Ullrich has gone underground and refused internal T-Mobile DNA tests....
- Thread starter whiteboytrash
- Start date
DNA: that's too simple, you can't change the rules (it's not allowed to compare it if Ullrich or another rider doesn't want that) afterwards. And it's not correct to blame the riders for the cuurent situation, the UCI could have implemented rules like the French did years ago,they didn't and because they didn't it's almost impossible to proof anything now but that's because the UCI didn't WANT too. Because of all the media attention they try to turn around everything (Basso and Ullrich should proof their innocence) now but it's not good when the UCI comes through with that policy. They have to change their anti-doping policy, period.whiteboytrash said:
By the way like i said, it will stay a mess as long as the people who are running the show don't leave.
CH: Earlier in this thread, you posted the following statement:cyclingheroes said:
"According to the Irisch beer glass, ah no... wait... according to Belgian sports daily Sportwereld Jan Ullrich is cooperating with the investigation and gave a DNA sample to the investigators."
http://www.sportwereld.be/Article/D...cleID=GCN11UVPB
Now you are saying they can't force him to submit a sample if he doesn't want to. Did he or didn't he already do so?
I agree with WBT - if JU submits a sample (may already have done so), the authorities can compare it to the bag of blood attributed to him, and a no-match result will close this case and silence his detractors. If he refuses to do so, then doubts will linger and things will remian in limbo. It will only be complicated if he hides behind the rules and refuses to cooperate. I can't imagine why he would want that outcome if he knows he didn't have anything to do with Fuentes.
Exactly i posted: according to Belgian daily sports....
There are still conflicting reports so i don't know if he has given DNA probes or not. I don't like the proof you are innocent thing. I can understand why people think that way but you can also argue that lots of media and also Mr. McQuaid said they had evidence. So why does Jan needs to give DNA? If the UCI has evidence they should come forward with it. I can also understand that people say Jan and others are hiding behind the rules, but hey were are rules for, if you don't like the rule anymore it doesn't count? It's just what the UCI would like to see, so we have our scapegoat now, all are happy and we can continue businues as usual untill the next case comes up....
The problem is much bigger than 58 riders,the problem is that the system is rotten and the system wasn't (only) made by the riders. I don't think it will bring anything for the sport in het future to work with scapegoats. the UCI wants to install a commision now and might install DNA databanks, blood databanks and so on. Why do they need a commission for that? Are they hoping the storm will calm down if the scapegoat is punished, i mean the German federation will start from november 1 with it and the French are doing it for years now. Why wait????
Another thing is, i learned a lot about how doping probes are manipulated in the last months and what criminal energy there is to black mail people etcetera. If i was innocent and would know that i wouldn't give a DNA probe, no way. I wouldn't trust the UCI,Fuentes & co. I learned that the situation is far worse as most people can imagine, read the article from Donati (Italiananti-dopingofficial who leads the CONI hearing with Basso) that i posted on the Full doping list thread, these people are setting other people up, they are criminals!
There are still conflicting reports so i don't know if he has given DNA probes or not. I don't like the proof you are innocent thing. I can understand why people think that way but you can also argue that lots of media and also Mr. McQuaid said they had evidence. So why does Jan needs to give DNA? If the UCI has evidence they should come forward with it. I can also understand that people say Jan and others are hiding behind the rules, but hey were are rules for, if you don't like the rule anymore it doesn't count? It's just what the UCI would like to see, so we have our scapegoat now, all are happy and we can continue businues as usual untill the next case comes up....
The problem is much bigger than 58 riders,the problem is that the system is rotten and the system wasn't (only) made by the riders. I don't think it will bring anything for the sport in het future to work with scapegoats. the UCI wants to install a commision now and might install DNA databanks, blood databanks and so on. Why do they need a commission for that? Are they hoping the storm will calm down if the scapegoat is punished, i mean the German federation will start from november 1 with it and the French are doing it for years now. Why wait????
Another thing is, i learned a lot about how doping probes are manipulated in the last months and what criminal energy there is to black mail people etcetera. If i was innocent and would know that i wouldn't give a DNA probe, no way. I wouldn't trust the UCI,Fuentes & co. I learned that the situation is far worse as most people can imagine, read the article from Donati (Italiananti-dopingofficial who leads the CONI hearing with Basso) that i posted on the Full doping list thread, these people are setting other people up, they are criminals!
fbircher said:
To quote McQuaid and what he said on the final day of the TDF.
He said that if the federations of the banned riders did not take action (against the riders) then the UCI would take action against the riders.
If the "evidence" cannot persuade the national federations (Spain/Switzerland/Italy) to take a case against those riders, I fail to see how the UCI could take any case against the riders based on the same "evidence".
This entire affair stinks.
He said that if the federations of the banned riders did not take action (against the riders) then the UCI would take action against the riders.
If the "evidence" cannot persuade the national federations (Spain/Switzerland/Italy) to take a case against those riders, I fail to see how the UCI could take any case against the riders based on the same "evidence".
This entire affair stinks.
McQuaid forgot about that. Yesterday he told reporters that the UCI would study the documents themselves and would consider if they go to TAS/CAS or not (In July he said they would).limerickman said:
I decided to post the Donati story again (written by Donati, the anti-doping official who is leading the Basso hearings). The story makes clear what some people are capable of und who destroy the credibilty of some of the dopinglabs and some federattions. Now ofcourse Fuentes is not mentioned in this article but if these people try to destroy the credibility of Donati and do that by manipulating probes what makes people so sure that Fuentes issuch a nice guy that he wouldn't?
The story about manipulating doping probes from Donati :
http://www.playthegame.org/Knowledg...he%20Stage.aspx
Anna Maria Di Terlizzi, a young 100m hurdler I had been training for a few years, was tested positive for caffeine on February 7th 1997, after an indoor competition. The caffeine level found in the urine sample was very high, nearly double the value established by IOC.
When the girl told me what had happened, I asked if she had taken any medicament. She answered she was on the pill, but had not taken nothing except a cappuccino at breakfast and a cup of coffee after lunch, but the competition had taken place hours later, in the evening. The caffeine value found in the urine sample corresponded to about thirty cups of coffee taken at the same time.
After a week, the second sample of urine was tested in the presence of an expert of our choice.
Right at the beginning, the Head of the Rome Anti-doping Laboratory asked our expert if he chose the normal testing procedure, which would last several hours, or the shortened procedure. The expert was very surprised and answered, that it was, of course, necessary to repeat exactly the procedure used for the first test, the one that had proved positive.
Before the end of the qualitative analysis, the Head of the Laboratory asked our expert if he wanted to go out for a cup of coffee. He refused and noticed that the Head of the Laboratory and his collaborators were becoming increasingly nervous. When the qualitative analysis was over, the result was astounding: no caffeine peak at all!
The expert called me on his cellular phone; I had been waiting for that call all morning and the news left me breathless; but I still couldnt believe it. I asked how long it would take to have the results of the quantitative analysis; about an hour, he said. That hour seemed never to end. At last he called me with the results; Anna Maria's urine sample contained the traces of one cappuccino and one cup of coffee.
At last, it dawned on me; they had prepared an ambush, the worst possible one: they had tried to destroy my reputation, my credibility. I realised then that I had been dealing with really malicious people.
The story about manipulating doping probes from Donati :
http://www.playthegame.org/Knowledg...he%20Stage.aspx
Anna Maria Di Terlizzi, a young 100m hurdler I had been training for a few years, was tested positive for caffeine on February 7th 1997, after an indoor competition. The caffeine level found in the urine sample was very high, nearly double the value established by IOC.
When the girl told me what had happened, I asked if she had taken any medicament. She answered she was on the pill, but had not taken nothing except a cappuccino at breakfast and a cup of coffee after lunch, but the competition had taken place hours later, in the evening. The caffeine value found in the urine sample corresponded to about thirty cups of coffee taken at the same time.
After a week, the second sample of urine was tested in the presence of an expert of our choice.
Right at the beginning, the Head of the Rome Anti-doping Laboratory asked our expert if he chose the normal testing procedure, which would last several hours, or the shortened procedure. The expert was very surprised and answered, that it was, of course, necessary to repeat exactly the procedure used for the first test, the one that had proved positive.
Before the end of the qualitative analysis, the Head of the Laboratory asked our expert if he wanted to go out for a cup of coffee. He refused and noticed that the Head of the Laboratory and his collaborators were becoming increasingly nervous. When the qualitative analysis was over, the result was astounding: no caffeine peak at all!
The expert called me on his cellular phone; I had been waiting for that call all morning and the news left me breathless; but I still couldnt believe it. I asked how long it would take to have the results of the quantitative analysis; about an hour, he said. That hour seemed never to end. At last he called me with the results; Anna Maria's urine sample contained the traces of one cappuccino and one cup of coffee.
At last, it dawned on me; they had prepared an ambush, the worst possible one: they had tried to destroy my reputation, my credibility. I realised then that I had been dealing with really malicious people.
CH: While I can’t comment on the specifics of the Donati case you’ve cited, I’m very skeptical of conspiracy theories in general. I used to work in a lab that conducted analyses of metallurgical samples, and I can tell you there are many reasons that have nothing to do with conspiracies that can account for why test results sometimes come out wrong – even drastically wrong – and why subsequent testing can yield a different result. With a proper system of validation in place these occasional errors can be caught and corrected.cyclingheroes said:
If JU is really concerned about some dark conspiracy involving antagonistic UCI officials, crooked lab directors, and dishonest lab technicians, all working together to rig the results of scientific tests, then his attorneys should request independent analyses at multiple test facilities, in the presence of technical auditors. Unless you believe the UCI is omnipotent enough to coerce multiple teams of officials at multiple laboratories into committing fraud (and quite likely implicating themselves in criminal acts), then any fears of manipulated results can be put aside.
While I agree that JU has no obligation to submit to DNA testing, and the UCI has no right to demand that he do so under the rules that are in place now, my contention is that it is in his interest to do so if he is truly innocent. Maybe the UCI’s evidence is indeed weak, but there has been enough circumstantial linkage between JU and Fuentes that many people have reasonable suspicions now. I can’t blame them, especially in light of the widespread evidence and numerous examples of doping in cycling. JU has to evaluate his options against the backdrop of this reality. IMO, it just doesn’t cut it for people to complain on the one hand that JU is suffering from all the negative attitudes directed against him, but on the other hand applaud his decision to refuse to avail himself of a golden opportunity to close this matter with scientific evidence. If he insists on trying to clear himself through arguments about stamps on documents and other weak details, then it will be hard not to sympathize with the large group of cycling fans who will likely come to view his achievements with suspicion.
He doesn't, the Swiss cycling federation does and they have a good reason i have some of these documents and a court or sports court can't open a case if some of the documents are with stamps of the Guardia Cicil others don't have authentification. The documents who are without are essential documents. A body that takes itself serious can't open a case with that.fbircher said:
Excellent post. I find it interesting that people want to believe so bad that these guys are innocent. Just the fact that a lab with such extensive knowledge and equipment was found tells us that doping in cycling AND OTHER SPORTS is not just a few select individuals. I think we are also seeing as to how the governing bodies have knowledge of the doping practices and did so little to clean the sport up.
The testing labs of the governing bodies seem to be sloppy at times. Until Armstrong attacked this situation they were allowed to carry on as usual. Sloppiness within the labs have given the athletes a legal way of claiming innocence. And maybe they are innocent. But without credablilty of anyone, how are we to know?
The labs in Spain opened my eyes. And I was not naive about doping in sport. Do I think JU and Basso are guilty? Yes. Guilty is such a bad word. I'm not convinced that doping makes you guilty of anything since doping is so ingrained in the sports history. Unfortunatly, I also think doping is just part of cycling. No big deal . I do not really believe that since the 60's there has been a TDF winner that did not have "special water." And the governing bodies know this. I also believe that JU and Basso and Landis are scrapegoats. They simply did what ALL champions did before them and for some reason the powers that be want some heads to hang.
Until Landis, how long has it been since a contender in the TDF has tested positive and thrown out? Not tested positive, but tested positive and thrown out? I bet if Tommy Simpson would have not died on the mountain that horrible day, he would have passed the controls later.
Then this was posted on the Velonews website......
300,000 Euros Worth Of Dopage
In a fitness center in Bergamo, Italy a freight vehicle was stopped by police and inside 300,000 Euros worth of doping products were found.
Italian media reports that the stop was related to the Italian investigation into the Operation Puerto Affair.
That's a lot of drugs...
The testing labs of the governing bodies seem to be sloppy at times. Until Armstrong attacked this situation they were allowed to carry on as usual. Sloppiness within the labs have given the athletes a legal way of claiming innocence. And maybe they are innocent. But without credablilty of anyone, how are we to know?
The labs in Spain opened my eyes. And I was not naive about doping in sport. Do I think JU and Basso are guilty? Yes. Guilty is such a bad word. I'm not convinced that doping makes you guilty of anything since doping is so ingrained in the sports history. Unfortunatly, I also think doping is just part of cycling. No big deal . I do not really believe that since the 60's there has been a TDF winner that did not have "special water." And the governing bodies know this. I also believe that JU and Basso and Landis are scrapegoats. They simply did what ALL champions did before them and for some reason the powers that be want some heads to hang.
Until Landis, how long has it been since a contender in the TDF has tested positive and thrown out? Not tested positive, but tested positive and thrown out? I bet if Tommy Simpson would have not died on the mountain that horrible day, he would have passed the controls later.
Then this was posted on the Velonews website......
300,000 Euros Worth Of Dopage
In a fitness center in Bergamo, Italy a freight vehicle was stopped by police and inside 300,000 Euros worth of doping products were found.
Italian media reports that the stop was related to the Italian investigation into the Operation Puerto Affair.
That's a lot of drugs...
cyclingheroes said:
Thanks, just read the article... very good... although your report asks a lot more questions than it answers.... it appears to be one massive fark up... surely Fuentes numbering system is not that sophisticated that we can't work out the identity of the athletes ? Is there any possibility that JAN is not JAN or not even a cyclist ? there is every possibility that DNA has already been used but no revealed to the public as its not permissible in court ? ie The UCI handed over some of Ullrich blood from a health test to confirm whether JAN was in fact Jan Ullrich to assist them with their case ? It happens and the police do it all the time. Not to use as evidence in court but to make sure they don't waste time chasing evidence on the wrong guy.
However I read some reports today on another forum that Jan is actually Landis ! I'm not sure if it’s wild speculation but is possible. However I'm more inclined to your report that it could be Jan Huska.
One question.. is your report based on exactly what the Swiss federation have seen ? or do they have more documents ?
Yes you are right, the document produces more questions than answers. The Swiss have more documents now, but they have problems as well. The thing is that the biggest questions are raised by the identification of the athletes and without that the rest is worthless. I don't think that the rumours (i heard them as well) that JAN is Landis are correct, i find that hard to believe and didn't find anything that leads to Landis.whiteboytrash said:
Just read OPuerto Part 2. The Spainish Police seem to have put alot of this together in a hurry as you have pointed out in your article - things just dont add up.cyclingheroes said:
The transcript not completed on the sisters phone call, the code names, the Pat McQuaid comments about JU doping after the report was submitted, and the fax with the correct names on it - do we know what date this was sent? The majority of people in the press and cycling establishment seem to want to beleive the doctor? But who can we trust, the Spainish Police, the doctor, the UCI, the riders? I just hope the UCI takes some sort of control of this, otherwise this will rumble on for a long time and do pro cycling no good. The test for the UCI will be, if and when Basso's case gets closed and if the Swiss Fed keep JU's case closed and he looks for a team - what will happen? Are they still under suspicion of doping? More to follow I am sure.
A great piece of journalism and I hope other publications pick it up. Well done CH.
On a side line - I had a bad day today on my bike - went for a ride tonight but got caught in a monsoon type shower. The roads where flooding and I did not see a pothole and went crashing down to the ground and have some lovely sore road rash tonight! I feel better telling you all - thanks. Off to lie down!
Thanks for the compliment. I am about to leave for Zürich, Sunday Zürich Metzgete and tomorrow i will do some training in the Swiss alpes. When i come back i will look for the date of the fax.
I hope your crash wasn't to bad (no injury).
I hope your crash wasn't to bad (no injury).
foxvi said:
It did not take long for the German Press to link his name with that of Jan Ullrich, currently with out a team (Astana). Talking to the German TV Station ARD1 Godefroot made it clear that his new Team were not interested in signing Ullrich. " There is no question about it, Jan will not be joining us. We already have three great riders Vinokourov, Klöden and Kasheschkin. We have no sporting reason to find a place for Ullrich”
Almost.... he said it seems we have no sporting reason... His statement was full of i can't think offs, seems etc. He also said that Jan is not convicted, charged or anything and that the Fuentes case wouldn't be a reason not to sign him as long as Jan is not convicted...whiteboytrash said:
Next round, according to Sportbild UCI will appeal if Ullrich get cleared:
http://www.radsport-aktiv.de/sport/sportnews_40836.htm
http://www.radsport-aktiv.de/sport/sportnews_40836.htm
