealt with and the others are no witness in an investigation by Italian prosecutors.

Lance had some comments about this in last nights LA Interview on OLN.
He claims he did not call Simeoni a "liar". He did say that Simeoni was not telling the truth in regards to his claims that "Everyone BUT him is on drugs". Makes sense to me.
Also makes sense as to why the whole peleton might be irritated at this guy.

Also makes sense as to why the whole peleton might be irritated at this guy.
IS the whole peloton irritated at this guy???

I doubt it's everyone. But Lance seems convinced that there was a LOT of animosity directed towards him (simeoni) from many of the other riders.

Forgive my ignorance, but I still don't understand why it was such a big deal that Lance ran down his breakaway.

Forgive my ignorance, but I still don't understand why it was such a big deal that Lance ran down his breakaway.

I'm no expert, but I believe its a big deal because it was purely vindictive. The guy was no threat to Lance's position, and yet he targeted him specifically. In other words, the REASON he chased him down is because he didn't like him. After he caught him, he essentially said to other riders, I don't care if you break, but if this guy goes with you, we're going to chase you down. So its fine if other riders that are no threat to him go, but not this guy.

I still don't think that amounts to intimidating a witness, but it does leave a bit of a sour taste in my mouth. I just don't think its very sporting to attack a guy who is no threat to you just because you don't want to see him win anything. Again, I think Lance is free to do what he wants, but it would have been more in character (at least the character he wants portraied) if he had just left him alone.

Thanks. Now I understand.

Lance has never been the "shy guy", if he doesn't like you or something he'll let his opinion be known.

If Simeoni really does act that high and mighty about being clean, insinuating that he's the only clean cyclist in the pack, then I have to give Lance credit for doing what he did. I've never read any full/trustworthy quotes from the guy, so I have no idea if that's really his attitude or not, I did see his "walking the bike" across the line spectacle and it was more than a little over the top.

However if Simeoni isn't saying the above then I think Lance was being a bit of a bully.

Andrew