Patchelicious Posted January 25, 2018 Share Yeah, I suspect they want to invite a few ex-pros to increase the publicity of the event. And a lot of ex-pro's have a drug shadow hanging over them, which would have ruled them out from the event. I can't imagine there are too many non pro's? I'm sure there are a handful, but not really enough to impact the sales bank balance? It must be about high profile riders?This in spades, one can understand (even if you don't agree) why a business would want to do that. Beside a few Hubtantrums, there wasn't that much fall out from having Hincappie there last year, but it brought lots of extra attention. They probably had a board meeting and went "hmmmm that worked quite well, lets add more of that to the recipe for 2018". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldron Posted January 25, 2018 Share Ironman is clean, was always clean and will always be clean so the Epic will become clean by virtue of it being an Ironman event now. No doping control needed ???? Patchelicious, Duane_Bosch, Long Wheel Base and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted January 25, 2018 Share Actually I have been following it VERY closely.I believe everyone has the right to defend their case, so will wait till that happens and seewhat evidence WADA can provide other than the emails. I'm confused. Do you think think that the Russians are innocent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tristand Posted January 25, 2018 Share I'm confused. Do you think think that the Russians are innocent?I am reserving a decision of guilt or innocence until the due process has been followed.Especially since it is not a case of a 'positive'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted January 25, 2018 Share I am reserving a decision of guilt or innocence until the due process has been followed.Especially since it is not a case of a 'positive'. Erm, I think they (Russian Government) have been found guilty, a few times? They were almost banned form the previous Olympics and Think they have been banned from the upcoming winter Olympics. But this is besides the point. But this started with you talking to the "scale of Lance". "What made LA different to most dopers was the scale of the operation and aspects surrounding it, ie intimidation, etc" I commented, implying that the Russians and Kazaks ran a bigger operation than Lance. So question: Based upon what we know and have seem, do you think that Lance ran a bigger operation and was more intimidating than the Russians? the nerd, T-Bob, Duane_Bosch and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shebeen Posted January 25, 2018 Share ZERO TOLERANCE: Any person who is under provisional or final sanction by an Anti-Doping Organisation with jurisdiction under the WADA Code (a “person under sanction”) is prohibited from participating or being involved in the race, whether as a rider, team manager or official or in any other capacity whatsoever. Where any such sanction has been made final for an offence committed after 31 December 2012, such prohibition shall apply for the life of the person under sanction (irrespective of the duration of the sanction imposed by the relevant Anti-Doping Organisation). guys Guys GUYS !!!I don't think you all follow the concept of 'conditional' zero tolerance.Lance did his stuff before 2013, he'd be free to race (if he didn't have that other UCI lifeban thingymajig)David George is cool, by a few months. KevEv is on the naughty boy list. Rourke too.even Chickenlegs can come epic all he wants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling#2013 T-Bob and Patchelicious 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted January 25, 2018 Share ZERO TOLERANCE: Any person who is under provisional or final sanction by an Anti-Doping Organisation with jurisdiction under the WADA Code (a “person under sanction”) is prohibited from participating or being involved in the race, whether as a rider, team manager or official or in any other capacity whatsoever. Where any such sanction has been made final for an offence committed after 31 December 2012, such prohibition shall apply for the life of the person under sanction (irrespective of the duration of the sanction imposed by the relevant Anti-Doping Organisation). guys Guys GUYS !!!I don't think you all follow the concept of 'conditional' zero tolerance.Lance did his stuff before 2013, he'd be free to race (if he didn't have that other UCI lifeban thingymajig)David George is cool, by a few months. KevEv is on the naughty boy list. Rourke too.even Chickenlegs can come epic all he wants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling#2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevief Posted January 25, 2018 Share Dalian Wanda group... A chinese conglomerate that includes commercial real estate, Malls, fast food, theme parks, hotels etc owns Iron Man, which in turn owns Epic. It is no longer an SA owned, SA run family business. It is a commercial holding which either hits it's target numbers or gets shut down. In order to keep hitting those numbers, they will probably have to relook at including celebrities, past doper famous cycling faces and do away with moral stand points. Chinese business is ruthless. I say as a cycling community guys need to move on from AWE factor of the Epic. The blinkers on, media hyped race everyone is so enamored with is really not so different to a host of other options we have on our doorstep.Agreed, the old Epic as we used to know has died. Its a new event now. Time to move on for the weekend warriors. Not a bad thing , thats life just like the English Premier League is not recognisable to the 70,80,90 and early naughties, times change. We very lucky we still have some great rides like JHB2C and Cape Pioneer etc. Edited January 25, 2018 by Stevief Patchelicious, Oufy MTB (Roadie), Jewbacca and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odinson Posted January 25, 2018 Share I am reserving a decision of guilt or innocence until the due process has been followed.Especially since it is not a case of a 'positive'. We all eagerly await your judgement, M'Lord. Underachiever and Patchelicious 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pista Posted January 25, 2018 Share I've seen a couple tweets to the effect that the new Cape Epic owners are to rescind the rule around not allowing riders with drug infringements from entering the event. Is this true? Does anyone have anymore clarity on the the exact changes?Guess now Lance can ride nathrix 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skubarra Posted January 25, 2018 Share I know I will be unpopular for saying this but I think it would be good if this lifetime ban rule gets scrapped. The way they are inconsistently applying this is a joke anyway and seems more like a marketing gimmick. Not to rehash this whole discussion again but the fairness of a lifetime ban is debatable anyway. Cafe Racer, pista, Odinson and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oufy MTB (Roadie) Posted January 25, 2018 Share I know I will be unpopular for saying this but I think it would be good if this lifetime ban rule gets scrapped. The way they are inconsistently applying this is a joke anyway and seems more like a marketing gimmick. Not to rehash this whole discussion again but the fairness of a lifetime ban is debatable anyway.I prefer a lifetime, they must never comeback in any shape or form. that is zero tolerance. There should be a number of non doping pros that can come give your event publicity, now you want to get publicity by using ex-dopers. that's *** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldron Posted January 25, 2018 Share I know I will be unpopular for saying this but I think it would be good if this lifetime ban rule gets scrapped. The way they are inconsistently applying this is a joke anyway and seems more like a marketing gimmick. Not to rehash this whole discussion again but the fairness of a lifetime ban is debatable anyway.I haven't seen any inconsisntency... Which riders did they let in that fell foul of the rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jewbacca Posted January 25, 2018 Share Alexander Vinokourov and Riccardo Ricco vs Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton... Boom! I would pay loads of money to watch that nathrix 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shebeen Posted January 25, 2018 Share I know I will be unpopular for saying this but I think it would be good if this lifetime ban rule gets scrapped. The way they are inconsistently applying this is a joke anyway and seems more like a marketing gimmick. Not to rehash this whole discussion again but the fairness of a lifetime ban is debatable anyway.well they never banned Sauser for trespassing on the route, when it was supposed to be a lifeban. Patchelicious 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathrix Posted January 25, 2018 Share well they never banned Sauser for trespassing on the route, when it was supposed to be a lifeban. Sauser was visiting Clare at Lourensford, showed Clare some mtb skillz, before she moved into her R90m Clifton mansion.Christo wasn't too happy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now