Official Valverde thread.

[Benotti69]

Serious Sam, I am more inclined to think that the new class of PEDS being used today help him perform a lot better in comparison with other riders. As opposed to before. Before he had a smaller margin.

And you have to admit that after riders being warned or banned the majority come back weaker. So coming back stronger today you have to admit that there has to be a high level of talent.

They all have a high level of talent. That is never in doubt.

The responses to the levels and amounts of PEDs is really the difference. Add in a motor and who knows what counts.

Valverde kept his mouth shut and stayed out of the media during his ban iirc. Most don't.

Movistar are a big money team and money in sport talks. Maybe people are buying their burial of their test results. it worked for the Russians for a while. It probably works for many many others.

Valverde is past his talent peak. So there is something else at play and that comes down to response, new PED, quantities and possibly a motor.

Still it is incredible and amazing to beat all those guys in their prime age in the age of 37 even using any PEDs ... .

It would be incredible if he was using the same PEDs and same quantities as others. Never mind the corruption.

We dont know what he is using so i reserve the incredible and amazing till i find out, if we ever find out.

[mcduff]

I wonder what Dan Martin is thinking? I reckon he was just ripped off a monument win. In 2016 Valverde was sublime in 2017 it is definitely rediculous.

Any evidence to suggest Martin is riding any cleaner than Valverde; apart from the fact he is 2nd all the time instead of first. This is the same Martin, after all, who did to everyone else on the last climb what Valverde did to him.

Well he hasn't previously had a doping ban like Valverde, and Valverde is beating him for fun while whistling dixie......

So when Dan Martin beat Valverde in 2013 or 2014 or some such, was he doping then? Or was Valverde clean then?

Obviously Valverde doped in the past. But if we are pointing at him doping in the NOW, then that implicates his competitors as well. If its easy for one guy to get away with it, others can to. The lazy narrative of the one bad guy cheating but everyone (especially one's favourite riders) doing it for the moral good of sport, is a unrealistic one.

Hitch nice try, but observations about Valverde today are not just LBL but from the context of his entire career, his age and his performances in the last two seasons against his own performances of seasons past which have caught my eye.
Valverde is not a late bloomer like Horner, he turned pro in 2002. Yes Valverde is a great talent but Dan Martin hasn't been podiuming grand tours at 35 or 36 after turning pro nearly 15 years ago either. Most people expect performances to gradually decline with age but now we have to put up watching a veteran regularly finishing ahead of riders in their physiological prime years of 28 - 32 - not just in hilly classics but in Grand Tours supposedly riding support for Quintana (last years Tour). If Piti podiums the TdF this year you will have some explaining to do. Hopefully I am wrong.

Froome is talking Valverde up as a contender...

[The Hitch]

I wonder what Dan Martin is thinking? I reckon he was just ripped off a monument win. In 2016 Valverde was sublime in 2017 it is definitely rediculous.

Any evidence to suggest Martin is riding any cleaner than Valverde; apart from the fact he is 2nd all the time instead of first. This is the same Martin, after all, who did to everyone else on the last climb what Valverde did to him.

Well he hasn't previously had a doping ban like Valverde, and Valverde is beating him for fun while whistling dixie......

So when Dan Martin beat Valverde in 2013 or 2014 or some such, was he doping then? Or was Valverde clean then?

Obviously Valverde doped in the past. But if we are pointing at him doping in the NOW, then that implicates his competitors as well. If its easy for one guy to get away with it, others can to. The lazy narrative of the one bad guy cheating but everyone (especially one's favourite riders) doing it for the moral good of sport, is a unrealistic one.

Hitch nice try, but observations about Valverde today are not just LBL but from the context of his entire career, his age and his performances in the last two seasons against his own performances of seasons past which have caught my eye.
Valverde is not a late bloomer like Horner, he turned pro in 2002. Yes Valverde is a great talent but Dan Martin hasn't been podiuming grand tours at 35 or 36 after turning pro nearly 15 years ago either. Most people expect performances to gradually decline with age but now we have to put up watching a veteran regularly finishing ahead of riders in their physiological prime years of 28 - 32 - not just in hilly classics but in Grand Tours supposedly riding support for Quintana (last years Tour). If Piti podiums the TdF this year you will have some explaining to do. Hopefully I am wrong.

I will have explaining to do?

The guy who started the thread about post return piti being a doper?

Anyway you seem to have missed the point. So let me spell it out clearer.

If Valverde is Doping this much AND getting away with it then that means its possible to dope this much and get away with it.

and if its possible to dope and get away with it, then its not just gonna be 1 person who dopes. As cycling history clearly shows.

[GraftPunk]

http://www.velonews.com/2017/04/commentary/opinion-six-reasons-we-should-trust-valverde_436574

Hoodie being the apologist...?

[mcduff]

http://www.velonews.com/2017/04/commentary/opinion-six-reasons-we-should-trust-valverde_436574

Hoodie being the apologist...?

Thanks for the read. These two sentences stood out:

If we don’t accept the effectiveness and deterrence of the anti-doping apparatus, then the peloton still has a very serious problem.

And

Would he risk doping? Who knows, but the fallout would be incalculable.While there are still doping cases, and there’s no question that some teams and riders push the ethical line — look no further than the TUE scandal brewing in the UK right now — there hasn’t been a major, full-blown doping scandal involving a big star or major team in nearly a decade.


Its entirely possible that you have your answer right there. If testing is ineffective then there will be no major scandals via the testing regime. With regards to Valverde risking it, if he was reliant on doping to win then of course he would risk it as the alternative would be constant failure. If he risks doping he has literally nothing to lose as the alternative is also nothing.

I don't know or even have a strong belief either way. I'm not even sure I care that much but I do think the Velonews article is wishful thinking.

[Cookster15]

I didn't reply to you Hitch as I thought, we will see. Well after the Dauphine TT today confirming his unbelievable form last season and so far this season, the D day of a 37 year old winning the Tour de France just got a little more likely

The point of mine you didn't address is how a 37 year old seems to be riding stronger than he was any any point in his own long career? I am aware VO2 max isn't the only indicator of road cycling ability but VO2 Max is supposed to decline by 5% per decade after the age of 30 for well trained athletes. Now I know Valverde has had a "rest" during his ban but he turned pro way back into 2002 and we know career longevity as a pro can also effect when you start to decline. But 37?

My point is whatever Valverde is on and getting away with seems to be more effective than what the rest of the younger peloton is on and getting away with.

We just got over a near 42 year old winning the Vuelta and now we could possibly be looking at a 37 year old winning the biggest race in cycling. Not sure why this thread isn't on fire in the Clinic today. Apparently a 32 year old ex Sky Antipodean Richie Porte is the bigger concern.

[BullsFan22]

I didn't reply to you Hitch as I thought, we will see. Well after the Dauphine TT today confirming his unbelievable form last season and so far this season, the D day of a 37 year old winning the Tour de France just got a little more likely

The point of mine you didn't address is how a 37 year old seems to be riding stronger than he was any any point in his own long career? I am aware VO2 max isn't the only indicator of road cycling ability but VO2 Max is supposed to decline by 5% per decade after the age of 30 for well trained athletes. Now I know Valverde has had a "rest" during his ban but he turned pro way back into 2002 and we know career longevity as a pro can also effect when you start to decline. But 37?

My point is whatever Valverde is on and getting away with seems to be more effective than what the rest of the younger peloton is on and getting away with.

We just got over a near 42 year old winning the Vuelta and now we could possibly be looking at a 37 year old winning the biggest race in cycling. Not sure why this thread isn't on fire in the Clinic today. Apparently a 32 year old ex Sky Antipodean Richie Porte is the bigger concern.

Valverde is a young man now compared to what Horner was at the Vuelta in 2013. Porte is a baby at 32. Since Horner seemed to peak at almost 42, then a more talented Valverde could definitely go another 4 or 5 years, no probs. And Porte could certainly go 5-10 years, he's got plenty of time!

[Blanco]

I didn't reply to you Hitch as I thought, we will see. Well after the Dauphine TT today confirming his unbelievable form last season and so far this season, the D day of a 37 year old winning the Tour de France just got a little more likely

The point of mine you didn't address is how a 37 year old seems to be riding stronger than he was any any point in his own long career? I am aware VO2 max isn't the only indicator of road cycling ability but VO2 Max is supposed to decline by 5% per decade after the age of 30 for well trained athletes. Now I know Valverde has had a "rest" during his ban but he turned pro way back into 2002 and we know career longevity as a pro can also effect when you start to decline. But 37?

My point is whatever Valverde is on and getting away with seems to be more effective than what the rest of the younger peloton is on and getting away with.

We just got over a near 42 year old winning the Vuelta and now we could possibly be looking at a 37 year old winning the biggest race in cycling. Not sure why this thread isn't on fire in the Clinic today. Apparently a 32 year old ex Sky Antipodean Richie Porte is the bigger concern.

Maybe because Valverde is once in a generation talent, while Richie..., well he isn't But if he wins the Tour, this thread is going to be on fire, believe me!

[Robert5091]

Valverde and Gilbert and maybe LRP seem to be on the same "training regime". If Valverde starts to climb with Quintana etc then it's something new. Interesting to see later stages.

[Galic Ho]

I didn't reply to you Hitch as I thought, we will see. Well after the Dauphine TT today confirming his unbelievable form last season and so far this season, the D day of a 37 year old winning the Tour de France just got a little more likely

The point of mine you didn't address is how a 37 year old seems to be riding stronger than he was any any point in his own long career? I am aware VO2 max isn't the only indicator of road cycling ability but VO2 Max is supposed to decline by 5% per decade after the age of 30 for well trained athletes. Now I know Valverde has had a "rest" during his ban but he turned pro way back into 2002 and we know career longevity as a pro can also effect when you start to decline. But 37?

My point is whatever Valverde is on and getting away with seems to be more effective than what the rest of the younger peloton is on and getting away with.

We just got over a near 42 year old winning the Vuelta and now we could possibly be looking at a 37 year old winning the biggest race in cycling. Not sure why this thread isn't on fire in the Clinic today. Apparently a 32 year old ex Sky Antipodean Richie Porte is the bigger concern.

Scientific paper to back these claims can be found where? V02max decreases by 5% per year in pro athletes who never show their numbers...good luck proving that one. You cannot.

So that's a major fallacy.

Explain to us HOW to increase your V02max and your knowledge base might be a bit more credible.

Sheesh dude, you're clutching at straws here.

It's pro cycling.

Valverde has ALWAYS been the top rider in the peloton. He is the most naturally gifted cyclist of the past 25 years and you're shocked he is still good!

You're probably shocked when Sagan wins too right!?!?

When was the last time, anyone posting in the clinic actually ENJOYED cycling?

If you don't...leave the sport and give it up for your own personal well being. Actually stop complaining for just one day about how a specific racer rides and see how that changes YOUR perspective and attitude. Choose to not complain. Choose to be grateful.

The best thing I've done is get out of the clinic. Lance got popped and so many blokes around here return day in, day out...the same energy draining mental vampiric attitude. Complain some more. It's changed NOTHING in the pro peloton.

There is a multitude of good racing going on. So what if it's doped? You think other sports are clean too? No they're not! But the attitude of the viewers is the indicator...you can't change them, only yourself. So give that a whirl for a minute.

Oh no, a 32 year is a favourite for the Tour and Valverde may be really, really good!

Neither are outlandish or surprising. This has been seen miles away by many. Same deal with the complaining. If anyone here is surprised that two racers are on really good form...it happens every year, the riders name simply change. Wait till the Tour is over. Crash the servers when something goes nuclear...until then, how about being grateful and then seeing whether this cesspool of misery is fun...

Because the clinic is NEVER satisfied. Ever. But if you like complaining...by all means, carry on...

[veganrob]

It's .5% not 5% decline in VO2 max.

[ebandit]

Hitch

.

It's pro cycling.

When was the last time, anyone posting in the clinic actually ENJOYED cycling?

If you don't...leave the sport and give it up for your own personal well being. Actually stop complaining for just one day about how a specific racer rides and see how that changes YOUR perspective and attitude. Choose to not complain. Choose to be grateful.

The best thing I've done is get out of the clinic. Lance got popped and so many blokes around here return day in, day out...the same energy draining mental vampiric attitude. Complain some more. It's changed NOTHING in the pro peloton.

There is a multitude of good racing going on. So what if it's doped? You think other sports are clean too? No they're not! But the attitude of the viewers is the indicator...you can't change them, only yourself. So give that a whirl for a minute.
.

i love pro cycling ..........always have.............always will

valverde is well cool...............................and a winner i cheer him on 'cos he races with
heart

i watch separate from discussions here...........doping is not the be all and end all but a platform
for interesting discussions

i'm mostly amused by those heaping their dislike on riders /teams they personally dislike

Mark L

[Fernandez]

I didn't reply to you Hitch as I thought, we will see. Well after the Dauphine TT today confirming his unbelievable form last season and so far this season, the D day of a 37 year old winning the Tour de France just got a little more likely

The point of mine you didn't address is how a 37 year old seems to be riding stronger than he was any any point in his own long career? I am aware VO2 max isn't the only indicator of road cycling ability but VO2 Max is supposed to decline by 5% per decade after the age of 30 for well trained athletes. Now I know Valverde has had a "rest" during his ban but he turned pro way back into 2002 and we know career longevity as a pro can also effect when you start to decline. But 37?

My point is whatever Valverde is on and getting away with seems to be more effective than what the rest of the younger peloton is on and getting away with.

We just got over a near 42 year old winning the Vuelta and now we could possibly be looking at a 37 year old winning the biggest race in cycling. Not sure why this thread isn't on fire in the Clinic today. Apparently a 32 year old ex Sky Antipodean Richie Porte is the bigger concern.

Scientific paper to back these claims can be found where? V02max decreases by 5% per year in pro athletes who never show their numbers...good luck proving that one. You cannot.

So that's a major fallacy.

Explain to us HOW to increase your V02max and your knowledge base might be a bit more credible.

Sheesh dude, you're clutching at straws here.

It's pro cycling.

Valverde has ALWAYS been the top rider in the peloton. He is the most naturally gifted cyclist of the past 25 years and you're shocked he is still good!

You're probably shocked when Sagan wins too right!?!?

When was the last time, anyone posting in the clinic actually ENJOYED cycling?

If you don't...leave the sport and give it up for your own personal well being. Actually stop complaining for just one day about how a specific racer rides and see how that changes YOUR perspective and attitude. Choose to not complain. Choose to be grateful.

The best thing I've done is get out of the clinic. Lance got popped and so many blokes around here return day in, day out...the same energy draining mental vampiric attitude. Complain some more. It's changed NOTHING in the pro peloton.

There is a multitude of good racing going on. So what if it's doped? You think other sports are clean too? No they're not! But the attitude of the viewers is the indicator...you can't change them, only yourself. So give that a whirl for a minute.

Oh no, a 32 year is a favourite for the Tour and Valverde may be really, really good!

Neither are outlandish or surprising. This has been seen miles away by many. Same deal with the complaining. If anyone here is surprised that two racers are on really good form...it happens every year, the riders name simply change. Wait till the Tour is over. Crash the servers when something goes nuclear...until then, how about being grateful and then seeing whether this cesspool of misery is fun...

Because the clinic is NEVER satisfied. Ever. But if you like complaining...by all means, carry on...

Dont waste your energy, you wont get nothing from them.

[Cookster15]

It's .5% not 5% decline in VO2 max.

Well the source I checked its 5% decline per decade for trained athletes - 10% decline per decade in untrained people. If you have a VO2 Max of 70m at 30, it would decline to 67 at 40, 64 at 50 and 60 by age 60. If it was .5% per decade someone like Greg Lemond who was said to have a VO2 Max of 95 at age 30 would still have a VO2 max of 94 by 60. I don't think so.

[Cookster15]

I didn't reply to you Hitch as I thought, we will see. Well after the Dauphine TT today confirming his unbelievable form last season and so far this season, the D day of a 37 year old winning the Tour de France just got a little more likely

The point of mine you didn't address is how a 37 year old seems to be riding stronger than he was any any point in his own long career? I am aware VO2 max isn't the only indicator of road cycling ability but VO2 Max is supposed to decline by 5% per decade after the age of 30 for well trained athletes. Now I know Valverde has had a "rest" during his ban but he turned pro way back into 2002 and we know career longevity as a pro can also effect when you start to decline. But 37?

My point is whatever Valverde is on and getting away with seems to be more effective than what the rest of the younger peloton is on and getting away with.

We just got over a near 42 year old winning the Vuelta and now we could possibly be looking at a 37 year old winning the biggest race in cycling. Not sure why this thread isn't on fire in the Clinic today. Apparently a 32 year old ex Sky Antipodean Richie Porte is the bigger concern.

Valverde has ALWAYS been the top rider in the peloton. He is the most naturally gifted cyclist of the past 25 years and you're shocked he is still good!

Well that was quite mild by your lurking standards, well done I kind of agree with you about the Clinic, my normal reaction is as soon as someone wins well I come here to see what the dark side thinks. The Clinic certainly has its "favourites". When they say nothing about certain riders but not others is why this place loses credibility. I enjoy the sport regardless and the forum and differing opinions is part of that.

[Valv.Piti]

What is the saying, the rich keep getting richer?

[veganrob]

It's .5% not 5% decline in VO2 max.

Well the source I checked its 5% decline per decade for trained athletes - 10% decline per decade in untrained people. If you have a VO2 Max of 70m at 30, it would decline to 67 at 40, 64 at 50 and 60 by age 60. If it was .5% per decade someone like Greg Lemond who was said to have a VO2 Max of 95 at age 30 would still have a VO2 max of 94 by 60. I don't think so.

However in comparison, master athletes who continue to keep fit only show a decrease of 5-6% per decade or 0.5-0.6% per year (25,26,27,28). When they maintain the same relative intensity of training, a decrease of only 3.6% over 25 years has been reported (28) and most of that was attributable to a small increase in bodyweight.


http://www.sport-fitness-advisor.com/VO2max.html

[MightyWheelSucker]

Valverde winning Tour would be hilarious. I have a reason to watch Tour and I will support him. Broad publicity does not care about winner of Ardennes classics, they do no even know something like that exist. But Tour is completely different story. Winning it by 37 years old guy for the first time and with doping history has to raise some questions. Rasmussen says hello...

[Alexandre B.]

I'm sure those results are the benefit of a long-term injury.

[bigcog]

I'm sure those results are the benefit of a long-term injury.

Yep somewhat dubious ..