Andreu says he and Lance doped: EPO,cortisone, tesosterone.....



Frank Drackman wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message


>> the 2nd rider is only identified as still being involved in cycling. as
>> far as i know livingston isn't.
>>

>
> He leads some tours, does that qualify for being involved?
>
>


The key is which rider(s) have something to lose by being ID'ed, but not TOO much to lose.
That rules out current racers, obviously. Vaughters is a director, which qualifies. I'm not sure
Livingston has much to lose by running a few tours, but maybe.

http://bicyclehabitat.com/page.cfm?PageID=477
 
[email protected] wrote:
> Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
> > Stu Fleming wrote:
> > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > Dan Connelly wrote:
> > > > Frank Drackman wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Wow! Any ideas who the second rider was? I am thinking that it might be
> > > > > Jonathan Vaughters .
> > > >
> > > > Tyler Hamilton? Just kidding....
> > > >
> > > > Vaughters is the obvious guess.
> > > >
> > > I would bet on a American retiree, but why is Vaughters more obvious
> > > than Livingston?
> > >
> > > Livingston would have been my guess for '99.

> >
> > Dumbass -
> >
> >
> > Seconded.

>
> dumbass,
>
> the 2nd rider is only identified as still being involved in cycling. as
> far as i know livingston isn't.


Dickweed,

Livingston is very much involved in the sport. He did some consulting
for the Tour de Georgia and Tour of California.
 
"Dan Connelly" <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@i_e_e_e.o_r_g> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Frank Drackman wrote:
>> <[email protected]> wrote in message

>
>>> the 2nd rider is only identified as still being involved in cycling. as
>>> far as i know livingston isn't.
>>>

>>
>> He leads some tours, does that qualify for being involved?

>
> The key is which rider(s) have something to lose by being ID'ed, but not
> TOO much to lose.
> That rules out current racers, obviously. Vaughters is a director, which
> qualifies. I'm not sure
> Livingston has much to lose by running a few tours, but maybe.
>
> http://bicyclehabitat.com/page.cfm?PageID=477


I agree, that is why I thought that it was Vaughters also.
 
First you would have to believe that the NYT story was 100% true. Was there
really a second confession or does it just make for a more interesting
story. Question what you resd please.

ken


"Frank Drackman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> New York Times www.nytimes.com
>>
>> 2 Ex-Teammates of Cycling Star Admit Drug Use
>> By JULIET MACUR Two of Lance Armstrong's 1999 Tour de France
>> teammates said they used the banned endurance-boosting drug EPO in
>> preparing for that year's race.
>> http://tinyurl.com/f8475
>>
>> Andreu Says Fears for Sport Made Him Come Clean
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/sports/othersports/12andreu.html
>> http://tinyurl.com/hyobz
>>

>
> Wow! Any ideas who the second rider was? I am thinking that it might be
> Jonathan Vaughters .
>
 
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> > Vaughters is the obvious guess.

>
>
> We're making an assumption it's someone in management? What about
> Vandevelde?
>

Or even Big George?
 
"VeloJon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>> > Vaughters is the obvious guess.

>>
>>
>> We're making an assumption it's someone in management? What about
>> Vandevelde?
>>

> Or even Big George?
>


I wouldn't be surprised if Vaughters turns out to have been the only clean
rider on Postal in 1999.
 
Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@i_e_e_e.o_r_g> wrote:
> Frank Drackman wrote:


> >
> > Wow! Any ideas who the second rider was? I am thinking that it might be
> > Jonathan Vaughters .


> Tyler Hamilton? Just kidding....


> Vaughters is the obvious guess.


Vandevelde and Hincape are more obvious. The anonymous rider is still
active.

> 181. Lance Armstrong (USA)
> 182. Frankie Andreu (USA)
> 183. Pascal Deramé (Fra)
> 184. Tyler Hamilton (USA)
> 185. George Hincapie (USA)
> 186. Kevin Livingston (USA)
> 187. Peter Meinert-Nielsen (Den)
> 188. Christian Vandevelde (USA)
> 189. Jonathan Vaughters (USA)


--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

2006 Merlin Works CR-3/2.5, 1998 Chorus 9-speed suppleret med billigt
Mirage 06 bras der er langt bedre...
 
B. Lafferty wrote:
> I wouldn't be surprised if Vaughters turns out to have been the only clean
> rider on Postal in 1999.


Just curious, but why do you feel that way? What about Vaughters leads
you to that conclusion?

Fred
 
[email protected] wrote:
> B. Lafferty wrote:
>> I wouldn't be surprised if Vaughters turns out to have been the only clean
>> rider on Postal in 1999.

>
> Just curious, but why do you feel that way? What about Vaughters leads
> you to that conclusion?
>
> Fred
>


Vaughters had a continual problem with withstanding the rigors of a 3-week
stage race, yet was strong enough to excel at 1-week stage races. Not the
sign of someone enhancing recovery with the miracles of synthetic chemistry.

Dan
 
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> B. Lafferty wrote:
>> I wouldn't be surprised if Vaughters turns out to have been the only
>> clean
>> rider on Postal in 1999.

>
> Just curious, but why do you feel that way? What about Vaughters leads
> you to that conclusion?
>
> Fred
>


IIRC, Vaughters told a story in an interview with either VeloNews or
CyclingNews that at a team meeting just before the start of the Tour,
Bruyneel told everyone that their hematocrits tested just below 50% which
Vaughters apparently found to be rather odd.

What is becoming quite clear is that we, cycling fans, have effectively been
cheated out of what could have been some very interesting and competitive
years of cycling in the 1990s--especially the early 90s.
 
"B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "VeloJon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>> > Vaughters is the obvious guess.
>>>
>>>
>>> We're making an assumption it's someone in management? What about
>>> Vandevelde?
>>>

>> Or even Big George?
>>

>
> I wouldn't be surprised if Vaughters turns out to have been the only clean
> rider on Postal in 1999.

Vaughters may have been "the cleanest" rider on Postal 1999 but a "clean"
rider may very well not have existed.
 
Morten Reippuert Knudsen wrote:

> Vandevelde and Hincape are more obvious. The anonymous rider is still
> active.
>
>
>>181. Lance Armstrong (USA)
>>182. Frankie Andreu (USA)
>>183. Pascal Deramé (Fra)
>>184. Tyler Hamilton (USA)
>>185. George Hincapie (USA)
>>186. Kevin Livingston (USA)
>>187. Peter Meinert-Nielsen (Den)
>>188. Christian Vandevelde (USA)
>>189. Jonathan Vaughters (USA)


The anonymous rider has a "job in cycling" according to the quote, that
is odd phrasing for an active racer but maybe he was being purposefully
vague.

Also, Andreu's quote was "to help (us) prepare for the Tour de France
that year"; a liberal interpretation of that would allow for riders on
the USPS who didn't make the Tour team, including Casey, Dean, and Jemison.
 
B. Lafferty wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > B. Lafferty wrote:
> >> I wouldn't be surprised if Vaughters turns out to have been the only
> >> clean
> >> rider on Postal in 1999.

> >
> > Just curious, but why do you feel that way? What about Vaughters leads
> > you to that conclusion?
> >
> > Fred
> >

>
> IIRC, Vaughters told a story in an interview with either VeloNews or
> CyclingNews that at a team meeting just before the start of the Tour,
> Bruyneel told everyone that their hematocrits tested just below 50% which
> Vaughters apparently found to be rather odd.


IIRC, Vaughters had a waiver for the 50% rule because he was able to
prove (how I don't know) that he was naturally over the limit. This
fits with the fact that he grew up at altitude. This isn't proof that
he never used EPO, but it does indicate that he was less likely to have
used it.

>
> What is becoming quite clear is that we, cycling fans, have effectively been
> cheated out of what could have been some very interesting and competitive
> years of cycling in the 1990s--especially the early 90s.


Just like we've been cheated during every other era.

Bret
 
B. Lafferty wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > B. Lafferty wrote:
> >> I wouldn't be surprised if Vaughters turns out to have been the only
> >> clean
> >> rider on Postal in 1999.

> >
> > Just curious, but why do you feel that way? What about Vaughters leads
> > you to that conclusion?
> >
> > Fred
> >

>
> IIRC, Vaughters told a story in an interview with either VeloNews or
> CyclingNews that at a team meeting just before the start of the Tour,
> Bruyneel told everyone that their hematocrits tested just below 50% which
> Vaughters apparently found to be rather odd.


So, regardless of the countless denials and non-failed tests, you can't
bring yourself to belief Armstrong didn't dope, but Vaughters makes one
comment in an interview that he finds the mention hematocrit levels in
a team meeting odd, and you're convinced HE'S clean?

WTF?

Fred
 
"Morten Reippuert Knudsen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@i_e_e_e.o_r_g> wrote:
>> Frank Drackman wrote:

>
>> >
>> > Wow! Any ideas who the second rider was? I am thinking that it might
>> > be
>> > Jonathan Vaughters .

>
>> Tyler Hamilton? Just kidding....

>
>> Vaughters is the obvious guess.

>
> Vandevelde and Hincape are more obvious. The anonymous rider is still
> active.


From the NY Times article:
"The other rider who said he used EPO spoke on condition of anonymity
because he said he did not want to jeopardize his job in cycling."

There are many jobs in cycling. It says nothing about his being an active
rider.


>
>> 181. Lance Armstrong (USA)
>> 182. Frankie Andreu (USA)
>> 183. Pascal Deramé (Fra)
>> 184. Tyler Hamilton (USA)
>> 185. George Hincapie (USA)
>> 186. Kevin Livingston (USA)
>> 187. Peter Meinert-Nielsen (Den)
>> 188. Christian Vandevelde (USA)
>> 189. Jonathan Vaughters (USA)

>
> --
> Morten Reippuert Knudsen :) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>
>
> 2006 Merlin Works CR-3/2.5, 1998 Chorus 9-speed suppleret med billigt
> Mirage 06 bras der er langt bedre...
 
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> B. Lafferty wrote:
>> <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> >
>> > B. Lafferty wrote:
>> >> I wouldn't be surprised if Vaughters turns out to have been the only
>> >> clean
>> >> rider on Postal in 1999.
>> >
>> > Just curious, but why do you feel that way? What about Vaughters leads
>> > you to that conclusion?
>> >
>> > Fred
>> >

>>
>> IIRC, Vaughters told a story in an interview with either VeloNews or
>> CyclingNews that at a team meeting just before the start of the Tour,
>> Bruyneel told everyone that their hematocrits tested just below 50% which
>> Vaughters apparently found to be rather odd.

>
> So, regardless of the countless denials and non-failed tests, you can't
> bring yourself to belief Armstrong didn't dope, but Vaughters makes one
> comment in an interview that he finds the mention hematocrit levels in
> a team meeting odd, and you're convinced HE'S clean?
>
> WTF?
>
> Fred
>

Learn to read Fred. I said it would be amusing if Vaughter's is the only
1999 Postie to have been clean. With his naturally high hematocrit he would
have less need to dope. Does that mean he didn't dope? Of course not.
IMO, he's simply the least likely of that group to have juiced.
 
"matabala" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "VeloJon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>>> > Vaughters is the obvious guess.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We're making an assumption it's someone in management? What about
>>>> Vandevelde?
>>>>
>>> Or even Big George?
>>>

>>
>> I wouldn't be surprised if Vaughters turns out to have been the only
>> clean rider on Postal in 1999.

> Vaughters may have been "the cleanest" rider on Postal 1999 but a "clean"
> rider may very well not have existed.


Agreed.
 
Los Angeles Dog Trainer, July 9th:

He also wrote: "It's not like I never played with hotsauce, eh?"
Reached by telephone recently, Vaughters declined to comment. ...

Also, remember that he had an exemption to have an elevated 'crit.

-RJ
 
> What is becoming quite clear is that we, cycling fans, have effectively
> been cheated out of what could have been some very interesting and
> competitive years of cycling in the 1990s--especially the early 90s.


If the barriers to entry are low, and doping widespread, then you have been
"cheated" out of a drug-free event, but how have you been cheated ot of a
"very interesting and competitive" event?

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

"B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> B. Lafferty wrote:
>>> I wouldn't be surprised if Vaughters turns out to have been the only
>>> clean
>>> rider on Postal in 1999.

>>
>> Just curious, but why do you feel that way? What about Vaughters leads
>> you to that conclusion?
>>
>> Fred
>>

>
> IIRC, Vaughters told a story in an interview with either VeloNews or
> CyclingNews that at a team meeting just before the start of the Tour,
> Bruyneel told everyone that their hematocrits tested just below 50% which
> Vaughters apparently found to be rather odd.
>
> What is becoming quite clear is that we, cycling fans, have effectively
> been cheated out of what could have been some very interesting and
> competitive years of cycling in the 1990s--especially the early 90s.
>
 

Similar threads