It's like they say. "Loose lips sink ships". I don't see any good that could come out of this. It's like stirring up the bottom of the pot. With the beating pro cycling has been taking since 1998 for doping, why add to it? We all know 90% of other pro sports dope. Cycling has been under closer scrutiny than any other sport. I don't condone drugs in sports unless it is for health reasons. Hey, an IV drip with vitimins after a hard hot mountain stage in the tour to top off a rider? I wouldn't call that doping. I would call that smart and the right thing to do. I don't think many riders could finnish a major tour without some sort of medical help. It's just sad to see a rider speak out way after the fact when only bad can come of it. Shame on you Frankie.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6066570

I believe there was/is a code of silence in the pro peloton. If you believe that premise, than I have no problem with ex-riders(or current riders) breaking the code

It's like stirring up the bottom of the pot. With the beating pro cycling has been taking since 1998 for doping, why add to it?

Maybe if it gets bad enough, the UCI will stop pretending to do something, and actually do something.

Maybe if it gets bad enough, the UCI will stop pretending to do something, and actually do something.
They're doing a bit, I don't think they have the support to do more than they currently are... Or the legal ability.
At least they're pretending to, as you put it. Football, baseball? I'm sorry, they talk about doping but they don't do ANYTHING.
-estone2

I agree with this. Cycling is getting a black eye because they are trying to do something.

Football and baseball have cloed their eyes to the problem

I agree with this. Cycling is getting a black eye because they are trying to do something.

Football and baseball have cloed their eyes to the problem

Yep. Cycling is head-and-shoulders above any other professional sport, and is nearly up to amateur standards. And that level of control is why they get wacked.

The difficulty is in 'doing something about it.' Nice tale to tell, but tough to make happen. Fact is, the drugs and doping regimens are sophisticated enough that it's nigh well on impossible to say that someone 'did' dope. For things like autologous blood transfusions, it's precisely impossible to say they doped, just that it looks like they probably did. The EPO and testosterone tests aren't all that much more valid - they are statistical comparisons, rather than a true smoking gun.

As for Frankie, he has zero credibility with me. He's got that embittered loser thing working. I'd be equally willing to believe that a) he and Lance had EPO-shooting parties every Friday or B) he made this up completely, and has never taken anything stronger than Starbucks.

When someone stands up that's not in the center of a controversy or has something to gain/prove, I'll pay attention. Until then, some do, some don't, and the 'code of silence' is just a bunch of gossipy women in the back of the peloton. (Apologies to the genetically gifted among us.)

I believe there was/is a code of silence in the pro peloton. If you believe that premise, than I have no problem with ex-riders(or current riders) breaking the code


I agree Dave and I think that nearly every contender has ridden "hot".

After the Spanish Inquisition gets done there will be much more insight into the situation.

I think they need to legalize safe methods of improving performance so that the desire to use illegal drugs is eliminated.

Frankie got caught between a rock and a hard place. He was forced to testify against LA under oath and now he steps up and tells the truth about himself with nothing to gain but his future in announcing and cycling is now in jeopardy.

It's like they say. "Loose lips sink ships". I don't see any good that could come out of this. It's like stirring up the bottom of the pot. With the beating pro cycling has been taking since 1998 for doping, why add to it? We all know 90% of other pro sports dope. Cycling has been under closer scrutiny than any other sport. I don't condone drugs in sports unless it is for health reasons. Hey, an IV drip with vitimins after a hard hot mountain stage in the tour to top off a rider? I wouldn't call that doping. I would call that smart and the right thing to do. I don't think many riders could finnish a major tour without some sort of medical help. It's just sad to see a rider speak out way after the fact when only bad can come of it. Shame on you Frankie.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6066570

Frankie only decides to clear his conscience AFTER a dustup with Lance and questionable testimony.
Frankie has made himself an excellent example for other riders who want to help clean up the sport AFTER they're safely retired and PED's can't be used to their advantage anymore. If Frankie really wanted a clear conscience, he should have spoken to his priest, then donated a load of cash to WADA so Pound, Dick can continue his blind witchhunt.

Frankie goes to Hollywood.

good one

IMHO he might as well tell the truth-it is a lot easier to live with yourself that way. I wish more riders would break their stupid code of silence.

If you don't think that most (if not all) pros dope you haven't been paying attention.

Second rate riders in the Pro ranks, have to dope, to keep their jobs.

Second rate riders in the Pro ranks, have to dope, to keep their jobs.

And the first rate riders have to dope to win :)

It's like they say. "Loose lips sink ships". I don't see any good that could come out of this. It's like stirring up the bottom of the pot. With the beating pro cycling has been taking since 1998 for doping, why add to it? We all know 90% of other pro sports dope. Cycling has been under closer scrutiny than any other sport. I don't condone drugs in sports unless it is for health reasons. Hey, an IV drip with vitimins after a hard hot mountain stage in the tour to top off a rider? I wouldn't call that doping. I would call that smart and the right thing to do. I don't think many riders could finnish a major tour without some sort of medical help. It's just sad to see a rider speak out way after the fact when only bad can come of it. <u>Shame on you Frankie.</u>

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6066570

this isn't a war of aggression, loose lips don't sink ships. loose lips lead to further investigations and more exposure which may ultimately lead to less doping. there's the "good that can come out of this". if you enjoy cliches, try "sunlight is the best disinfectant".

The more I read and hear about cycling the more I completely believe that its a very dirty sport. Attempting to compare drugs in cycling to other sports is a deflection tactic. What is the relevence in comparing cycling to MLB or the NFL?

Cycling fans are the biggest hypocrits in sports. They boast about how tough the drug policies are but the minute "their guy" tests positive they bash the tests procedures, claim conspiracies, etc.

It's just sad to see a rider speak out way after the fact when only bad can come of it. Shame on you Frankie.



Wha? Let's assume for a minute that he's telling the truth. What "bad" can come of this? I only see upside here...

Isn't it odd that everytime you read about a doping bust, the peloton either says nothing or "gosh, I'm really surprised, I hope it isn't true, etc. etc...." Not a single pro rider wants to step up and acknowledge the elephant in the room? Why do you think that is?

Well, it's either because (a) there is no elephant; or (b) they're afraid of what might happen if they speak up. When the winner of the TDF gets popped for doping, after the two top contenders are dismissed, option (a) just isn't reasonable anymore. So...option (b)? Even if you're not naming names, you're sticking your neck out there and implying that you're clean. Do you really want that?

Or, in the alternative, you have the "let's not give our own sport a black eye" line of bs. Hard to take that position when the sport already has a busted nose.

And what does Frankie gain? I don't see a single benefit here. He can't touch Lance, and he knows it. A tell-all book? Based on his statements, I doubt it...as far as doping stories go, his is pretty boring.

Sorry to rant here, but Frankie isn't the problem. WADA and Dick Pound are not the problem. The French labs are not the problem. The problem is a bunch of riders/teams/ DS who want the fans to pretend that there is no problem. I applaud Frankie for having the courage to come clean.

Amen brother!

Frankie only decides to clear his conscience AFTER a dustup with Lance and questionable testimony.
Frankie has made himself an excellent example for other riders who want to help clean up the sport AFTER they're safely retired and PED's can't be used to their advantage anymore. If Frankie really wanted a clear conscience, he should have spoken to his priest, then donated a load of cash to WADA so Pound, Dick can continue his blind witchhunt.

Second rate riders in the Pro ranks, have to dope, to keep their jobs.


that's a poor excuse.....

they don't have to dope. THEY CHOOSE TO DOPE. Get another job if you can't do it clean. don't give me that sob story...poor poor cyclist has to dope to keep his job.

"Get another job if you can't do it clean"
.
Easy to say, when your #1 goal in life isn't to be a Pro cyclist.

I also applaud Frankie for having the guts to admit his past transgressions. I believe it will hurt him financially, as he will probably never get any kind of decent job (or maybe any job) in cycling again. It will probably hurt his public speaking appearances, too, unless someone wants him to do a "do as I say, not as I did" speech.

I believe there are tremendous pressures to dope in the pro peleton. You are judged by your results and if you are continually getting your ass kicked by other pros that are "on the juice", what are you going to do to keep your job? I also believe the DSs and teams know a lot more than they say they do. It's just like the army. The enlisted man gets court-martialed, the higher ups get a pass or a slap on the wrist. They did nail Saiz, so maybe this will [hopefully] change. Cycling must clean itself up from within and maybe if others like Frankie continue to speak out this will start to happen.

I think it will have little impact. In Europe, the consensus is that every doping allegation, admission, investigation is merely a tip of the iceberg. I am impressed with Frankie's admission, and I hope he suffers for the transgression of using dope - ie he should not get any job related to cycling at all. He can go flip burgers for all I care. I'd like the other dopers to know that sooner or later, they could be found out, and if found out then they will be ruined as well.

I hope he suffers for the transgression of using dope - ie he should not get any job related to cycling at all. He can go flip burgers for all I care. I'd like the other dopers to know that sooner or later, they could be found out, and if found out then they will be ruined as well.

You actually highlight an interesting dilemma. If a rider doped as a pro and is outed then morally he/she should be banned from work in the cycling industry. But, what do you do with the ones who out themselves; e.g. Frankie? They doped, therefore they cheated, therefore they should be banned from the club. However, who is going to voluntarily sign up to save cycling by breaking the code if it means an ouster from the club and loss of work? How does one court the truth without ruining lives? I don't have an easy answer.

What's the statue of limitations for breach of contract? If you were the managment from that time period would you sue Frankie? Maybe the US should have a sports fraud law on the books.

You actually highlight an interesting dilemma. If a rider doped as a pro and is outed then morally he/she should be banned from work in the cycling industry. But, what do you do with the ones who out themselves; e.g. Frankie? They doped, therefore they cheated, therefore they should be banned from the club. However, who is going to voluntarily sign up to save cycling by breaking the code if it means an ouster from the club and loss of work? How does one court the truth without ruining lives? I don't have an easy answer.

In an imaginary world, I'd take back all the money from winning from those who don't confess and let the confessors keep it.

What's the statue of limitations for breach of contract? If you were the managment from that time period would you sue Frankie? Maybe the US should have a sports fraud law on the books.

In the United States, statutes of limitations vary from state to state. The usual range is from two to six years in contract cases. But, there are some states with longer statutes of limitations in certain special circumstances. Many state statutes are subject to a "discovery" rule. That is, the statutory period does not begin to run until the person who is suing knew or should have known that the defendant violated the contract. If Postal/Discovery were to sue Frankie and there were a dispute as to when Postal/Discovery knew or should have known that Frankie were doping, it could lead to some intersting allegations. I seriously doubt that Postal/Discovery really would want to open up the can of worms that litigation with Frankie would entail. The current threats of litigation, in my opinion, are just a tactic to scare other riders from making post-career confessions.

Well, Frankie was fired from Toyota-United and probably is having trouble finding a job in cycling right now. I still feel the timing of it was kind of odd. And there very well could be some USPS/Disco involvement in him getting fired after the testimony of his wife. At this point, what does he have to lose.

I think it is sour grapes.

"I still feel the timing of it was kind of odd."

What is odd about it? He didn't have to worry about losing his job anymore so he make an admission.

"I think it is sour grapes."

I'm not sure what "sour grapes" means? All that matters is whether it is truthful or not. Or are you saying he's making it up?

I think it is sour grapes.


that doesn't do much to address the unnamed one.