Floyd, Tour Winners, and stripping...

[William]

After watching the Floyd interview on the "Lance is a bully" thread it got me wondering.... Should Floyd have been stripped of his Tour win?? Others have won the Tour and have tested positive or admitted later that they were doping during their wins but kept their titles. Even Oscar Pereiro named as winner in default after Floyd was stripped of the title was declared clean......but only after getting cleared after testing positive for salbutamol. This would certainly cast doubt on the fact that he was "clean" when he was "cleared" to get the win after they took the title. from Floyd.

Eric Zabel, Bijarne Riis, Bert Dietz, Udo Bölts, Christian Henn, Richard Virenque, Marco Pantani, Alex Zulle, Contador (not yet), to name a very few have won many stages and races.... were their wins stripped after the truth came? Here is a link to an interesting chart down the page which lists Tour winners since 1961 who have tested positive for banned, and not yet banned substances....

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


Another thought is after watching the documentary "Freakonomics", and the section on cheating in Japanese Sumo wrestling, it really got me thinking about the correlation between the two sports. Specifically: the cultivated public perception, and the reality of their inner workings. As economist Steve Levitt put it, "When an insider comes forward and says there is cheating, there is probably cheating".


<Edit> Removed sentence. Could only find one source for the supposed admission of other PED use besides the salbutamol.



William

[weiwentg]

Are you sure that Pereiro admitted to doping? I thought he'd said he was innocent. The Spanish Federation decided that his salbutamol use was justifiable because of his asthma - say what you will, but salbutamol isn't like clen or EPO. It has legitimate uses.

[William]

Are you sure that Pereiro admitted to doping? I thought he'd said he was innocent. The Spanish Federation decided that his salbutamol use was justifiable because of his asthma - say what you will, but salbutamol isn't like clen or EPO. It has legitimate uses.


From what I can find, it was alleged that the UCI gave Pereiro "retroactive permission to use the substance on medical grounds after the positive tests."

Professional cyclists, their team doctors, and likely even managers know what the banned substances are. They also know that if there is a legitimate reason to use one of the substances that they need to inform officials beforehand . For those who make professional cycling their career, it would be grossly negligent to claim they had no idea the substance in question was a banned one. IMO of course.





William

[weiwentg]

Even Oscar Pereiro named as winner in default after Floyd was stripped of the title was declared clean......but only after getting cleared after testing positive for salbutamol. In 2010 he admitted to taking EPO, testosterone, human growth hormone and blood transfusions along with female hormones and insulin. This would certainly cast doubt on the fact that he was "clean" when he was "cleared" to get the win after they took the title. from Floyd.
William

I was referring just to the bolded text above - it makes it sound like Pereiro admitted to doping. I don't believe he did.

As to Floyd - I think people agree that the 2007 Tour was relatively clean aside from him. Given that, I think he should be stripped. Unless, of course, Pereiro was on the sauce as Floyd alleged, but there's no evidence of that yet.

[Lifelover]

I assume that the differences is that Floyd got caught directly by doping control of the TDF.

I would think (hope) that a specific title would/could not be stripped if the rider was caught at another time.

Tyler's olympic medal was stripped because he was caught via olympic testing.

At least I hope this is the case. Otherwise there could not be a cleared TDF winner (maybe other than Cadel) in the last 15 or so years. I think they all have been linked to PEDs one way or another.

[Bob Ross]

As to Floyd - I think people agree that the 2007 Tour was relatively clean aside from him.

Wait, what???

[William]

Removed that text. After searching I could only find one source that stated that "admission" to other PED's besides the retro covering of the salbutamol. Of course that was the first thing I found earlier. :crap:


William

[norcalbiker]

I said this before and I am going to say it again and stick with it.

They all doped! It's a matter of how much. Some are greedy and do more than others. It's also a matter of when you get caught.

Some get caught but way after the fact that cookies was already digested.

Some get caught after they ate the cookies but the officials can't really proved if they even swallowed it.

As for Floyd, he is a victim of getting caught by having his hand in a cookie jar. Therefore he was sent to his room and taken away his allowance and he is grounded. :D

[CunegoFan]

I think that it is ridiculous that Floyd is not considered the winner when Armstrong, Pantani, Ullrich, Riis, and Contador are still considered winners.

Pereiro was given a backdated TUE. Floyd has also talked about the doping that Pereiro was doing when Pereiro rode for Phonak in 2005. Kloden and his his team went to Freiberg during an early stage in that Tour to get blood transfusions. Kloden paid the german prosecutors to settle the criminal doping investigation into his activities. So the top three of 2006 doped. To consider Floyd not to be the winner seems a bit of a farce.

[William]

I was referring just to the bolded text above - it makes it sound like Pereiro admitted to doping. I don't believe he did.

As to Floyd - I think people agree that the 2007 Tour was relatively clean aside from him. Given that, I think he should be stripped. Unless, of course, Pereiro was on the sauce as Floyd alleged, but there's no evidence of that yet.

You have to wonder....a guy who had finished only as high as 10th or further back in couple of previous Grand Tours is all of a sudden on top in 2006. If what Landis said was true about discussions with the owner of Phonak regarding a doping program and getting the go ahead and money to do it...the anomaly result appears to match the institution of the program.

Just saying.

I agree that I believe most all of them dope. You would have to be a pretty amazing genetic specimen to be clean and be able to beat all the other top cycling pros who dope.....even just the ones who have been caught.




William

[William]

I think that it is ridiculous that Floyd is not considered the winner when Armstrong, Pantani, Ullrich, Riis, and Contador are still considered winners.

Pereiro was given a backdated TUE. Floyd has also talked about the doping that Pereiro was doing when Pereiro rode for Phonak in 2005. Kloden and his his team went to Freiberg during an early stage in that Tour to get blood transfusions. Kloden paid the german prosecutors to settle the criminal doping investigation into his activities. So the top three of 2006 doped. To consider Floyd not to be the winner seems a bit of a farce.


That is along the lines of what I was thinking.....why does Floyd get the spanking when so many others got a walk?

Is it possible that a certain individual (with alleged ties into the top officials in cycling) who has a history of slapping down those that leave the coop maybe figured FL needed a slap down, especially after such an amazing comeback? Does anyone disagree that a certain individual (as FL put it) doesn't just want to win, but wants to see everyone else lose? What ever the cost. Is it possible?

Just wondering...




William