Sinkewitz testifies

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

I am hearing that the ex T-Mobile member testifed yesterday that doping occured before and after Ullrich left the team.Apparently he went into some detail as to when and how it was done.
I don't have the link but if someone does please post it here.

I am hearing that the ex T-Mobile member testifed yesterday that doping occured before and after Ullrich left the team.Apparently he went into some detail as to when and how it was done.
I don't have the link but if someone does please post it here.
Cyclingnews said he also detailed what was going on at Quickstep. I wonder if he was willing to give more detailed info about that.

It may be retribution day for those that have sailed through un-tarnished up until now.
The bad part is that it will hurt the sport overall.
I have mixed feelings. It's like watching your ex drive off a cliff in your new Lexus.

It's like watching your ex drive off a cliff in your new Lexus.
Some are watching that from the back seat or are travelling in a trunk.

These cyclists coming clean are just helping anti-cycling people pour gas into the fire.

.............and in the meantime, we have a UCI President who insists that "there are only a few bad apples".
In 1998, he told us that there is "no doping in cycling".
Progress of sorts, in a peculiar way.
I said that Pat would not be the remedy and he isn't.






This entire process is being drawn out and while it's painful, the ritual denial of the existence of the doping problem ensures that the authorities and the doping apologists are prolonging this painful process.
Of course, they could adopt the other strategy....by trying to distance themselves totally from the sport.
Which seems to be the other strategy being currently employed.

.............and in the meantime, we have a UCI President who insists that "there are only a few bad apples".
In 1998, he told us that there is "no doping in cycling".
Progress of sorts, in a peculiar way.
I said that Pat would not be the remedy and he isn't.






This entire process is being drawn out and while it's painful, the ritual denial of the existence of the doping problem ensures that the authorities and the doping apologists are prolonging this painful process.
Of course, they could adopt the other strategy....by trying to distance themselves totally from the sport.
Which seems to be the other strategy being currently employed.


Yes,McQuaid said he was a remedy and he came close as a disease. I get more cynical every day Lim.

Yeah, it's difficult not to be cycnical JH.

Pat's a secondhand car salesman.
The only time that he will change stance - and his kind will always change stance - is when the tipping point is reached.

Right know, Pat and the folk up in the UCI ivory tower, reckon that they have at least 50.1% support from teams/sponsors/fans etc.
If that level drops to 49.9%, Pat will change his tune.
He tests the water - look how Vino was condemned as the bad boy but others implicated in other scandals are not condemned.

Some of us opposed Pat's nomination for the role at national level (he had to get his national federation to nominate him for the UCI election).
Some like minded people at national level opposed him - because we knew that his election would change nothing.

Don't get me wrong, Pat's a nice guy, affable and good company and he was a superb coach.
But he's a gobshite too.