Press Release Regarding Fränk Schleck

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderator: Moderator Team

Posts: 1326
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 5:12 pm

by marko

Just as we suspend belief when goin to the movies etc., we do the same with this sport, otherwise we'd give up and go away.

Posts: 380
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 7:16 am
Location: Geelong, Victoria, Australia

by TMK001

Here is a question thats going through my mind?

Why has it taken two years and all the BS investigations to uncover the fact he was linked to OP? Why didn't Frank come out at the start and say "I was linked to OP, anyone can test my values, I was getting coaching advise only... I have nothing to hide - I'm innocent" or similar...

Rather than release a spin doctor statement 2 years after... two years of opportunity to be honest with the cycling fans and let us decide if we believe him or not.

I'm sorry, it screeeeeeaaaaams guilty to me.

Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 10:19 am
Location: Germany

by jozuph

Fuentes provided nobody with training programs

Posts: 1046
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 12:49 pm
Location: Stockholm


marko wrote:Just as we suspend belief when goin to the movies etc., we do the same with this sport, otherwise we'd give up and go away.

I don't. I watch the race, I assume they are all doping.

I would say the politics around doping make the overall soap opera more fun than many sports.

The only thing that puts me off the sport is strong outright denials of doping. The people like Ricco and Canc who when pushed say 'I would really not talk about that' are more honest than the Armstrongs and the Ullrichs.

User avatar
Posts: 2327
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:52 pm
Location: Aix-les-Bains

by Danton

jozuph wrote:Fuentes provided nobody with training programs

Good point, Cecchini was the man with the coaching plans, the SRM software and more. Fuentes was the blood bank. Schleck's denial looks too weak.

Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:16 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

by Sparta

I truly believe that at the time Frank wanted to "improve" his riding as was the norm in the peloton - hopefully more than today. But there is no evidence that he didn´t change his mind after the initial contact. If that is indeed the case, he probably just naively hoped that it would all go away if he never mentioned it - very normal human behaviour. If he indeed did go for the full monty, he would most likely have bloodbags in OP, which would make it stupid to allow comparisons.
Sic transit gloria mundi

User avatar
Posts: 5771
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:37 am
Location: Phoenix Arizona

by CharlesM

Nothing says he didn't or did have bags there.

I guess there is a broader investigation now from the Lux authorities. We'll see if it's just another attempt by an official or two to keep getting their name in the paper... Or if there is really more evidence or a good lead.

I don't, for a second, discount the use of doping accusation and the massive hype that surrounds it as a political stunt by several people... It's a great way for officials to get press.

And Coaching was a part of Fuentes program as well. Timing doping with training cycle and stage was an integral part of the benefit.

User avatar
Posts: 7926
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

by djconnel

marko wrote:Just as we suspend belief when goin to the movies etc., we do the same with this sport, otherwise we'd give up and go away.

That's not necessarily the case. We know riders cheat. Every time they grab onto a team car, that's cheating. Every time (in the US) they cross a center-line, that's cheating. So many of the deals rumored to occur in the peloton are cheating. I've heard mixed stores about how closely riders are held to 6.8... more cheating? (Emma Pooley's bike's gotta be carrying a heck of a lot of heavy metal...)

If cheating can be checked, that's as good as as you can do. Don't expect perfection, or you'll be disillusioned. No suspension of disbelief is necessary. It is what it is. It's just a race.

Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:24 am

by hors_categorie

Tapeworm wrote:Aye, an "attempt to possess" could definitely be an offense. But you have to prove exactly what he was going to possess. Or that the person suppling indeed had the item the person thought they were going to possess.

For example if there was a bag labelled "EPO for Mr Schleck (or some cunning codename, let's say F.Schleck, no wait, too obvious, lets say, Frank S.) then this could be an attempt to possess. If there was an entry in Schleck's diary saying "Monday 9.00am, pick special bag of... stuff," also an attempt.

Until you actually have something to link the payment to, it just smells, no offence. So far.

What about "Amigo de birillo" from the OP list of blood bag nicknames? This was suggested by an unknown 'source' to a German newpaper some time ago (but after the Tour), so not exactly reliable, but now this stuff has come out a month or two later about the payment, it starts to make sense...

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Last post