Cyclingnews TV   News  Tech   Features   Road   MTB   BMX   Cyclo-cross   Track    Photos    Fitness    Letters   Search   Forum  

Recently on

Dauphiné Libéré
Photo ©: Sirotti

Letters to Cyclingnews - September 21, 2007

Here's your chance to get more involved with Cyclingnews. Comments and criticism on current stories, races, coverage and anything cycling related are welcomed, even pictures if you wish. Letters should be brief (less than 300 words), with the sender clearly identified. They may be edited for space and clarity; please stick to one topic per letter. We will normally include your name and place of residence, but not your email address unless you specify in the message.

Please email your correspondence to

Astana's future and Bruyneel
Bruyneel's afterlife
Floyd Landis decision
Why is VAM a benchmark
Lifetime bans
Menchov felt betrayed by Rasmussen
Ungrateful Levi
Spanish cycling
Where is the due process

Astana's future and Bruyneel

William, were you kidding about Discovery's strong stance against doping?

Discovery's stance against doping has been so strong that it signed Ivan Basso, who was clearly implicated in the Puerto affair and therefore included in the ProTour's list of riders whom should not be signed, but Discovery did anyway -- to a chorus of objections from other ProTour teams. Then Ivan admitted, once CONI put the big pressure on, that he was indeed guilty. His guilt was not a surprise to most objective fans of cycling, and I'd suggest certainly not to the professionals at Discovery.

Johan Brodie,
Fernie, BC, Canada
Thursday, September 13, 2007

Respond to this letter

Astana's future and Bruyneel #2

Mr. Law's letter is crazy. If Bruyneel is to begin working with Astana, it would be a slap in the face to all those who have worked at his side in the past. It is understandable if he chooses to retire and Discovery closes doors as such. If he chooses not to retire, disbanding Discovery would leave to history one of the greatest teams ever, for the effect of joining one of the worst.

Astana by the way, seems likely to continue regardless of whether or not Bruyneel joins, however it is unfortunate this was not the case with Disco. I can also hardly speculate that this team could reform under Bruyneel in the manner that T-Mobile has given the Kazakh government's continued support of their star riders, even after testing positive. Can Bruyneel bring credibility to Astana with a sponsor that blind? If the rumours are correct that Bruyneel could have brought another sponsor in to tailwind, then it is wrong not to, and it would have been a good way to keep a ProTour license in credible hands.

Instead, at the loss of two ProTour teams this year, and several more next year, Astana is likely to be left in when they ought to be ousted.

Chris Bouchard
Connecticut, USA
Thursday, September 13, 2007

Respond to this letter

Astana's future and Bruyneel #3

Are you crazy? USPS/Discovery has frequently been suspected of doping. Frankie Andreu confessed. Former USPS riders Tyler Hamilton, Roberta Heras and Floyd Landis all tested positive and, except for Landis, have been suspended.

For the longest time Lance Armstrong always ducked behind the assertion that he "never tested positive" instead of proclaiming he never doped.

Johann Bruyneel as director didn't help matters by hiring Ivan Basso, who was drummed from CSC. If you want to get behind a team with a director who is looking to eliminate doping from the sport, look no further than the Slipstream Team and Jonathan Vaughters.

Larry Buttrey
Long Beach, CA, USA
Friday, September 14, 2007

Respond to this letter

Bruyneel's afterlife

I disagree with the position that Johan Bruyneel is guilty of "throwing the Discovery Channel Team to the winds." His situation is much like that of the riders: out of a job. If you want to blame somebody, blame Lance and his other partners equally. I'm saddened by Disco's demise, but cycling moves on and I'm excited that Johan may be back in the game.

John Barton
North Little Rock, Arkansas, USA
Date: Friday, September 14, 2007

Respond to this letter

Bruyneel's afterlife #2

One quick comment...Bruyneel was, maybe, one part of the decision-making group that decided to withdraw Discovery from competition. Tailwind Sports, along with Lance (remember him?) owned the team. While Bruyneel probably had a vote, I think it's unfair to hold him responsible for the decision. The blame lies in the changing sponsor climate, due to the negative press that the cyclists and the organizers have precipitated. I agree with a previous letter...Johann going to Astana sends, what I hope is, a positive message to the team, to cycling and to the public.

Saturday, September 15, 2007

Respond to this letter

Bruyneel's afterlife #3

Johan Bruyneel DID NOT pull the Discovery Channel Team, Tailwinds Sport the parent company did. Granted he was part of the decision but it was not solely his to make.

We have no right to tell Johan Bruyneel what he should or should not do, I'd be looking at something else to bring home the bacon and boost my retirement fund as well.

I hope he does take Astana and the Kazakh government up on their offer because if he cleans up Astana and takes them into the upper echelons of the sport he took USPS/Discovery too, we'll have a trustworthy team to support for many years to come.

Donald Young
Aberdeen, Scotland
Monday, September 17, 2007

Respond to this letter

Floyd Landis decision

I must admit that I haven't read the (obviously disgraceful) 'Lawyer's letter', however I would like to make a few points in relation to the barrage of attacks it has gotten in response.

Firstly, I don't think it's up to us, the public, to decide on whether it is one of the most respected laboratories in the world or not, just as it's not up to the cyclists either. The only people who are in a position to evaluate these things are medically accredited experts in this area. I hope beyond all hope that WADA and everyone else has made their decisions regarding laboratory accreditation fairly, however it would be unreasonable for me to assume otherwise based on hearsay from the media, and Floyd Landis' much publicized defence. It's not surprising that in a small community like the professional peloton, rumours and a negative image will spread quickly, especially if the lab is catching (rightly or wrongly) riders' friends who they did not believe were doping. This does not make riders experts in the science of dope testing. Similarly, just because we all read Landis' internet defence, does not make us experts, and does not give us the required information to condemn the lab. News Flash: That was the point of making his defence public, so everyone would see his reasonable sounding view of things, and form the same opinions. That's fine, but it doesn't make it any more or less true. That's why it should be, and is, up to experts in the field of sports arbitration to decide (after months of work - not just a couple of hours after work every so often).

In relation to the leaking of information, obviously it's a terrible thing to be going on, but the whole point of it is that nobody is sure who does it, otherwise there would be sanctions. All the info from Operation Puerto is getting leaked, but it has nothing to do with the French lab, so it's clearly happening all over the place. It is never just the lab that has information, because they have to pass it on.

It is clear to everyone that there were some problems in the procedure at the French lab during the testing, like the woman who knew who she was testing. Ok, so maybe this means 'legally' that he has to be found not guilty, but as I said earlier most of us aren't lawyers, or doctors, and so there's no point in trying to give an 'expert opinion'. Of course, it's possible that this woman just hates Floyd Landis, and deliberately causes his positive result, but does anyone really think that if she was in the position to do that, she would only do it to one rider, specifically Floyd Landis?

As everyone keeps saying, he seems like a nice guy, so that seems very strange to me, especially on that one specific day. The only positive of the whole tour and it's the guy that does 'that' ride. I don't think its right to assume guilt based on how good a performance is, but to assume that through random lab error, this specific rider on this specific day was found positive is a little far fetched. And this woman can't have been stupid enough to think that she could give him a positive, and not immediately be under huge scrutiny. The people who subscribe to the absurd argument that athletes couldn't possibly have doped because they knew they'd be tested and wouldn't get away with it, would need to also believe that this woman couldn't possibly have deliberately tampered with Landis' sample, because she knew she would be caught too. To argue otherwise would be totally hypocritical. To sum up, if it takes this long for experts working professionally to work it out, why should we be so certain at home on our computers?

Simon Kriewaldt
Friday, September 14, 2007

Respond to this letter

Why is VAM a benchmark

I agree that VAM is not a straightforward predictor of power output (and therefore can't simply point to possible doping). In fact, one of the proponents of using VAM as a training tool, Dr. Michele Ferrari, has published data showing the relation between slope (the road grade in percent) and VAM, for constant power output. The results for a 64 kg person climbing at a constant 300 W VAM varies from 1200 to nearly 1700 m/h for slopes from 5% to 13%, a 42% change! This is indeed a big error if one is trying to estimate the cyclist's power output from this single measure.

Also, VAM increases at higher slopes, up to the measured 13%. This is because on lower road grades the bike speed is higher, and more energy is spent in wind resistance than on simply increasing ones potential energy by moving higher. Ignoring wind resistance and other losses, power and VAM are related by the following: P=m*g*VAM, where m is the total mass (bike + rider), g is the gravitational constant and P is the power output. The theoretical maximum VAM for this cyclist is then 1722 m/h, and is only obtainable with negligible wind resistance and high efficiency of the cyclist on the bike. Ferrari's data suggest that for this highly trained cyclist, a slope of 13% or greater is required to slow him to the point that VAM is near the theoretical value. Therefore, measuring VAM on such very steep inclines might indeed give a good measure of power.

Of course, for less capable cyclists, VAM is probably a much better measure of power for even modest slope hills since speed, and therefore power loss due to air resistance, is so much less.

It would be interesting to see more data in order to understand the universality of the increase of VAM with slope, taking into account rider weight, speed, riding style, and other variables. It seems reasonable that one might extract an estimate of power from observable data even on lower slopes, using VAM, speed, slope and possibly other factors.

David Abraham
New York
Monday, September 17, 2007

Respond to this letter

Why is VAM a benchmark? #2

Ian asked why is VAM a benchmark? It is a benchmark, but not a good one.

I actually answered that very question exactly 3 years ago to point out that Dr Ferrari, who then had a column in cyclingnews, used that estimator of performance a little bit carelessly.

If you search this website (fall 2004) you will find a column by Ferrari acknowledging the sloppiness of VAM as a measure of power.

Here is my 2004 comment, still valid.

How good is VAM? Your commentator Dr Ferrari uses the vertical speed of ascent as a quick way of estimating the relative power exerted by riders on hill climbs.

While it is a quick estimator, it is not a very accurate one for comparing different climbs. Let's go to analytic cycling and see what VAM one gets for a 66 kg cyclist riding a 7.5 kg bike with an extra 1.5 kg of equipment, i.e. a total of 75 kg. For the other numbers to plug in, let's say the rider has CdA of 0.38 square meters, air density is 1.1 and rolling resistance = 0.004 Then, for whatever slope, let's say the exerted power is a CONSTANT 430 watts at the back wheel, ie about 440 watts at the crank ( 6.67 watts/kg). How much will his/her VAM vary according to the steepness of the climb?

Here are the answer from analytic cycling:

6% - 1590 meters/hr
7% - 1696 meters/hr
8% - 1777 meters/hr
9% - 1837 meters/hr
10% - 1883 meters/hr
11% - 1917 meters/hr
12% - 1948 meters/hr
15% - 1998 meters/hr

One can readily see that the VAM is really a crude estimator of efforts on climbs of different steepness as for the same given power the VAM drops from 1883 m/hr on a 10% incline to 1590 m/hr on a 6% slope, a difference of more than 15%.

François Siohan
Thursday, September 16, 2004

Respond to this letter

Lifetime bans

Here is my $0.02:

I think lifetime bans should apply to riders and anyone 'convicted' of aiding the doping practice - managers, agents, doctors et all.

Here is what I would do if I were Pat McQuaid.

1. Institute lifetime bans effective January 1, 2008. Anyone who caught doping and is found guilty gets an instant lifetime ban from UCI events.
2. Declare a private amnesty running until midnight Dec 31, 2007. This would include everyone involved in the sport. Names of people would be known only to UCI management.
3. Make all UCI staff and sub contractors sign air-tight NDA. Prosecute people who leak data to the fullest extent permissible by law in their jurisdiction.
4. Coordinate investigations with police agencies and Interpol to avoid the drama of recent years. At least avoid being caught unaware of what is happening.
5. License all team and consultant positions - impose heavy penalties to teams or individuals that employ unlicensed private contractors (Fuentes, Ferrari).

The amnesty would give people a way out prior to the strict new rules taking effect. Confessions could lead to whistle-blowing and a purging of 'bad elements' in the sport.

For every doper, there are two clean racers that would ride their hearts out for a chance at a classic or Tour.

Another thing, if Pat wants to shed the UCI's goofball bush-league status in professional sport, the leaks and court of popular opinion non-sense has to stop. Also, the feuds with ASO and WADA have to end. Pat has cornered himself now and the UCI is at risk. Many people would love to see it die, but I think some good management could fix most of the UCI's image problems in one productive off-season.

Perry Longinotti
Monday, September 17, 2007

Respond to this letter

Menchov felt betrayed by Rasmussen

The idea of using peer-pressure to clean up the peloton is all well and good, but regarding the example given, as I recall, Lance "chased down Filippo Simioni and refused to allow him to be a part of a breakaway group" because Simioni had accused a certain infamous Dr. of helping his clients cheat, thus implicating Lance.

There is also frequent mention of an "unspoken code" in cycling wherein the riders have kind of agreed to not rat each other out, which is enforced by peer-pressure. Though no exact instances come to mind, I'm certain that anyone following cycling will be familiar with it. It would be great if this type of enforcement was possible, but it seems to me that the opposite is true: peer-pressure is exerted by the cheaters on potential rats, not the other way around.

R Ware
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Friday, September 14, 2007

Respond to this letter

Menchov felt betrayed by Rasmussen #2

I just cant get past this comment in regard to peer group pressure cleaning up the sport. In the 2004 Tour, Lance Armstrong made a dramatic statement on the road when he chased down Filippo Simioni and refused to allow him to be part of a breakaway group. Basically saying "I am the boss of you and I can make your life miserable." I recollect it was in fact Simioni that was trying to clean up the sport by voicing dissatisfaction with Armstrong's links with the 'evil' Dr Ferrari, thus incurring Armstrong's wrath for breaking omerta. Armstrong should have been pilloried for acting like an immature prat trying to protect omerta.

Adrian Grose
Perth, Western Australia
Monday, September 17, 2007

Respond to this letter

Ungrateful Levi?

I just read the letter from Noel M in LA where the idea is that Levi should have allowed George to win the US Championship road race this year since George did so much work for Levi. Let's not forget that Levi completely demolished the field in this same race last year, with big George right on his wheel. When the finish was in sight, Levi sat up and left the win to George. In that sense, the work George did in ToC and TDF was repayment for Levi's efforts last year, especially since Levi was not 'officially' on the same team as George at the time.

Greg G.
Atlanta, GA, USA
Friday, September 14, 2007

Respond to this letter

Ungrateful Levi? #2

Levi being ungrateful? He practically gift wrapped the US National Championships for George last year, knowing George would soon be his new team-mate and domestique. In return George, as you mentioned, worked his butt off for Levi through the Tour of California and the Tour de France etc. Just so you know it's George's job to do that for his team leaders, be it Contador or Levi. Sounds like they're pretty even to me. Levi gave this years Nationals his all and rode the field off his wheel to a great solo win.

It's disappointing that some people have to go looking for flaws in one rider's performance because they aren't their personal "favourite", George is a great rider and I detract nothing from that, but what is so wrong with Levi going for his first US Road Race National Championship win? If you'll recall Levi has been plenty grateful to George in the past, be it in the ToC or the TdF, for the sacrifices he has made. If George saw Levi as being so ungrateful to all he had done, he would have chased down his own team-mate. Instead he did the honourable thing and sat in, partially a victim of negative racing on the day. I'm sorry that you can't accept a new US National Champion, but I'm more than happy to see Levi wearing the Stars and Stripes for next year.

Thursday, September 13th, 2007

Respond to this letter

Ungrateful Levi #3

Your memory is very short. Cast your mind back exactly one year and you will find Levi pulling George round the course and up the hills to take the stars and stripes. Reportedly Levi could have ridden off on his own up Paris mountain but perhaps didn't a) because he was staying at George's house and b) because he was with the Gerolsteiner team and would be joining Discovery in the following year and wanted the goodwill. This year it's his turn.

Friday, September 14, 2007

Respond to this letter

Spanish cycling

Why is it that the Spanish cycling federation doesn't want to investigate the Spanish riders implicated in Puerto? They keep trotting out the flimsy excuse that there was no law against sporting fraud at the time, but unless I completely misunderstand things, the Spanish federation is strictly a sport governing body and as such is supposed to enforce the rules of the sport they represent. Can they only sanction a rider for an offence if he as also violated Spanish laws as well?

The Italians investigated their riders who were implicated and as a result several of them are now serving bans for their participation. The same is the case with the Germans, but the Spanish continue to brush things under the carpet and pretend that there isn't a problem. Are they really that naïve or do they just think the cycling fans are that stupid?

Brian M
Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Respond to this letter

Where is the due process

It seems strange to me that as soon as there is an accusation (possibly with evidence of some nature) that bicycle racers are immediately banned from participation. Shouldn't they actually be convicted of something before losing the ability to participate?

It seems more logical to me to allow participation until guilt or innocence has been proven. It would also seem fine to put real teeth into the penalties under those circumstances (e.g. a lifetime ban for the first incident). I guess that approach might be better (or not) and innocent persons would not be harmed (here is where I see the real bonus). Like other professional athletes, their careers are short. To be forbidden for simply being accused seems patently unfair to me.

Rasmussen was kicked out of the Tour de France for having accusations against him. But the eventual winner, Contador also had various accusations floating over his head. Is one guilty? Both? Neither? We don't know. At any rate, the whole thing seems very uneven.

I agree that one ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. But does a system without due process provide the deterrent against the bad behaviour?

Truthfully, I can't say that I have any solutions to the problem, but I can see disturbing problems with the current way of operating things.

Another thing that is patently obvious is that testing procedures need to be standardized. From the things I have read about on the Landis case, it is very clear that proper procedures have not been followed. Especially telling is that results are leaked immediately and before verification. Does that not tell you instantly that someone has an axe to grind?

In order for the testing to be effective:
* Testing has to be standardized and verified.
* The results should withstand scientific scrutiny and the procedures should be followed exactly as defined.
* Those performing the test must be totally impartial to the results.

It is very clear that none of these objectives has been met. Testing that is unreliable is not better than not testing at all. If ten guilty people are caught and one innocent one is falsely identified, that (to me) is a greater miscarriage of justice than if the ten guilty parties never got caught.

I guess that my bottom line here is:

1. Straighten up the testing and prove its accuracy

2. Do not punish until guilt has been proven.

I don't even know if they are good suggestions, but they seem good to me.

Dann Corbit
Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Respond to this letter

Recent letters pages

Letters 2007

  • September 14: Astana & Bruyneel, Cycling vs. soccer, Cycling will survive, Floyd Landis decision, LeMond's comments, Menchov felt betrayed by Rasmussen, Ungrateful Levi, Why is VAM a benchmark?
  • September 7: Cycling vs. soccer, Floyd Landis decision, UCI, ASO, LeMond, et al who cares? Riders, Lawyers in the Landis case, LeMond's comments, Riders taking the fall?, US Postal/Discovery R.I.P.
  • August 31: LeMond’s comments, Farewell De Peet, Cycling needs a Norma Rae, Vino & human rights?, Cadel was robbed, Floyd Landis decision, Market beliefs, Sinkewitz Positive.
  • August 23: Biting the hand that feeds you, Cadel was robbed, Congratulations to grand tour organizers, Cycling needs a Norma Rae, Discovery folding, Drugs and cycling, Fewer ProTour teams, Floyd Landis decision, Petacchi’s asthma, Science of doping, Sinkewitz positive, Tailwind withdrawal, The good news...., Unibet, what a shame, World’s exclusion, Vino: "a clear violation of human rights"?,
  • August 17: Dying from within..., Cadel was robbed, Biting the hand that feeds you, Discovery folding, Astana-Tour cover-up?, Christian Moreni, UCI may lose it all, Drugs & cycling, Aussie proTour team, Valverde and the worlds, Klöden: are things getting out of control?, Congratulations to grand tours organizers
  • August 10: Smarter Drug Testing, Cassani and Rasmussen, Bruyneel: take doping seriously, The dubious Disco boys, Spanish ethics, Who's to blame for doping?, Untrustworthy authorities, Insurance for pro riders, Science of doping, It's working?, State of cycling, Less mountain stages, Positively false, Sinkewitz positive, Team suspensions, Tour ethics, Vino response, Editorials call for ending Tour, Revoking le Tours jerseys, LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, WADA vigilantes
  • August 3, Part 1: What about team suspensions?, WADA vigilantes, Vino response, Vino excluded, but why the whole team?, Unanswered questions, Tour de France doping "scandals", State of cycling, Spanish ethics and the A.C. joke, Sinkewitz positive, Secondary testing?, Editorials calling for ending Tour, Rasmussen's location, Quality control and anti doping, Positively False, McQuaid: not the Godfather of cycling, Less mountain stages
  • August 3, Part 2: LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, Le Tour, L'affaire Vino, It’s the culture, IOC questioning cycling in Olympics, Greg LeMond is not surprised, Greg LeMond, German TV, Due process, Evans v Contador - the real margin of victory, Doping, the media and the MPCC, Doping, Evans, Dope tests and the tour, Different perspective on doping, David Millar, Cycling revolution, Cadel was robbed, Bruyneel a 'man in black'?, Another drug test result leaked, Andy Hampsten
  • July 27 Part 1: 80's style back in fashion?, A great few days for cycling, Vino excluded, but why the whole team?, Another drug test result leaked, ASO discretion in administering Tour justice, Astana in stage 5, Astana’s tactics, Bad day for Australia, Bloody dopes, Cadel Evans, Catching Vino is good news, Conspiracy?, David "what a joke" Millar, Doping, Doping controls, Tour ethics, German TV, LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, How many big bastards in the peloton?
  • July 27 Part 2: How will cycling survive, Kazahkstan Pie, Kessler's lie, Landis and lie detector, Landis testing, Le maillot jaune is gone, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, The'Vino' scene, Losing time and bouncing back, Losing my religion, Moreau, No, not Vino, Out of season testing and baseline tests, PED's, Revoking le Tours jerseys, Petacchi out
  • July 20: What about team suspensions?, Tyler Hamilton, Stuttgart Worlds, Sinkewitz positive, Petacchi out!, Bad day for Australia, Kessler's lie, Landis and lie detector, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, Intestinal problems, Greg LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, Fair doping tests, Drug testing and sequence of recorded results, Revoking le Tours jerseys, Advice for Stapleton and Sinkewitz, Astana in stage 5, Crashes, bike changes & team cars
  • July 13: Fair doping tests, Tyler Hamilton, Tour downright exciting!, Stuttgart(?) Worlds, Rocketing Robbie v tormented Tommy, Armstrong's comment to ASO, Petacchi out, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, Intestinal Problems, Incentive for doping, Imagine, UCI agreement, Does the UCI test for blood transfusions?, The real heroes, Bicycle options,
  • July 5: Tour de France boring!, The real heroes, The flying Scotsman, Signing the contract, No Zabriskie?, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, Incentive for Doping, Bicycle Options, Anti-doping charter, Sale of the century
  • June 29: "The Flying Scotsman",Cancellara,The real heroes, Categorised Climbs, Tour for Devolder and Zabriskie?, Tour de France, boring!,Nationalistic pride, Anti Doping Charter, Bicycle Options, Doping, Doping Coverage - Enough already..., Who dopes? Who doesn't? Who cares!
  • June 22: Anti Doping Charter, The real heroes, Basso's "suspension", Categorized climbs, Bicycle options, Greg LeMond and record ITT's, It is about us!, Finding the clean winner of the TdF?, Tour de France, BORING!, Prudhomme and the 1996 Tour farce, Riis, the '96 Tour and Prudhomme, Amnesty for doping..., Cycling, doping....???, Who dopes? Who doesn't? Who cares!
  • June 15: Bicycle options, New Trek Madone, A week of confessions, Cycling - not yet a real professional sport, Di Luca's finest win..., Three Tour wins for Ullrich?, Ullrich getting screwed, Giro fever, Amnesty for doping offenses, Greg LeMond and record ITTs, Is drafting a known doper cheating?, Let's sort this mess out, Doping hypocrisy, Cycling, doping....?, Prudhomme and the1996 Tour farce, Simoni goes 1850 meters / hour
  • June 8: Di Luca's finest win, Simoni goes 1850 metres / hour, What ever happened to Iban Mayo?, Andy the Dandy, Three Tour wins for Ullrich?, Ullrich getting screwed, Percentage of pros with asthma, Amnesty for doping offenses, ling - not yet a real professional sport, Doping and cycling, Greg LeMond and record ITTs, Meaningless defense, We are out of denial - Let's look forward
  • June 1, part 1: A thought for cycling's true heroes..., A cunning plan, A great opportunity for the UCI, Admissions of guilt, Let's have some real confessions, Amnesty is the way forward, Suggestions for an amnesty, Amnesty, Amnesty or punishment?, ASO's double standard, Tour Clowns, Bjarne Riis, Bjarne Riis confession, Riis must go, Riis, Basso, Zabel, et al..., Repairing the Magenta Express, Tip of the iceberg, Riis and winning the tour on EPO
  • June 1, part 2: Confessions?, Honour - Seemingly rare in cycling, How deep do you go?, Who do we give it to?, A week of confessions, Peer pressure, Mind boggling hypocrisy, Pro cycling - Sometimes you make it hard to love you, Meaningless defence, Riding with Lance, Lucky Lance, Cheating by proxy, LeMond trying to tear down US riders , So, if Floyd is right..., Thank you Floyd, Floyd Landis hearing, Mr. Young's closing arguments, Something more important..., What ever happened to Iban Mayo?, Percentage of pros with asthma:
  • May 23: Landis case live coverage, LeMond a true champion, Questioning LeMond's motives, LeMond trying to tear down US riders, Saint LeMond, Landis and his character, Landis has made cycling a joke, Landis had his drink spiked?, Landis in a corner, Landis polygraph?, Landis' disclosure of information, The quality of Landis' character, Landis' behaviour, Joe Papp
  • May 18: Armstrong can defend himself, Di Brat, Chris Hoy's world kilo record attempt , Hoy in sixty seconds, What ever happened to Iban Mayo?, Hypocrisy of the cycling world, Italian Reactions to Basso, Who's telling the truth?, Basso + Ullrich = Armstrong?, Basso still a legend, Simoni vs Basso, Basso, Landis etc The new mafia?, Landis to ask UCI to boot Pound, Vinokourov to claim second in '05 TdF?, Percentage of pros with asthma, Unibet at Dunkerque
  • May 11: An attempt at doping?, Almost as bad as Ullrich, Basso admission, Hats off Basso, Basso still a legend, Basso's attempted plea bargain, Basso and Discovery, Discovery's PR, Basso vs Simoni , Truth and Reconciliation Commission, A means to an end, Hypocrisy of the cycling world, Vinokourov to claim second in '05 TdF? , New Puerto plan, Where is the Puerto money?, Time to start re-stating race results, The morals and math of cycling, Chris Hoy's world kilo record attempt , Unibet at Dunkerque, Davide Rebellin
  • May 4: Call that a race?, Reflecting on Schumacher's win, Pose with Landis, at a price, Danielson should leave Discovery, Davide Rebellin, The year of the clean Classics?, Basso and Discovery, Basso this, Landis that, Ullrich the other..., Basso, DNA and whatever else, Basso's DNA, Say it ain't so, Johan, Let's cut them some slack!, Armstrong, head and shoulders above?, Landis, Armstrong vs the Lab, It's not all about the Tour!, Puerto Affair
  • April 27: The year of the clean Classics?, David Rebellin, Call that a race?, Reflecting on Schumacher's win, Danielson should leave Discovery, Inspirational O'Grady and those cobbles, L'Equipe does it again!, Tour de France speaks out, The morals and math of cycling, Basso and Puerto, Puerto, part deux, Gilberto, you were right!, Landis, Armstrong vs the Lab, Pose with Landis, at a price?, Taking blood, Gent-Wevelgem and the Kemmelberg, Gent-Wevelgem and water bottles
  • April 20: Stuey wins Roubaix, O'Grady Rocks!, An Aussie in Arenberg, Deep-dish carbon versus the cobbles, Gent-Wevelgem and water bottles, Unibet/FdJ/Lotto - Help!, U.S. Open Cycling Championships, Racing in America, Retesting Floyd's B-samples, Taking blood
  • April 13: Thoughts on Flanders, Crashes at Gent-Wevelgem, Gent-Wevelgem and water bottles, What about that loose water bottle?, T-Mobile one-two, Popo for the Classics, Racing in America, U.S. Open Cycling Championships, Unibet/FdJ/Lotto - Help!, French hypocrites?, Bjarne Riis, Floyd Landis 'B' sample fiasco, Taking blood, Ullrich DNA match
  • April 6: April Fools, Ullrich DNA match, Taking blood, T-Mobile and Puerto, The song remains the same, Ullrich and Hamilton, Tyler Hamilton and flu, Unibet and access into France, Bjarne Riis, Popovych, The death of irony, Armstrong boring?, Ullrich/Armstrong comparisons
  • March 30: Basso wind tunnel testing, Bjarne Riis, Riis' response, Drugs in other sports, Dominquez at Redlands, Armstrong boring?, Ullrich/Armstrong comparisons, Popovych - the new Armstrong?, ASO wildcard selections, ASO-UCI split, Boys atop the sport, Cycling at two speeds, Puerto shelved, Tyler Hamilton.
  • March 23: Popovych - the new Armstrong?, A few years ago, Tyler Hamilton, Operación Puerto not complete, Puerto shelved, ASO-UCI split, Drugs in other sports, Basso wind tunnel testing, Water bottle and cage sponsorship, Bates' article on Jan Ullrich, Ullrich's retirement, The current state of cycling
  • March 16: Don Lefévère, Lefévère tries to reinforce omerta, Spring fever, Ullrich's retirement, UCI has no power, Puerto shelved, Who's been taking what?, ProTour a flawed competition?, UCI-Grand Tour organizer dual!, ASO-UCI split, ASO needs to see benefits in ProTour, Sponsorship, drug use and dinosaurs, The current state of cycling, New Pro Cyclist Union, Congratulations to Unibet, Unibet situation, marketing, Tour of California mistake
  • March 9: ASO - UCI split, UCI has no power, UCI vs. ASO, UCI vs. the world, ProTour and contracts, The Unibet fiasco: is it that bad?, Unibet and French law, Unibet situation, Pete Bassinger's Iditarod Trail record ride, Bates' article on Jan Ullrich, Ullrich's retirement, Tour of California expenses, Discovery's profile in Europe, Discovery's reasons for pulling sponsorship, Floyd's big ride
  • March 2: Ullrich's retirement, Altitude tents and EPO, Home-made altitude tents, Tyler Hamilton and drug testing, The agony of Unibet?, Discovery's reasons for pulling sponsorship, Discovery's world upside down?, Upside down Disco solved, Tour of California mistake, Graeme Brown, Hats off to Dick Pound?, Grand Tours, who really cares?, ProTour and contracts, ProTour vs wildcards, RCS' decision, UCI vs. the world, Floyd's big ride, Asthma everywhere
  • February 23: Altitude tents and EPO, Tour of California mistake, Chavanel's training regime, Discovery's reasons for pulling sponsorship, Discovery's world upside down?, Tyler Hamilton and drug testing, Grand Tours, who really cares?, The Unibet fiasco: is it that bad?, A solution to the Unibet situation, UCI and the ASO, UCI vs. the world, Will the fight never end?, Paris Nice and others, Pro Tour and contracts, RCS decision, Hats off to Dick Pound, Armstrong owes Dick Pound nothing, Graeme Brown, Asthma everywhere, The sorry state of pro-cycling
  • February 16: T-Mobile, Adam Hanson and doping, Unibet's new jersey, Double standards for Unibet?, RCS decision, A letter to ASO, Hamilton and Tinkov, Discovery Channel, Asthma everywhere, Bart Wellens' comments at the cross worlds, Best moment?, Crowd control at the cross worlds, Doping reconciliation, Get into 'cross racing, Pound still wants answers from Armstrong, The sorry state of pro-cycling
  • February 9: Unibet show they won't be put down, Double standards for Unibet?, Unibet's new jersey, Asthma everywhere, Bart Wellens' comments at the Cross Worlds, Crowd control at the Cross Worlds, Jonathan Page's mechanic beaten, Cheers to Bradley Wiggins, Bradley Wiggins' comments, Jaksche lashes out, Get into 'cross racing, Le Tour was created to sell newspapers, The stakes are too high, Doping reconciliation, Best moment of 2006?, Ivan Basso interview, Ullrich's DNA sample, Ullrich to Relax-GAM?, Ullrich partners with sports-clothing company, Still love to ride, My perfect state of mountain biking, A terrible model for cycling
  • February 2: The sanctimonious need to be taken out back, Confidentiality of test results, Oscar Pereiro cleared, Cyclo-cross reader poll results, Fairness in Operation Puerto?, Riders' nicknames, Doping reconciliation, Help for Floyd Landis, Museeuw's insults, Sven Nys, The Floyd Fairness Fund, The sorry state of pro-cycling
  • January 26: Drug testing methodologies, Museeuw the PR man, Museeuw's insults, Johan Museeuw and Tyler Hamilton, Sven Nys, Conduct in the pro peloton, McQuaid unhappy with Pereiro, Put doping in the correct context, Moreau wins 2006 TDF, Who wins the 2006 Tour now?, Drapac Porsche's exclusion from the TDU, Bike sponsorship, Compact geometry, The Floyd Fairness Fund
  • January 19: Drapac-Porsche and the TDU, Bettini to win the Ronde?, Frame geometry, Phil Liggett's recently stated views, Prudhomme's zealotry, 3 cheers for Christian Prudhomme, Deutschland Tour, 3 cheers for Saunier Duval, Dick Pound, Fairness in Operation Puerto?, Do the maths, The Floyd Fairness Fund
  • January 12: Dick Pound, Just 'Pound' him, Pound casts doubt on Landis, Pound comments, The Dick and Pat Show, McQuaid starts cultural polemic, Why the Pro Tour model will never work, The Floyd Fairness Fund, Riders' union, Cyclo-cross reader poll results, Danny Clark - an inspiration, Allan Peiper, Do the maths, Peter Van Petegem's secret, Justice and America, Lance in Leadville, Tubeless road tires
  • January 5: Danny Clark - an inspiration, Legal standards and cycling, Peter Van Petegem's secret, Lance a no show for Leadville, Cyclo-cross reader poll results, Do the math, A fair trial, Tubeless road tires, Manzano's polygraph test, Blind trust in implicated riders, A terrible state of affairs, Armstrong's credibility - the conspiracy theories, Best ride ever

Letters 2006

  • December 29: Lance in Leadville, Leadville Trail 100, Manzano's polygraph test, British Cycling and the Tour de France, Tell me, what's the problem?, "Disco" team?, Presumption of innocence, Landis and the Landaluze case, Landis' defense fund, American culture, Armstrong's credibility, Back room politics and the IPCT
  • December 22: Scott Peoples, Hypocrite?, Landis and the Landaluze case, Landis' defense fund, Rumours and innuendo, Bjarne Riis interview, Enough already, Back room politics and the IPCT, Armstrong's credibility, American culture, Bjarne's ignorance factor, Deutschland Tour and Denmark Tour, Operation Puerto and the UCI
  • December 15: A totally predictable situation?, Armstrong's credibility, Deutschland Tour and Denmark Tour, Back room politics and the IPCT, Holczer and others, Holczer and the Discovery exclusion, Bjarne's ignorance factor, Can't we all just get along?, DNA safety, Floyd Landis on Real Sports, Genevieve Jeanson, Mark McGwire, Operación Puerto bungled...deliberately?, Operation Puerto and the UCI
  • December 8: Genevieve Jeanson, Floyd Landis on Real Sports, Deutschland Tour, Bjarne's ignorance factor, USADA does it again, Labs and testing, Astana denied ProTour license, Isaac Gálvez, McQuaid, Question about DNA testing, Le Tour de Langkawi 2007
  • December 1: Hamilton, Isaac Gálvez, USADA does it again, Bjarne's ignorance factor, Shorten the Vuelta?, Vuelta short, shorter, shortest, Labs and testing, Ullrich to CSC, Clean up cycling's own house first, Fed up with doping, Strange sponsorships, What about Leipheimer?, French anti-doping laboratory, Basso agrees to DNA testing, Basso to Discovery, What's going on behind the scenes?, Graeme Obree
  • November 24: Graeme Obree, What about Leipheimer?, French anti-doping laboratory, Basso agrees to DNA testing, Basso to Discovery, Richard Virenque, UCI are the problem, What's going on behind the scenes?
  • November 17: Saiz and Tinkoff, Countdown to the 2007 Tour, Improving the reliability of testing, Basso to Discovery, Cycling and DNA testing, Forgetting Tom Simpson, Operación Puerto and national federations, Refusing DNA testing - an admission of guilt?. Reverse blood doping, Richard Virenque, What's going on behind the scenes?
  • November 10: Forgetting Tom Simpson, Tour Route, Basso to Discovery, Cycling and DNA testing, What is DNA testing?, Refusing DNA testing - an admission of guilt?, Jan Ullrich, Operación Puerto and national federations, Reverse blood doping, What's going on behind the scenes?, Comments on McQuaid
  • November 3: Tour Route, Return of a real good guy, Cameron Jennings, Future Australian ProTour team, Neil Stephens, 2007 Tour Intro Video Snub, Richard Virenque, Reverse blood doping, Comments on McQuaid, Marc Madiot, Who's more damaging?, What's going on behind the scenes?, Wada & Cycling's Governing Body, UCI and Doping, The Pope of Cycling and the Spanish Inquisition, Refusing DNA testing - an admission of guilt?, Put up or shut up!, DNA, its so ‘easy', DNA Testing In Cycling

The complete Cyclingnews letters archive