Walter

It's the adding of the username I'm quoting that I can't get.

Walter

A test

That'll work, thanks.

hollow

Well, Simeoni is a small player who has sued Lance for libel, whether it is a valid charge or not. I know that if I was Lance and someone had sued me for libel, I would probably be pretty unhappy with them.

Smoothie104

Simeoni testified in court against Dr. Ferrari, saying Ferrari taught him how to dope and not get caught.

Lance called him a "liar" in a newspaper article.

Why Lance is defending Ferrari is beyond me. There are Dozens of former pros who have talked about getting "medically prepared" by Ferrari, he is the most notorious of them all. Even guys from the U.S. peleton have go to Italy for "studies" before big events.

There are many who feel that simeoni is singing, and needs to be silenced.

TXCiclista

At the risk of being flamed as an idiot...
Am I to understand that Lance chased Simeoni down, denied him the stage win, and when Simeoni dropped back, the peloton ostracized him because Sim had alleged that there was rampant doping in the peloton? Hmmmm. IF I have this correctly, I can see two sides:

(1) Lance was pissed because he doesn't dope and doesn't appreciate the allegations. If someone accused me of something similar, I'd do everything I could to cut them out of any victory in an event in which I competed, even if it meant working doubly hard and maybe losing a bit myself. I think most of you would do the same ( I know, sweeping allegation)... Just think what you would do if your nextdoor neighbor called the police on you for stealing cable when it was really a few people further down the block and he just assumed you did it too. I'd be pretty hot, espcially if a news crew was there filming the cops showing up at my door...

(2) No one likes a snitch. Though we may need them, it's a tough road. If I were in the peloton and Simeoni made a blanket statement that could possibly include me, I'd shun him whether I doped or not (more so if I didn't than if I did).

So, DO I have it correctly? Is Simeoni's allegation of doping what led to all this? I think if you're gonna be a whistle-blower, you need some proof. Just "seeing" someone do it doesn't really count (at least not in court) and assuming really doesn't cut it. I dunno. Am I just completely off base here? Does Simeoni maybe have more proof or is he just swinging a cat over his head assuming he'll hit a doper? How do we know he doesn't dope? If it's so rampant...

PS This look would scare the crap out of me...

Walter

The good Dr. is on record saying "EPO is no more dangerous than orange juice." W/o implying or insinuating that LA dopes I'm still a bit uncomfortable that LA did this to, at least in part, defend Ferrari.

No one does like a snitch and Simeoni is paying the price for that but when it comes to Ferrari, he's not the only one singing.

BTW I'm drinking some OJ right now getting ready to go to the gym, think it'll help my workout?

Murrays

From the coverage this morning, it sounds like Simeoni has been saying unflattering things about the other Italian cyclists for most of the Tour.

The coverage seemed to show the rest of the peloton smiling at Lance's actions. I think Lance made some more friends and annoyed only one guy.

-murray

Roostalee

Gotta admit, the drama of all of it is very interesting. And the politics therein can be incredibly complex. So many Americans dismiss cycling as a silly race where men in tights just have a free-for-all for a few hours and someone wins. It's much more complicated than that, and in this case, if Lance was motivated by his disdain, and I think he was, then the absolute value of his actions is....entertaining! Yes, I said it. Almost as good as Shakespeare, sans all the murdering. And they said this stage would be totally dull.

Let's be real here, not a single person on this forum really knows if Lance or Sim are telling the truth.

don d.

Simeoni testified in a court of law that HE doped, and that HE went to Dr. Ferrari and that HE was instructed by Dr. Ferrari on the methods to properly use drugs so as to avoid detection. He did not, to the best of my knowledge, name any other rider names. He told HIS experience.

Lance came out in a newspaper article and called Simeoni a liar. He said that Simeoni was lying about Simeoni's experiences, even though Lance wasn't there, and has no knowledge of Simeoni's experiences.

Simeoni is suing Lance, not for libel, not for slander, but for defamation of character.

Lance has a well known and long established relationship with Dr. Ferrari. Lance's calling Simeoni a liar and in effect defending Dr. Ferrari has caused some people to look at Lance kinda like a dog looks at it's owner when it's puzzled with that "head cocked, what the he!! are you doing" look. As Walter said above, Ferrari has championed the use of EPO.

Now Simeoni is being ostrasized by certain members of the peloton. You can read what you want into that. Not all members of the peloton are united on this though. David Etxebarria came out in the media today and said that many members of the peloton thought what Lance did was wrong. T-Mobile has insinuated that they didn't chase the break with any committment because they thought what Lance did was wrong.

see www.cyclingnews.com

Curiously, Virengue is not ostracized by the peloton, but then he didn't name Lance's doctor as the source of his drugs.



This is interesting. The code of silence. The idea that you don't support what's right, but rather support your clique. To me, this is one of the most insidious evils that has crept into human social life.

When people support what is right first and the group second, right will rule instead of the mob. But fear of rejection and ostracizing are powerful tools of coercion, especially when ones economic survival is at stake.

I applaud those who have the strength of character to stand up to this cowardly code of silence and defy it.

Duffy

I think don d. should become the international cycling czar since he is the all informed know it all!

don d.

Cycling czar? Me? awe shucks .....

I can't though, Laggard is the official cycling czar. You'll have to take it up with him.

Walter

Don,

I didn't see the Etxebarria or T-Mobile comments.

Kula

Here is a letter from Lance Armstrong to the San Francisco Chronicle from Sunday March 21st, 2004. I think this letter has some interesting insight into doping, Dr. Ferrari and cycling.

The article that prompted a response from LA is here: https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...PGOI5C0RH1.DTL

Lance Armstrong replies

Gwen Knapp on March 2 authored a piece that I believe was unfair in its treatment of me, my fellow athletes who believe in drug testing, and my long-time trainer, Chris Carmichael. In my opinion I was portrayed as a drug cheat aligned with a drug-pushing trainer.

Ms. Knapp stated: "His trainer (mine) just happens to be charged with distributing performance-enhancing drugs."

My trainer for the past 15 years has been Chris Carmichael. He discovered me as a young athlete, convinced me to focus on cycling, stood by me during my cancer treatments, orchestrated my comeback, and has been by my side every winter in between my five Tour (de France) wins. Chris has never been under any sort of investigation for distributing drugs.

In her column, Ms. Knapp states that Dr. Michele Ferrari is my trainer, and she relies on that statement to build her case. The truth is that Chris has been my coach, my trainer and my primary source of daily training schedules for many, many years. I believe it was irresponsible of Ms. Knapp to ignore that fact. I would like to thank The Chronicle for printing a clarification.

The fact is that Dr. Ferrari is among a number of people who consult with Chris and me on issues like diet, hypoxic work and recovery. To say that Michele Ferrari is my trainer is like saying that your nurse is your "doctor" just because he or she may provide support to your doctor.

It is true that Dr. Ferrari has been on trial in Italy for a number of years for allegedly providing drugs to athletes. I have been clear about this issue. First, I have never seen anything that would lead me to believe that Dr. Ferrari would do such a thing and, second, I continue to believe that he deserves the benefit of a simple presumption: innocent until proven guilty. Finally, I have said that if Dr. Ferrari is found guilty I will immediately re- evaluate his role as a consultant to Chris and me.

Furthermore, Ms. Knapp states that my association with Dr. Ferrari was "revealed" in a 2001 article in the Sunday Times of London. The truth is that my association with Dr. Ferrari has never been a secret. I have never denied my association with him or intentionally attempted to hide it. Beyond that, dating back to 1996, there have been a number of respected journalists aware of our association. It is my belief that they chose not to write about it because they did not find it sensational or particularly newsworthy.

Last year I was drug tested more than 24 times. That's twice a month. Ms. Knapp claims that "savvy fans know that the tests are unreliable." Really? If that's the case, then I know a lot of professional cyclists who are not very "savvy." The truth is that we believe the current tests do work and we are proud that our sport has led the way to create cutting-edge testing and forced that testing on ourselves. I would ask Ms. Knapp if she called someone like Dr. Don Catlin head of the IOC-accredited UCLA testing lab, to ask him if he thought that drug testing was "unreliable" or if, specifically, the test for EPO does not work.

I would challenge her to do a little homework on the EPO test and reconsider her view.

I believe in the importance of organizations like the U.S. and World Anti- Doping Agencies. I sincerely hope they are enforcing "reliable" drug testing. And I've put my money where my mouth is. I have donated my own money to speed research into improved drug testing.

Beyond the obvious clarification of who my trainer is, I would also like to clarify a few other statements:

1. She stated that my sport has been spared of investigations into drug taking. Are you kidding? There have been any number of government investigations into our sport. In fact, my own team suffered through a two- year investigation by the French government that, in the end, concluded that we had taken no drugs or done anything wrong. Yes, we have had our problems. But we have joined together in the fight against doping and our sport should be proud of that. I challenge anyone to find a sporting event that has more doping control than the Tour de France.

2. She called my performances, post-cancer, a "stunning improvement." She makes it sound as if I came out of nowhere and won the Tour de France (with the hidden implication being that I did that with the aid of drugs). The facts are that I was winning professional triathlons at age 17, that I am still the youngest-ever world road cycling champion, and that I was the youngest ever Tour de France stage winner at age 21.

When I found out I had cancer at age 25, I was on my way to maturing as a professional and was just beginning to have the sort of experience that could have allowed me to make an overall win at the Tour a goal. When I did win the Tour, there were a number of journalists, mainly French, who questioned my accomplishment. They even insinuated that the chemotherapy I was administered may have enhanced me physically and permanently, thus explaining my Tour win in 1999.

I suppose I could just sit back and say nothing when I'm attacked like this. Life is short, and I know that from my own personal experience. I have said it before and I will say it again: I believe that I am the most tested athlete on this planet, I have never had a single positive doping test, and I do not take performance-enhancing drugs.

don d.

They are in First Edition News for June 25.

TXCiclista

Fascinating Don d. Thanks for the info. As for my "No one likes a snitch" you left off the follow-up sentence: "Though we may need them, it's a tough road." There are reasons "snitches" aren't liked. No matter what spin a person puts on it, a "tattle-tale" IS one person accusing another of something. Again, it may be necessary, but at its very core it is one person being so preoccupied with another's actions (or perception thereof) that they feel the need to take it to a "higher authority" instead of placing faith in the fact that "Cheaters never win...". I would argue that this "evil" of not supporting snitches never "crept in". It's a visceral reaction to one person's decision to make your personal affairs public without being invited. I believe "tattling" is kind of two wrongs making a right. Unless a person's actions immeditately jeopardize the well-being of another, a snitch is crossing the line in my book. Now, I'm not necessarily arguing that tattling is this horrible thing that deserves ostracision (that a word?). What I AM arguing is that to do so means you are inviting that reaction from your peers, especially should you be proven wrong. I also think there's a difference between maintaining a code of silence and simply taking the energy it requires to snitch and instead putting towards beating the cheater. On numerous occassions I've done this. Someone was cutting corners and I didn't appreciate it. However, instead of going to the boss, I simply took the extra time and effort to do it right and do it better. So far, my efforts have been rewarded and the cheater has lost. For some, this may not happen, but it has for me.

NOW, if the "code if silence" is that you dope but don't confess, I would agree with you. If I kill someone and everyone pressures me to stay silent, but I turn myself in, that's not snitching. That's courage and honesty at their finest and I totally agree with your stance. If that's what Simeoni did, then I think Lance and the peloton are 110% wrong for what they did yesterday (unless Simeoni is possibly still doping and we just don't know it and they do).

Again, thanks for clarifying the situation with Simeoni...


Kula, thanks for posting that excellent article...

Walter

In conclusion if LA did this b/c Simeoni had called him a Poofer or had been going around saying Sheryl Crow is butt-ugly I wouldn't care. It might still be a bit petty but it'd be people taking care of personal business and that'd be that. It's the connection to the Ferrari deal that makes me uncomfortable.

I see the Etxebarria point but LA did let the 6 other "little fish" have their shot after he pulled Simeoni out of the break.

meb

I'm perplexed as to why Simeoni didn't stick with the breaking riders even if it meant they all were drawn back into a chasing peloton. Why should Simeoni let the breaking riders who were so willing to drop him at Lance's desire advance without Simeoni?