Dirty Dopers and Damn Assumptions.
by wjohngalloway
Today Juan Jose Cobo Acebo won the 2011 Vuelta Espana after a total of 3295km of racing. Twitter has been afire with suspicions about his murky past. Hell, he beat our new British hero (was unaware that bits of Africa still counted as British) Chris Froome and relegated our Brad to third!
He must be cheating!
Given the number of folk citing his dodgy history I’m surprised there’s any doubt in folk’s minds.
So. Cobo as doper? Well, during the Ricco “golden years” of Saunier Duval? As Riccardo and Piepoli danced up the mountains fuelled by blood the consistency of molasses? Cobo was there. Doped to the gills in a team dirty as a dirty thing’s dirty bits. Dirty rider IMHO. No proof, just opinion, but the differences were HUGE.
This year, on this Vuelta though? Given the tentatively brave new world of possibly, maybe, might just be credible, clean racing?
Let’s take a look at some of those assumptions and assertions.
“His ride to take the red jersey was “incredible””
Well he won the Angliru stage but, on the most heinous stage on the Modern Grand Tour circuit, he managed to wrestle a whole 48 seconds from a Chris Froome who’d clearly waited on the hill for Wiggins.
48 seconds?
A damning indictment! What are we to make of riders who gain more than that gap on any easier stage? Dopers all?
Let’s look at the finish of the three weeks.
After 3295km of racing he beat Froome ( a denizen of Her Majesty’s Empire so obviously squeaky clean) by a whole 13 seconds. That’s 0.0949924127 seconds per kilometer. Clear justification for hints of dopage. Hell, all those thousands of Euros paid to the likes of Fuentes for less than .1 of a second per kilometer? Money well spent. Is 0.0949924127 seconds per kilometer the difference between doper and paragon?
OK, all this Reductio ad absurdum shit is fun but the bottom line is that we live in changing times and our attitudes need to change with those times.
Rider who doped may be clean now whatever they did in the past.
Intelligent training may have narrowed the gap.
Big races have been more credible.
Constant cynicism is killing the sport we love. Doping is worse but why bother watching a sport in which every exceptional performance is greeted with scepticism?
My position? My bottom line given the current situation?
I don’t think I could express it better than I did in this tweet to my chum Stu Maclean this evening.
“Actually what this all comes down to is due process. I’m sick of the UCI applying rulings as they see fit. I’m sick of folk slandering riders and trying them in the court of public opinion. I want a fair, transparent, process that riders and public alike can trust. I want change.”
If you’re unhappy with an aspect of our sport? Strive to make a difference.
If you’re just moaning or speculating? STFU!
Dopers suck, so do haters.
Hill fitness? Don't make me laugh! 
Well said!
Yes! Well done Cobo!
I think there’s also a bit of stereotyping too. All Spaniards are dishonest, all Spaniards must be dopers…
Blind, unquestioning, devotion is one of the key things that got us into this mess.
The UCI, Teams, riders, and ASO were dragged kicking and screaming into this “New” era by the fans. If we said nothing then nothing would have changed
I think it’s more likely that the catalysts for change were the police forces of France, Italy and maybe Spain, amongst others. The fans lack any real voice. We might think we can currently make a difference but in reality Pat McQuaid et al aren’t listening to us. As to blind devotion? I’m far from advocating that but I think we need to shift the basic assumption from “he’s performing well so he’s a doper” to “Good ride” whilst encouraging open and frequent testing and a consistant and even handed sanctioning policy. You can have and encourage critical thinking whilst being positive about the sport and the apparent changes for the better that are taking place.
I have never advocated that performing well mean someone is a doper, but going from DFL to winning a GT while on a Gianetti team will always be questioned.
When I mention fans I also mean Media. The 3rd estate. Remember, it was not the police that broke the Fuentes case it was the media. The police did nothing until a series of interviews with Manzano exposed Fuentes…..still the UCI and the Spanish Fed did nothing. They attacked the messenger.
I often write about how much cleaner the sport is now. How clean riders can perform and win. At the same time pointing out continued toxic success of guys like Ganetti is a good thing.
Very well said and thanks for putting it out there. I dare to hope that we’re in changing times!
Hater is such a simplistic term that does not accurately explain why some would question a Gianetti rider, considering Mauro’s long, toxic history in the sport.
Here is a little history on Mauro
12 years ago Mauro almost died from doping. Desperate to get an edge so he took some experimental drugs (Perfluorocarbon). He ended up in the Hospital for 10 days, on the edge of death. The UCI did nothing and the Swiss Olympic committee had no problem putting him on the 2000 Olympic team.
After he retired he found some sponsors for a new team. It ended up being one of the dirtier teams in recent times. I know guys who rode on it and they were always being asked by various staff if they needed any “Help”?
David Millar knew there was something wrong and went to the UCI with his concerns……But Marco Zorzoli, the UCI’s chief medical officer, is a good friend of Mauro Gianetti and the UCI did nothing. The UCI gets a warning from a rider and they do nothing.
Of course everyone knows about Ricco and Pepoli. Yeah, they rode for Mauro, but he pretended he knew nothing….. despite the fact that multiple employees warned him that they were doping.
Former Tour yellow jersey wearer Stéphane Heulot rode alongside Mauro at La Francaise des Jeux in 1998, the year of Gianetti’s doping-induced brush with death. Later Heulot has been carrying out PR duties for Saunier Duval. This is what he had to say about Mauro
“Doping is so ingrained in certain managers, like GIanetti, that they can’t conceive of cycling any other way,”…”With people like GIanetti, we’re heading straight for an impasse. ”
Gianetti’s history is not limited to doping or connections. How about when he secures 5 million Euros from Geox,… then puts a bunch of it in his pocket and hires a bunch of Neo-Pros. Yet another sponsor burned by the sport.
Gianetti has a long, toxic, history in the sport. When one of his riders suddenly goes from DFL to wining a GT asking questions is not being a hater…..It is the right thing to do if you care about the sport
If you’ve listened to me waffling on for the last few years you’ll know that this is something of a sea change for me.
I am by nature, a cynical, pessimistic, dour Scotsman.
I am not suggesting we suspend critical thinking or turn a blind eye to those in our sport who have had, and continue to have, a toxic presence.
To be honest, this isn’t even really about Cobo. I’ve heard the same assumptions about every single winner of a big race this year.
All I’m saying is that maybe it’s time for our default assumptions to shift towards the positive.
I will be disappointed many times as dopers are caught and the fight continues but I refuse to remain a cynic. Except, of course, about the UCI. ;o)
Eyes wide open but daring to hope.
I have plenty of hope for the sport. I see, and hear, of many indicators of a change for the good in the sport.
As I wrote, I agree that it is absurd that every strong ride is followed by questions……but Cobo is not the guy to use as an example. When a Gianetti rider suddenly rides out of his skin we should be asking questions, lots of them.
Of course, none of this would be an issue if we had a governing body with a credible and transparent doping policy. We could have faith that we were likely seeing a clean race. That’s the real disgrace. Using Gianetti as an example and leaving the rider aside, how does he have a licence?
Sadly too true. While TRR’s comment is also undeniable – especially in the sycophancy to certain US riders – the cynical backlash is equally poisonous. It is likewise subjective and uneven: witness the groans of some critics on Levi’s TT during the USACPC, yet nary a word about CVV, just half a second back.
I’d like to believe we are in the post-doping era, and it is clear that we are indeed long past Festina, yet it is a very uneasy truce. Some of us hold our breath and hope, some talk trash of the whole affair. In any case, is it just a defense mechanism to forestall the pain of another disappointment? The young riders and fans may get beyond this, but for those of us who endured that relentless series of gut-punch letdowns, is it so surprising that an easy out toward cynicism has been taken?
No, it’s far from surprising. Totally understandable.This shift from me is a conscious effort to step back and reset my own preconceptions. As I said to TRR above. Maybe it’s time.
Why do you think Froome is clean? Basing your entire argument on that is a bit of a non sequitur don’t you think?
If Sky doesn’t renew his contract after this performance, I think we know the answer.
Don’t take this the wrong way but you’ve completely missed the point of the post. It isn’t about whether Cobo is innocent or guilty it’s about it being time to move away from “guilty until proven innocent” attitudes.
As for your last sentence? If Sky doesn’t renew his contract you’ll know as much as you do about the situation now. Nothing.
Due process, transparency, fairness. Punishment when due.
I am fucking SICK of “he’s dirty (nudge, nudge, wink, wink)” tittle tattle.
As to assuming Froome is clean? I don’t. But unless you’ve got proof, properly presented to authorities who can actually use it? I won’t assume he’s dirty either.
Jesus H Christ.
“he beat Froome ( a denizen of Her Majesty’s Empire so obviously squeaky clean) ”
Sorry I guess that meant I thought you assumed he was clean.
Yes, I realise the point of your post. I also think you have your head happily in the sand.
But carry on…
Why bother with the sport then? Serious question. If you’ve listened to The Velocast or The Flammecast at all then you’ll know I’ve been extremely critical and cynical about dopage for a long time.
There are many indicators though that this year is different so I choose to give the benefit of the doubt.I much prefer this fresh air instead of the miasma of the murky, soft, white, underbelly.
I’ve seen passionate fans with something worth saying drift away from the pro sport because of the constant negative attitudes of folk making “assumptions”.
The comment about the Empire was to mock the many who seem to base their “assumptions” on rider nationality.
As to head in the sand? You really haven’t listened or read my crap before now have you? ;o)
Well, if you’re cynical about the whole thing, you’re either going to be right, or pleasantly surprised – I can see why people like to take that view 🙂
More seriously, I think there’s a middle ground somewhere between “Everything is peachy” and “Everyone’s at it”. As hard as it is to ignore the pasts of some riders and managers, there’ll come a point in a clean(er) sport where we’ll have to if things are going to move on.
But the cynics will never be pleasantly surprised. No rider will ever be ‘proven’ to be clean.
My view of cyclists and doping is much like that of Schroedinger’s Cat. I can neither tell whether a pro cyclist is clean or doping without evidence that I as a spectator am unlike to have access to.
I can choose to believe that individual riders, team or countries are clean or dirty but that is merely supposition on my part. I cannot definitively know that this is the case.
Therefore have a choice do I watch the sport and go hurrah the clean Johnny Englishman has won, boo for that dirty foreigner or do I watch cycle sport for the spectacle, the closeness of the racing and the tactics with the peloton. For the sake of my sanity and enjoyment of the sport I will choose the later.
Give that man a coconut! ;o)
John.
Some good points have been made here and I have seen this over & back thought process on individual riders quite a lot more lately.
To me this is a futile endeavour for a number of reasons.
Firstly as pointed out by ‘Irishpeloton’ no-one can ever be proven ‘clean’ so until an actual positive the argument (both for & against) is just that, an argument.
You hit the nail on the head when you mentioned “due process” and seeking a “fair, transparent, process that riders and public alike can trust”.
That is the real problem – the cycling fans have lost that trust in the “due process”.
While I can understand your exasperation for me I rarely care about the individuals as they are part of a flawed system – but it is the system itself that needs to be exposed and ultimately changed.
Bingo, the system is what needs to be changed. Shining a light on the UCI, the Doctors, directors, and owners that enable this mess is key.
Our work here is done. Consensus reached.Now, when do we storm Aigle? ;o)
To steal one of @Velocast’s catch phrases. I could not agree more.