This article is from Cyclingnews.com from yesterday. It is about Phil Zajicek’s, now ongoing, problem with an alleged purchase of EPO and HGH from Joe Papp. I have been following this process and getting small bits of information, true and/or make believe, from lots of different people.
What I didn’t understand and what I still don’t understand is why Velonews hasn’t addressed the news. It is important cycling news. One of the best riders in the US, the last few years, turns up in this investigation and Velonews originally refuses to release his name and now, after the story has already been printed, hasn’t addressed it once again. I gave them a day get-out-of-jail card here, but this is just wrong. This should of been addressed. As America’s predominate cycling publication, I believe they have an obligation to address this.
I’m wondering what the reason is here. I’m wondering if it is the “Friends of Velonews Club”. Or maybe the “Boulder Cyclists Coalition”. I don’t know. I called Neal Rogers out on this, maybe somewhat early, on the Chuck Coyle issue. There are tons of unanswered questions we all have from that still. But, not reporting the Phil Zajicek situation is in a timely (instant) manner is very unprofessional.
I’m pretty sure that there isn’t an explanation that they could come up with that could appease my outrage.
This is the important news that Velonews thought was important for Jan. 6th.
This is a pet peeve of mine. I stopped subscribing to the dead tree version after 20+ years. VeloNews has a recent history of artfully avoiding doping stories. Omerta lives at VeloNews.
In their comments for doping stories, a couple of regulars reply to doping deniers with facts regarding the usual high profile doping suspects only to have their comments deleted. What’s left is the ‘most tested athlete,’ ‘UCI’s use of the bio-passport is cleaning up doping for good’ doubletalk.
This forum discussion pretty much covers one example: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=11360
Oliver Stone?
Look, there’s a lot of money tied up in bicycle racing being a “believable” sport, and the more stuff that comes out about drug use and cheating and the like, the less people will believe in, or care about, or (most importantly) pay for bicycle racing. If the cycle sports regulating bodies and media can just *not report* what’s going on with *big-name* riders, then it just looks like a bunch of lame also-rans trying to cheat their way to the top and getting caught – not that the guys who got to the top got there by cheating, which would be a disastrous revelation and would totally destroy the credibility of the sport.
Oh, and when the credibility of the sport goes away, advertising dollars for top-of-the-line bikes and components and suchlike go away, too, which means that Velonews will suffer, and the rest of the industry will suffer, too. It’s easier just to go along to get along, and avoid the controversy in the hopes that people will in time forget about it.
There’s actually an argument for cheating to be legal: Regulation of cheating by drug testing and the like just gives sophisticated cheaters an advantage – the more money they spend on state-of-the-art cheating, the less chance they get caught. Less sophisticated racers, or racers with smaller budgets, lose out and get caught. To equalize the playing field, performance enhancing drugs and equipment should thus be legal 😉
This is typical of Velonews. It seems like when Cyclingnews runs an update story on the ongoing Jeff Novitsky doping investigation, Velonews either posts it a few days later as though it’s an afterthought, or it is not posted at all.
There is no one out in the cycling world that is calling it out like you Steve. Love the blog.
in regards to comments from luce, if performance enhancing drugs were legalized, more athletes would be 6 feet under. If a guy is cheating then the noncheaters need a voice. If velo news wont report stories about cheaters being caught, then they are only helping minimize the stigma of the cheater. Cycling already has a bad reputation for doping so we might as well do as much as we can to ostrisize cheating! The health of young impresionable cyclists depends on it! Plus us noncheaters are sick of it!
Steve I agree. Neal Rodgers is not very good at his job. He is not objective. Look at the piece about Chuck Coyle. The endless stories about Radio Shack and Lance. I read the site because it is there not because it is good. I just dont think Velonews as a whole is a very good publication.
He was the only one to beat me in the uphill Shootout sprint a few weeks ago… so I guess I’ll claim it. 😉
Pingback: Zajicek