2010-2013 cleanest era of the sport?

[SeriousSam]

Andrew Hood over at velonews (http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/04/news/analysis-the-curious-case-of-alejandro-valverde_368078#mrrOc7EJpVAU0MJJ.99) has an intriguing article where he laments that Valverde's recent victories may well have been enhanced by DOPING and we just cannot know, and this is very unfortunate because the new era of clean cycling appears to have ended in 2013.

He gives an overall assessment of doping in the peloton in recent years, and since this is a recurrent topic in the clinic, shaping much of the discussion, I thought we could discuss Hood's hypotheses. Let me quote the man

By 2009, there were clear signs that real change was happening. The style of racing evolved. Gone were the big-ring attacks with 50km and two cols to go. In this new-look peloton, attacks were more measured and often came inside the red kite. The overall pace of the peloton increased, and rather than seeing aggression off the front, cycling became a war of attrition. Scared off by the biological passport, and perhaps due to an unwritten gentleman’s agreement among the teams to truly try to change their ways, the years between 2010 to 2013 delivered some of the cleanest, most believable results in the sport’s history.

On the other side of the coin, there is a never-seen-before parity within the peloton right now. The winning differences are fractions of percentage point, often made in one, well-timed, all-or-nothing surge. The notion of marginal gains has taken over the peloton. What teams like Garmin and High Road started around 2008-09 was perfected by the big-budgeted Sky outfit, which, after a rough birthing year in 2010, dominated the 2011-2013 seasons. Since then, nearly every major team has started to catch up, and things like gluten-free diets, skin suits in long road races, altitude camps, and the idea of “train hard, race easy” have been adopted by much of the peloton.

So, in sum, JV's Garmin, Cav's High Road and Sky ushered in new era of the sport with innovations like altitude camps, leading to the cleanest period ever from 2010 to 2013. The peloton appears to have since turned back to its dirty old ways though. I'm not entirely convinced Hood is right. What are everyone's thoughts?

 

[zlev11]

i'd agree with him that 2011 was clean-ish (climbing times actually were down that year) and the 2012 Giro was also slow, but the 2012 Tour de France changed everything. something was clearly going on.

 

[the sceptic]

how can anyone be paid to write this garbage?

sure, whenever an anglo wins the sport is 100% clean, but when they stop winning we must suddenly start to question the very same riders that got destroyed by your brits a few years ago. Give me a break.

 

[hrotha]

He thinks that clean racing equals conservative racing, even though the trend towards conservatism can clearly be observed during the EPO years. Furthermore, his timeline looks suspiciously like "Sky won because things were cleaner and if they lose it's because things are dirtier again". And he ignores all the times Froome or anyone else blew the race apart, too.

Long story short: he seems to be seeing cycling through the preconceived notion that Sky are cleans and taking it from there, warping the facts to suit that idea. It doesn't work.

I would agree with him that there seems to have been a relatively cleaner era of a few years, perhaps 2008-2010 (lots of very notorious dopers, there, but climbing times seemed to actually go down so it would seem that, while everybody that counts was still doping, most of them hadn't quite mastered the new system). Where we disagree is that I saw worrisome signs of a reversal in 2011, and therefore Sky can't be the posterboys of believable cycling, but rather the opposite - they embody the reversal in the general trend.

 

[zlev11]

oh yeah, i forgot about the 2011 Vuelta. that sh*t was bonkers. but Cobo was clean, for sure.

 

[the sceptic]

This guy has covered the tour since 1996.. man that's embarrassing.

Surely he doesn't believe a single word of what he is writing, he is basically a paid bot.

 

[Tonton]

There is no question that racing today is cleaner and more credible than it’s been since men started racing bikes to earn money.
No question for he who doesn't have a clue

 

[TheGreenMonkey]

2010 Giro saw Basso winning, although well off his 2006 performance, so not getting the massive boost from doping as back then but clean, hard to believe. Scarponi clean, he was only banned for contacts with Ferrari after being banned as part of Puerto, definitely clean.
2010 tour was very clean, Contador just tested positive during it, very clean race. Menchov clean, LOL, his final TT is not suspicious at all, hard to believe he ever got close to climbing with the best in a race without dope. If the climbing times were down in that race it was because Contador and Schleck spent most of the race trying to perfect the art of holding handing while racing.
2010 Vuelta had Mosquera testing positive, hugely clean race. Velits 3rd with the performace of his career including the final TT win, not suspicious at all. Menchov also beating Cancellara in that TT is also completely normal.

2011 Giro had Contador racing against the ban clock to get a victory before he was banned, not a good look at all. Scarponi, see 2010. Rujano returning to near the level he showed in 2005 when doping was rife, must have been clean, absolutely nothing to look
2011 Cadel Evan wins and is seen by many as being possibly clean but he did well as far back as 2005 with a top ten in the tour, so must be suspicious. Also his final TT is suspicious as well. The racing, or lack of it, in the mountains was also evident. With Contador racing injured and with the Giro in his legs it was Andy Schlecks' race to grab hold of in the mountains and win. However he was pathetic on most of the mountain stages (stage to Galibier the huge exception) and lost time in silly ways. So overall it was a weakly raced event, times need to be looked at in that context. Voeckler being competitive in the mountains is highly suspicious.
2011 Vuelta, 1 Jose Juan Cobo 2. Chris Froome 3. Bradley Wiggins. The rising from the dust of Cobo and the emergence of Froome from obscurity to GT contender and the confirmation of Wiggins transformation shown in the 2009 tour would continue at a higher level. This result stinks, it is about as believable as Santa Claus or Lance Armstrong or Ricardo Ricco.

I might come back to 2012-2013 later.

 

[blackcat]

hey, dont pot ricky riccio ok?

 

[SkyTears]

he is right

new clean era ended with the ridiculous Nibali in TdF 2014. *** all season then suddenly 6.5w/kg with no sweats & mouth closed

 

[hrotha]

Re:

he is right

new clean era ended with the ridiculous Nibali in TdF 2014. **** all season then suddenly 6.5w/kg with no sweats & mouth closed

True, his watt numbers were absolutely ridiculous. I mean, he roughly matched Froome's!

 

[jens_attacks]

2007-2011 for me was the most calm phase. all ended with europcar and phil

 

[The Hitch]

I already had a very very low opinion of Hood as a trash journo hypocrite. Remember when he wrote an "article" title - strong reasons to believe Nibali won the giro clean, and had a picture of Nibali with Vinokourov as the cover picture. Maybe like froome he doesn't even know Vino doped.

But the above quotations sam has shown us take him down in my estimation to a catergory I call "enemy of the sport" together with ligget, brian smith and lance armstrong (even kirby hasn't plunged to these depths).

Anyone who ever resorts to the brailsford argument of riders who attack less must be clean, is as dumb or corrupt as the people who claim the world is 6000 years old. There's no substance behind the argument. Absolutely 0 explanation why employing a tactic - attacking, is suddenly considered a measuring stick for doping, by the same people who will be outraged if you suggest climbing speeds are suggestive of doping.

Its ridiculous. Attack 50 times and do 5.5 w/kg - doping. Attack twice and do 6.5 - clean.

Not to mention the fact that there is 0 actual evidence these morons can offer that their favourite riders attack less than the ones they hate. Who attacked more, Froome 2013 who had 3 attacks on Ventoux alone, or Contador 2009 who had 1 on Verbier, 1 in Andorra and 1 attempt on Madeline stage.

Oh yeah, and I remember how froome and horner delivered all their attacks "inside the red kite". The fact that their rivals often reached the red kite a full minute after them doesn't change the fact that they were epic "last km" wins.

 

[The Hitch]

Oh and the real icing on the cake is the argument that the peloton cleaned up because of a "gentlemen's agreement".

After 20 years of each man for himself, people risking their lives to get a win, they all just shook hands and decided to stop and live happily ever after in tellytubby land.

My god these people have 0 life experience.

 

[Netserk]

2008 was the cleanest. Patrice Clerc was one who actually did what had to be done in order to clean it up. Many dopers caught those years. Then it was time for Armstrong to come back and Prudhomme to replace Clerc and from then on it was one big celebration every time anti-doping failed and no one was caught.

 

[TailWindHome]

Means nowt, but it's interesting to note that 28 picks in and only 1 active rider has been picked for the Doping Draft.

 

[Netserk]

Who of Alberto and Froome ain't active?

And then there's Horner and Basso as well.

 

[Bronstein]

Also Horner.

 

[TailWindHome]

Re:

Who of Alberto and Froome ain't active?

Apologies
Missed Bertie of the headcount

2 of 28 then

I'm not counting Horner - maybe he's active somewhere.....
(ETA - raced yesterday apparently)

Basso's doing nothing more than topping up the pension pot.

 

[the sceptic]

Means nowt, but it's interesting to note that 28 picks in and only 1 active rider has been picked for the Doping Draft.

you're saying climbing was faster before the 50% rule, EPO test and bio passport came into effect? amazing discovery, I think you should start writing for velo news. You could be the new Andrew Wood.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

Who of Alberto and Froome ain't active?

Apologies
Missed Bertie of the headcount

2 of 28 then

I'm not counting Horner - maybe he's active somewhere.....
(ETA - raced yesterday apparently)

Basso's doing nothing more than topping up the pension pot.

Strange definition of active.

Also worth noting that the thread is about 2010-2013 and both Horner and Basso won gts in that time period.

 

[Tommy79]

I can't for the life of me think what has happened in the last 16 months that is more or less suspicious than from 2010-2013.

Those who think everyone is doping all the time will continue to think so, those who thought the sport was largely clean 2010-2013 will probably think the same for the period 2014 to today. Odd.

 

[DFA123]

Re:

I can't for the life of me think what has happened in the last 16 months that is more or less suspicious than from 2010-2013.

Those who think everyone is doping all the time will continue to think so, those who thought the sport was largely clean 2010-2013 will probably think the same for the period 2014 to today. Odd.

Yep, it's completely disingenuous to suggest that a rider like Valverde winning a couple of classics in the Ardennes, is more indicative of doping than the ludicrous GT transformations of Froome and Wiggins, or Gilbert of 2011.

 

[nayr497]

Yes, I read this story yesterday and found many things odd about it as well. Not sure I think those three years were that clean either...

And goddamn, Gilbert is a far cry from his old form.

 

[Tonton]

Re:

Oh and the real icing on the cake is the argument that the peloton cleaned up because of a "gentlemen's agreement".

After 20 years of each man for himself, people risking their lives to get a win, they all just shook hands and decided to stop and live happily ever after in tellytubby land.

My god these people have 0 life experience.

Gentlemen agreement