Why not a shadow at a GT?
Mike Jacoubowsky
"clean-or-die" agenda offer a skeptical media person the opportunity to
shadow and be a room-mate for all or part of a GT? From what I've read,
you're going to need more than one, maybe less than two hours for a
transfusion. It's not something you can easily hide from someone
shadowing you. Of course, if you're shadowing Andy & Stuart you'd have
to make sure you didn't get drunk under the table...
As yet there seem to be no magic pills that will do everything needed;
everything seems to require careful administration and time.
So who do you have David Walsh shadow? Or Paul Kimmage? :-)
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
Brad Anders
> Just curious, maybe it's already been done, why doesn't a team with a
> "clean-or-die" agenda offer a skeptical media person the opportunity to
> shadow and be a room-mate for all or part of a GT?
Why not? Because if riders need 24-hour surveillance to assure they're
riding "fairly", then the sport is so corrupt that it should be shut
down. Which it should be.
Brad Anders
Mike Jacoubowsky
news:dafa39a8-05b8-4bb3...@l20g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 1, 9:40 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote:
> Just curious, maybe it's already been done, why doesn't a team with a
> "clean-or-die" agenda offer a skeptical media person the opportunity to
> shadow and be a room-mate for all or part of a GT?
Why not? Because if riders need 24-hour surveillance to assure they're
riding "fairly", then the sport is so corrupt that it should be shut
down. Which it should be.
Brad Anders
======
I'm not saying this needs to be done for every single rider. Just as the TdF
doesn't test every single rider on every single stage. I'm suggesting that
targeting, or better yet, a top rider volunteering (particularly one who
people suspect of cheating) to do this would make for an interesting story
and provide proof (within reason) that at least one person wasn't cheating.
As for the sport being so corrupt it should be shut down, what's your
justification for that? In what way is cycling not a mirror to the world at
large? I believe a case can be made that any gap between ethics in the
cycling world vs the "real" world has been narrowing quite rapidly over the
past few years. What is it that cycling is doing that is so much more
offensive than many large corporations? What about the Olympics? Why have
them at all when it's obvious the extent to which people are willing to
cheat to get a medal (not just cycling, look at gymnastics, track & field,
that cross country/shooting thing, etc).
We can't stop it (cheating) but we can try to see and understand it better,
and with that, work to reduce its impact in determining who wins & who
loses.
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
Fred
wrote:
At a certain point it must be recognized that we're talking about
entertainment, and the presence of doping does NOT, IMO, warrant the
complete disregard for basic civil liberties. None of us, not one,
would accept such an incredible violation of our privacy in return for
the right to do our job.
Fred
RicodJour
I think you have misconstrued what Mike was saying. I believe he is
talking about having a reporter embedded with the team during a GT -
similar to what happens with some army units in Iraq. It would be a
willful, by invitation, invasion of privacy and would be great
publicity. Who wouldn't want to see pictures and read stories of
behind-closed-doors GT happenings? The reporter would not necessarily
be acting as a chaperone, more of a witness with an all-access pass.
It would not have to be solely about looking for evidence of doping.
R
Fredmaster of Brainerd
Fred Fredburger
> On Oct 1, 6:46 pm, Fred <fred.gar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 1, 10:40 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Just curious, maybe it's already been done, why doesn't a team with a
>>> "clean-or-die" agenda offer a skeptical media person the opportunity to
>>> shadow and be a room-mate for all or part of a GT? From what I've read,
>>> you're going to need more than one, maybe less than two hours for a
>>> transfusion. It's not something you can easily hide from someone
>>> shadowing you. Of course, if you're shadowing Andy & Stuart you'd have
>>> to make sure you didn't get drunk under the table...
>>> As yet there seem to be no magic pills that will do everything needed;
>>> everything seems to require careful administration and time.
>>> So who do you have David Walsh shadow? Or Paul Kimmage? :-)
>>> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>> At a certain point it must be recognized that we're talking about
>> entertainment, and the presence of doping does NOT, IMO, warrant the
>> complete disregard for basic civil liberties. None of us, not one,
>> would accept such an incredible violation of our privacy in return for
>> the right to do our job.
>
> I think you have misconstrued what Mike was saying. I believe he is
> talking about having a reporter embedded with the team during a GT -
> similar to what happens with some army units in Iraq.
You believe that embedding reporters with units in Iraq lead to truthful
reporting?
RicodJour
That was a cheap shot. You pick the ugliest group of guys to make
your point. I see that picture of Hincapie, then I see a picture of
his wife, and I can only conclude that he is hung like a Clydesdale.
R
Beloved Fred No. 1
> You believe that embedding reporters with units in Iraq lead to truthful
> reporting?
More like suck-up ass-licking reporting.
RicodJour
wrote:
Do you believe that drug testing leads to clean races?
Do you believe that any reporter, anywhere, at any time in history,
has been totally unbiased?
Do you believe that marriage prevents infidelity - that a ring plugs a
hole?
You're asking a silly question. Please re-read my post you are
replying to - nowhere did I mention guarantees. It's kind of like
life...there are none.
R
RicodJour
Well, I guess it's a good thing then that we're talking about
entertainment - cycling, and not Iraq, huh?
BTW, when you're embedded with anyone that has massive amounts of
weaponry, where people die all of the time, it's really pretty smart
to suck up to people. The ass licking is probably just recreation.
R
Fred Fredburger
JFC, you're dumb. If you'd read Mike's original post you'd know that his
argument in favor of embedding reporters was that it would make it
difficult/impossible for riders to dope without getting caught. Your
Iraq analogy, rather than supporting his idea, demonstrates one way in
which it is false and yet you presented it as an explanation of what he
meant.
RicodJour
Please reread my post (as you obviously didn't the first time I asked)
and you'll see that I did not alter his meaning, I embellished it.
Free of charge, I might add. You're a mean man.
R
Fred Fredburger
You're a fucking moron.
If you think shadowing a rider wouldn't accomplish a god damned thing,
then just agree with me and quit pretending that you're making a
coherent argument. Candy Ass!
Fred Fredburger
> You're a mean man.
Yeah. To morons, especially! I hate you fuckers!
Mike Jacoubowsky
"Fred Fredburger" <JimJoeBobFred@Everywhere> wrote in message
news:4ca9...@news.x-privat.org...
I have no idea how Iraq and marital infidelity got into my thread.
My only point was that a team and rider might put things in a different
light for a guy like Walsh if they invited him in. It's not like an
embedded reporter situation, where you try to hand-pick and pre-qualify
people who will be sympathetic to your side and manipulate the
situation. This wouldn't be an infringement on the rights of the athlete
either, because he'd be in on it as a willing participant... I never
suggested it would be a requirement.
If you've got nothing to hide, then free unfettered access for at least
a week to a hostile journalist would be quite the experiment. Didn't
Lance try something sorta similar in a way, when he said he'd fully
disclose all his blood values throughout the season? Oh yeah, that's
right, he killed that one. :-)
RicodJour
Sigh. I didn't say it wouldn't accomplish anything. You still didn't
re-read my post, did you? I have time, I'll wait until you do.
R
RicodJour
wrote:
Which is what might happen to the embedded (entombed) reporter. Maybe
they'd find his asphyxiated corpse in the bus basement.
"Yeah, we couldn't understand why he wasn't picking up his cell
phone. We thought he flaked out and split without saying anything.
Damn shame."
R
Fred Flintstein
> If you've got nothing to hide, then free unfettered access for at least
> a week to a hostile journalist would be quite the experiment.
He could screw you in the can just to sell books. I dunno, I wouldn't
touch that if I were a DS. I mean, do we know any fans of the sport
that carries around massive grudges?
Fred Flintstein
RicodJour
wrote:
To protect my interests I'd have a team groupie following the reporter
around 24/7 recording everything. Probably would have to use a female
groupie with silicone implant breast-cams (shooting in stereo is the
way to go). Then I'd have an undercover groupie follow the overcover
groupie and record everything. Then, just to be safe, I'd kill all
three of them, and stuff their naked bodies in the bus basement and
make it look like they David Carridine'd themselves.
R
Ryan Cousineau
> I have no idea how Iraq and marital infidelity got into my thread.
>
Me neither, but that makes this one of the best rbr trolls ever.
Chapeau!
RicodJour
No credit for the David Carridine auto-asphyxiation reference...?
Damn, it's a tough crowd.
R