Professional Cycling For the Fans - Cas Now Bans Ullrich For 2 Years

Unreal! Posted on Yahoosports.com. He's done until 2013 & they also take away his Tour De Suisse title. Maybe Armstrong is not too far away?

Armstrong is very far away. If CAS took this long to find Ullrich guilty, than I figure by 2030, they might finally be able to convict Armstrong of something. What a bunch of bumbling beaurocratic boobs these guys are.

LemondFan, I just hope your alive to see it, since it's all you live for....

LemondFan, I just hope your alive to see it, since it's all you live for....


:lol: seriously.....

:lol: seriously.....

I mean, how he makes the connection between this Ullrich decision and Armstrong is beyond me, but I'm sure the provocateur, LemondFan, will show up soon and enlighten us!

Can you imagine waiting until 2019 to get the final results of last weekend's Super Bowl? Welcome to the wonderful world of professional bicycle racing. :rolleyes:

Armstrong is very far away. If CAS took this long to find Ullrich guilty, than I figure by 2030, they might finally be able to convict Armstrong of something. What a bunch of bumbling beaurocratic boobs these guys are.

LemondFan, I just hope your alive to see it, since it's all you live for....

Not at all, Im just thinking that now that theyve banned: Contador & Ullrich, the"feather in their cap" so to speak, could be an even bigger name like: Armstrong /Hamilton / etc cant be too far off? They feel they can keep going for years & years I guess. I was simply commenting that I think CAS/WADA must have their own agendas?

Well, CAS/WADA really are beginning to ruin the sport they oversee.

They simply cannot do multiyear investigations that drag on and on forever and then pull titles away from riders who are long retired and that they earned 7 years ago. The fans are growing tired of it. As HigherGround said above, "Can you imagine waiting until 2019 to get the final results of last weekend's Super Bowl?". The answer is of course not! The cry would be long and loud should that ever happen.

I'm certainly not pro drug, but the system as it is now is ridiculous. Somehow, they have to streamline the process. They have to put a statute of limitations on it, a time limit of some sort. I'm not sure what the people who work at WADA and CAS did before this, but they have managed to create a full time, lucrative living through these bodies, just like Congress! And just like Congress, they get nothing done in a timely fashion. They are ruining lives through there ineptitude.

Can you imagine waiting until 2019 to get the final results of last weekend's Super Bowl? Welcome to the wonderful world of professional bicycle racing. :rolleyes:

I still have my hopes up, and the jury is not out yet on XLII either

Well, CAS/WADA really are beginning to ruin the sport they oversee.

They simply cannot do multiyear investigations that drag on and on forever and then pull titles away from riders who are long retired and that they earned 7 years ago. The fans are growing tired of it. As HigherGround said above, "Can you imagine waiting until 2019 to get the final results of last weekend's Super Bowl?". The answer is of course not! The cry would be long and loud should that ever happen.

I'm certainly not pro drug, but the system as it is now is ridiculous. Somehow, they have to streamline the process. They have to put a statute of limitations on it, a time limit of some sort. I'm not sure what the people who work at WADA and CAS did before this, but they have managed to create a full time, lucrative living through these bodies, just like Congress! And just like Congress, they get nothing done in a timely fashion. They are ruining lives through there ineptitude.

Well said!
This is completely ludicrous.
They may as well go back and pull Fausto Coppi's results, since they have an admission there.

Well, CAS/WADA really are beginning to ruin the sport they oversee.

They simply cannot do multiyear investigations that drag on and on forever and then pull titles away from riders who are long retired and that they earned 7 years ago. The fans are growing tired of it. As HigherGround said above, "Can you imagine waiting until 2019 to get the final results of last weekend's Super Bowl?". The answer is of course not! The cry would be long and loud should that ever happen.

I'm certainly not pro drug, but the system as it is now is ridiculous. Somehow, they have to streamline the process. They have to put a statute of limitations on it, a time limit of some sort. I'm not sure what the people who work at WADA and CAS did before this, but they have managed to create a full time, lucrative living through these bodies, just like Congress! And just like Congress, they get nothing done in a timely fashion. They are ruining lives through there ineptitude.

Good points. It doesnt seem too far out now, to say that these guys couldve helped the currenr climate, by simply saying "Yes I did it, and heres why". Probably wouldve made alot of this mess easier? But, when all you do is: deny deny deny, what do you expect these agencies to do? Maybe a sol is a great idea. I mean lets not excuse any of these guys for their involvement in where it is today? They too should get some of the blame. Unfortunately, thats not happening. Doesnt matter why they did it, theyre still cheaters. They used something to gain an unfair advantage over their peers, regardless of whether "at the time evwryone was doing it too", thats an excuse & doesnt make it right. Its still cheaating. How can you or I or folks here, respect someone whos cheated to gain success? I cant.

Doping wasnt banned when guys like: Merckx/ Anquetil & the like were around. Now it is. People keep saying they want the sport to be clean, then complain when agencies try doing that. You cant have it both ways imo. Cant excuse some for doing it, then trash others for doing it, then get upset, when folks are trying to bust cheaters.

Not at all, Im just thinking that now that theyve banned: Contador & Ullrich, the"feather in their cap" so to speak, could be an even bigger name like: Armstrong /Hamilton / etc cant be too far off? They feel they can keep going for years & years I guess. I was simply commenting that I think CAS/WADA must have their own agendas?

Looking at it from a different perspective, maybe it's because they couldn't get Armstrong that they've gone ahead with easier (relative to Armstrong) cases. Think about it: they can ding Contador for minute quantities of a banned substance without definitively knowing whether it was intentional cheating by him or accidental contamination of something else he ingested. But they don't have enough to even bring a case against Armstrong. (FYI: Not having the evidence for a case against Armstrong is not the same as saying whether or not Armstrong doped.)

Good points. It doesnt seem too far out now, to say that these guys couldve helped the currenr climate, by simply saying "Yes I did it, and heres why". Probably wouldve made alot of this mess easier? But, when all you do is: deny deny deny, what do you expect these agencies to do? Maybe a sol is a great idea. I mean lets not excuse any of these guys for their involvement in where it is today? They too should get some of the blame. Unfortunately, thats not happening. Doesnt matter why they did it, theyre still cheaters. They used something to gain an unfair advantage over their peers, regardless of whether "at the time evwryone was doing it too", thats an excuse & doesnt make it right. Its still cheaating. How can you or I or folks here, respect someone whos cheated to gain success? I cant.

Doping wasnt banned when guys like: Merckx/ Anquetil & the like were around. Now it is. People keep saying they want the sport to be clean, then complain when agencies try doing that. You cant have it both ways imo. Cant excuse some for doing it, then trash others for doing it, then get upset, when folks are trying to bust cheaters.

Really, so just what did happen in hte 1969 Giro then? And does this mean that Anquetil now broke the Hour record twice?

Really, so just what did happen in hte 1969 Giro then? And does this mean that Anquetil now broke the Hour record twice?

Not sure, have any proof that doping was banned back then? Feel free to post any. If he cheated, & its known that he cheated, then he's broken no record(s), nor has 5 tdf titles in my opinion. Thats been my stance since the beginning. People here claim Merckx has said he doped? Then hes a cheater. Doesnt matter when, or who it was, if you doped & won & its found out later that you have? Then you're not only a cheater, but should have EVERY title stripped from you, why? If youve cheated even once, how do we know you didnt for all?

PS, before anyone says it, yes, even if its Lemond(which Im still waiting for any credible proof he did, but we all know that doesnt exist).

They may as well go back and pull Fausto Coppi's results, since they have an admission there.

Yes they should, why? If theres an admission of doping, then what does that mean: HE CHEATED. Doesnt matter when it happened & by who, he still cheated. Making excuses for him due to when it was, doesnt change that fact, its as I said: an excuse & folks way to have it both ways, whenever talk of cleaning up the sport arises.

Giacomo, these agencies could very well go back if they wanted to & strip titles from guys, no matter who/ when it was. Thats trying to have it both ways. You punish a few guys for it whove denied it(& gotten caught) & yet guys whove admitted to it, you allow them to walk, or keep their legacies intact, so you can pick & choose who you want/ dont want punished? Talk about hypocrisy. My opinion is, you start stripping guys from the past of their accomplishments, regardless of who it is? Watch how "suddenly" the sport becomes Alot cleaner. Or, you test EVERY SINGLE RIDER, before every stage & they cant ride til their test results are back. I bet half the field would be banned?

Not sure, have any proof that doping was banned back then? Feel free to post any. If he cheated, & its known that he cheated, then he's broken no record(s), nor has 5 tdf titles in my opinion. Thats been my stance since the beginning. People here claim Merckx has said he doped? Then hes a cheater. Doesnt matter when, or who it was, if you doped & won & its found out later that you have? Then you're not only a cheater, but should have EVERY title stripped from you, why? If youve cheated even once, how do we know you didnt for all?

PS, before anyone says it, yes, even if its Lemond(which Im still waiting for any credible proof he did, but we all know that doesnt exist).

God, you are ignorant. Merckx was disqualified while leading 1969 Giro because of a positive doping test in the Giro. Anquetil brok the hour record for a second time several years after the first time he broke it, but was so upset about the piss poor treatment he recieved while having to piss into a bottle with no concern for modesty or dignity that he stormed off.

EDIT:

Here is a link to a rather incomplete lsit regarding doping.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling

And here is the link specifically for Anquetil and the Hour record. It is highly doubtful that he did in fact dope as it was well known that any serious attempt at the Hour record was an hour in hell.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Anquetil


In 1967, 11 years later, Anquetil again broke the hour record, with 47.493 km, but the record was disallowed because he refused to take the newly-introduced post-race doping test.[8] He objected to what he saw as the indignity of having to urinate in a tent in front of a crowded velodrome and said he would take the test later at his hotel. The international judge ruled against the idea and a scuffle ensued that involved Anquetil's manager, Raphaël Géminiani. Cycling reported:[9]

hopefully there is a statute of limitations on this sort of nonsense. Before sometime in the '70s, the were taking stimulants which basically did very little for you. That's what merckx was caught using

God, you are ignorant. Merckx was disqualified while leading 1969 Giro because of a positive doping test in the Giro. Anquetil brok the hour record for a second time several years after the first time he broke it, but was so upset about the piss poor treatment he recieved while having to piss into a bottle with no concern for modesty or dignity that he stormed off.

EDIT:

Here is a link to a rather incomplete lsit regarding doping.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling

And, "god" youve just contradicted yourself here. First you highlight a part, then ask me if I know that Anquetil apparently was doping(which the article never says he did), then you turn around and claim he wasnt? which is it? go back up and re-read what you wrote(2 posts up from this), you say "I highly doubt it", so you've contradicted yourself, as YOU yourself dont know if he did? Read the article...cites NOTHING on any drugs being banned, or that he took drugs right? all it says is, he refused to take the test, and he states he wouldve taken the test back at his hotel.

As for Merckx, then he should get EVERY title stripped from him, why? if he did it in one race, then how do we know he didnt in every race?

Also, then many folks(not just myself) are wrong about there being no banning of drugs during that time? I've seen several people claim it wasnt illegal @ the time, or they werent testing back then.

Besides, quoting Wikipedia isnt very credible to yourt arguement

hopefully there is a statute of limitations on this sort of nonsense. Before sometime in the '70s, the were taking stimulants which basically did very little for you. That's what merckx was caught using

Stimulants that did very little for you? You're aware that the methamphetamines of today were popularized for military use during WWII, and spread into sporting use shortly thereafter. The difficulty was that just enough might win you the race, but too much would wreck you for days or weeks - or kill you, in Simpson's case. Consider the "delicate health" of some of the champions of those days...

Fignon is the most recent confessional I'm aware of - he talks about his experience with them in his autobiography.

Only in Lemondfanforeve's mind is the cycling "feather in the cap" not the top GC rider currently in cycling, but a guy who is retired and hasn't won anything of significance in almost six years.

Anyone else shaking their head about the complete lack of knowledge of the history of cycling from a guy who is always touting a rider from the 80's?

Only in Lemondfanforeve's mind is the cycling "feather in the cap" not the top GC rider currently in cycling, but a guy who is retired and hasn't won anything of significance in almost six years.

Anyone else shaking their head about the complete lack of knowledge of the history of cycling from a guy who is always touting a rider from the 80's?

It might be worse than you imagine. The same information about Merckx and others was brought up to him more than once in the last year and he already forgot it.

I would agree that investigations need to go on until test results start coming back clean ALWAYS. Just one rider getting caught is enough to whip up the bloodhounds (forgive the pun) into a frenzy.

As for continuing to look for ways to prosecute Armstrong, they likely have some information on him but obviously not enough to prosecute. The guy won 7 titles; if he did cheat, that would be an enormous coup de grace for the CAS or other. You also have these guys off Wallstreet stealing from the shareholders and walking away with 500+ million dollar fortunes (amounts we KNOW about), and no one prosecutes them.

I don't know; part of me likes to see justice where it can be found. Apparently he (LA) did fail a test in 1999 or something like that, so that raised suspicion. Time will tell. If the riders simply didn't dope, these organizations would disappear into nothingness and we could watch fair races again.

...but anyway, thinking about Ullrich, regardless of the ruling he was always one to make a great race. I didn't see the Tour he won, but 2003 is my all-time favorite - the closest thing to a bare-knuckles lay-it-all-on the-line Tour to the bitter end. It wasn't Armstrong that made it so riveting, but the challenge from Ullrich and the others that pushed him to one of his best performances. Most of his other tour wins were snooze-fests.

I think about that rivalry when I ride myself - what was Armstrong without Ullrich or his rivals? Not especially great or interesting. Who wants to see a guy win without really trying hard? So the guy in second place can make the race as much as the guy who wins, and I enjoy cycling and racing more that way - if you can't win, you can at least make sure the guys in front of you are busting their asses and digging deep to stay up there.

enjoy your new career jan and don't look back at the bloodhounds. it was always more exciting when you were lining up at the start. peace and best wishes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D5Sa2Yq-2g

Please play the above video while you read my comment below. It just comes out better.

I have a feeling that if The Cirque du Soleil are paying attention to news in the cycling world, there will be a major talent recruiting effort targetted at the CAS given the number of clowns that work there. This should not have taken 5 years to resolve.

Athletes should be clean, of course. But these types of protracted bans are so bad for the sport and the system the way it is now is so broken we'd be better off letting them all dope. Cycling needs a commissioner like in the major American sports. They may not always get it right, but at least the fans know there is someone in charge who is not afraid of being decisive when issues come up.

"All that hate's gonna burn you up kid!"
"It keeps me warm."

:rolleyes:

And, "god" youve just contradicted yourself here. First you highlight a part, then ask me if I know that Anquetil apparently was doping(which the article never says he did), then you turn around and claim he wasnt? which is it? go back up and re-read what you wrote(2 posts up from this), you say "I highly doubt it", so you've contradicted yourself, as YOU yourself dont know if he did? Read the article...cites NOTHING on any drugs being banned, or that he took drugs right? all it says is, he refused to take the test, and he states he wouldve taken the test back at his hotel.

As for Merckx, then he should get EVERY title stripped from him, why? if he did it in one race, then how do we know he didnt in every race?

Also, then many folks(not just myself) are wrong about there being no banning of drugs during that time? I've seen several people claim it wasnt illegal @ the time, or they werent testing back then.

Besides, quoting Wikipedia isnt very credible to yourt arguement

Maybe you should consider educating yourself at least a small amount before posting.

dop·ing (dhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/omacr.gifhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/prime.gifphttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ibreve.gifng)
n. The use of a drug or blood product to improve athletic performance.

The US Federation did not ban blood tranfusions until 1985. However, other forms of doping were banned by the US Federation & UCI long before that. Doping doesn't mean just blood doping. And blood doping doesn't refer to only transfusions.

And, "god" youve just contradicted yourself here. First you highlight a part, then ask me if I know that Anquetil apparently was doping(which the article never says he did), then you turn around and claim he wasnt? which is it? go back up and re-read what you wrote(2 posts up from this), you say "I highly doubt it", so you've contradicted yourself, as YOU yourself dont know if he did? Read the article...cites NOTHING on any drugs being banned, or that he took drugs right? all it says is, he refused to take the test, and he states he wouldve taken the test back at his hotel.

As for Merckx, then he should get EVERY title stripped from him, why? if he did it in one race, then how do we know he didnt in every race?

Also, then many folks(not just myself) are wrong about there being no banning of drugs during that time? I've seen several people claim it wasnt illegal @ the time, or they werent testing back then.

Besides, quoting Wikipedia isnt very credible to yourt arguement

No you have a reading comprehension problem.

You questioned if they had anti doping regulations back then. I first gave 2 very famous (at least among cycling fans other than 99ers and the like) incidents that clearly show they did have doping regulations. I then followed it up with links.

I never said Anquetil did not dope. Unlike riders today and most riders of his time Anquetil was honest. He never claimed to not dope.

I said is was very doubtful that he would dope for his final attempt at the Hour record, 11 years after his previous record setting performance. He knew he would be tested and he knew very well that a serious attempt at the Hour record is close to an hour in hell.

It is very well known that Anquetil was very open about doping. This also is very well known. Are yuo familiar with anything before 1986?

Only in Lemondfanforeve's mind is the cycling "feather in the cap" not the top GC rider currently in cycling, but a guy who is retired and hasn't won anything of significance in almost six years.

Anyone else shaking their head about the complete lack of knowledge of the history of cycling from a guy who is always touting a rider from the 80's?

Yup there are others. He is making my life so much harder. I'd jsut about gotten to the point where I can completely seperate my views of Armstrong from my views of his ignorent fanboys, now I have to accomplish hte same for Lemond.

I think there is a contest for ineptitude between the NCAA and CAS. After the "relatively" prompt ruling on Contador, the CAS was in danger of falling behind, what with the multi-year delay in the Reggie Bush dealings at USC that had established the NCAA as the supremely incompetent body. CAS needed something absolutely ridiculous to get back in the game, and this ruling against Ullrich is just the thing to put them back into the pole position.

There really does need to be some sort of streamlined procedure to deal with these things.

...

There really does need to be some sort of streamlined procedure to deal with these things.

I think one of the great problems they have is the complete lack of any sense of proportion to the rulings, and the complete lack of flexibility to their application.

One way or another, over and over, "its not justice, its just the law". Minor procedural stuff gets a two year ban. Blatant doping gets a two year ban. Someone admits it and apologizes and gets two years. Someone fights it and mf's the whole thing to the end, and gets two years. Someone mixes up the schedule and gets two years. Everyone is under investigation (remember The List - http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ucis-suspicious-list-leaked-from-2010-tour-de-france ), but there is little cooperation. It is inherently difficult to deliver unjust rulings, or to simply throw up your hands and say you have to, because that's just the rules.

If anything is looking up, its that there may be an autologous doping test at last, which would be a step up from the good but trickable biological passport system currently used...but I'd definitely agree that things need fixed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D5Sa2Yq-2g

Please play the above video while you read my comment below. It just comes out better.

I have a feeling that if The Cirque du Soleil are paying attention to news in the cycling world, there will be a major talent recruiting effort targetted at the CAS given the number of clowns that work there. This should not have taken 5 years to resolve.

:lol: Adding the video was a nice touch. Chapeau! :beer:

Maybe you should consider educating yourself at least a small amount before posting.

dop·ing (dhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/omacr.gifhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/prime.gifphttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/ibreve.gifng)
n. The use of a drug or blood product to improve athletic performance.

The US Federation did not ban blood tranfusions until 1985. However, other forms of doping were banned by the US Federation & UCI long before that. Doping doesn't mean just blood doping. And blood doping doesn't refer to only transfusions.

I knew all that, but if "other forms of doping were banned before transfusions" wouldnt that mean that that the governing bodies have seemed to "overlook" others who have doped and/ Or admitted to such? In other words, you have Anquetil/Merckx & others admitting to doping, & they seem to be "overlooked" & yet you have riders such as: Contador/Ullrich/Landis/ etc, who, some have/havent admitted to doping & theyre getting banned & titles taken away. Why not just go back & look over those guys too, since theyve admitted it& take ti tkes away from them too? They look bad playing favorites. Imo, the whole " doping investigation thing is pretty much bull**** anyways. My stance has always been, if youve doped, just admit it, why let it spiral out of control & allow it to get to places like this, where theres so much pro/con going on?

Also, I know im not alone in not knowing that there wasnt testing goimg on back then. Many here didnt either, as ive seen th "they didnt test for/ban doping back then" stated here on several ocassions.

No you have a reading comprehension problem.

You questioned if they had anti doping regulations back then. I first gave 2 very famous (at least among cycling fans other than 99ers and the like) incidents that clearly show they did have doping regulations. I then followed it up with links.

I never said Anquetil did not dope. Unlike riders today and most riders of his time Anquetil was honest. He never claimed to not dope.

I said is was very doubtful that he would dope for his final attempt at the Hour record, 11 years after his previous record setting performance. He knew he would be tested and he knew very well that a serious attempt at the Hour record is close to an hour in hell.

It is very well known that Anquetil was very open about doping. This also is very well known. Are yuo familiar with anything before 1986?

Yes I am. You first say, you didnt believe he did dope, but then it appears he did? So your " I dont believe he did" arguement was shot almost immediately. If you didnt know yourself, why ask me? If you did know, then why say "i dont think he did"when you already knew he did? Makes no sense. I read the links/articles fine, again, neither really comes out & says he did, we are to assume he did.

Yup there are others. He is making my life so much harder. I'd jsut about gotten to the point where I can completely seperate my views of Armstrong from my views of his ignorent fanboys, now I have to accomplish hte same for Lemond.

As I/ we do from all the ignorant Lance fanboys. I doubt anyone is "making your life harder" then it already apparently is? Unless you actually sit around thinking about stuff like this all day? I sure dont. Dont beat yourself up over it, or think too hard about it, youll make yourself sick. We agree to disagree, sadly some folks cant seem to handle that.

Doping of some sort has been going on in this sport for more than a century now. It is probably more engrained in cycling than any other sport I could think of. There were enough deaths back in the day from the usage of stimulants and even poisons. It seems that riders have been looking for some kind of edge since almost the first TDF.

In the C&V forum, there was a thread about riders carrying small flasks of brandy back in the 40-60's for a pick-me-up. Professional riders smoked cigarettes, believing it opened up your lungs. The rules even stated that a maximum of only 2 litres of water were allowed during a stage! Drug usage was so open and accepted in the 30's that the TDF rule book stated that the tour organisers would not provide the drugs. Coppi admitted to amphetimine use and said everyone used them.

So I guess my point is, what do you do to a sport where drugs are so engrained in the history? Are the tours just to difficult to face without them? Or can modern nutrition, training and excercise now make drug use unecessary? I'm not really sure how they should proceed or if they could ever wipe out usage completely...

As I/ we do from all the ignorant Lance fanboys. I doubt anyone is "making your life harder" then it already apparently is? Unless you actually sit around thinking about stuff like this all day? I sure dont. Dont beat yourself up over it, or think too hard about it, youll make yourself sick. We agree to disagree, sadly some folks cant seem to handle that.
I bet if one were to record your farts and play them back at a slow speed, they'd hear "Lance Armstrong is a doping cheater!"

Let. It. Go.

Get. A. Life.

great. now the germs have banned jan from cyclosportives. knew they were little, petty and vindictive but really? cyclosportives? was the firing squad on vacation?