2014 Cleanest Peloton Ever

Page 10 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
You are incapable of fathoming the position "I'm not sure".

I advice you to think long and hard about it before you answer.
 
Aug 13, 2010
3,317
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
I say "less doping" is a joke / laughable.

And you look like you are disagreeing with me.

I mean. It is binary right? There is either less doping or there is not, right? Your post goes to great pains to say it could be true.

Are you saying you don't know if it's true or not? That there might be the same or more doping, or there might be less, but you don't know?

:confused:

If so, I really do not understand the point of you even responding.
Less as in less riders are doping. Less as in less products. Less as in the effect that they are having?

Would you agree or disagree that doping had a bigger impact when there was no epo test and no hct rule?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Franklin said:
You are incapable of fathoming the position "I'm not sure".

I advice you to think long and hard about it before you answer.
Oh I am quite capable. I have watched Martin Vickers pretend to not like Wiggo for years now, saying "I am not sure if they dope", all the while insulting and ranting at anyone who suggests they do.

Your attack of my post and insulting, rhetorical posting is not balanced at all - it only supports the opposite view to the one I have.

This is a disingenuous example of "not sure".

Weak.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Still waiting for you to quote the strawman I allegedly set up.


tick tock tick tock tick tock tick tock

Lovely style of posting you have. Not only are you entitled of the pro peloton to answer your questions you feel the need to immitate a clock to spur me on? :D

I'm amused that you think people decided to stop doping in 2006. Oh wait. You didn't write that. You just wrote you think it may have happened. Or did you even do that.
The argument was quite simple. It was "there are less tests now than ever. Fact." Your detour on how we did or didn't hold a position that cycling got clean is indeed a strawman as that's a position none of us has taken. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Oh I am quite capable. I have watched Martin Vickers pretend to not like Wiggo for years now, saying "I am not sure if they dope", all the while insulting and ranting at anyone who suggests they do.

Your attack of my post and insulting, rhetorical posting is not balanced at all - it only supports the opposite view to the one I have.

This is a disingenuous example of "not sure".

Weak.
So showing that a statement is nonsense is insulting you *as this was about Benotti's "less tests than ever. Fact"*? The position that we need to look at facts is not balanced and it only supports the oppositeview you have?

Okay, good to know.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Franklin said:
The argument was quite simple. It was "there are less tests now than ever. Fact." Your detour on how we did or didn't hold a position that cycling got clean is indeed a strawman as that's a position none of us has taken. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
Yep, which is why I asked "OR DID YOU EVEN DO THAT?"

And then went on to summarise what you did do (because I had realised by then you don't even have a position, you're warming the fence) - simply disagree with me, using exaggeration and rhetoric to put me down (screaming).

Is that it?
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Again, if you knew we did not say that why bring it up other than to imply we hold that position? In other words a strawman.

But I'm done, rest assured, no more postings from me today as I had my fill. There's no use to discuss with someone who can only think in extremes.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Franklin said:
So showing that a statement is nonsense is insulting you? The position that we need to look at facts is not balanced and it only supports the oppositeview you have?

Okay, good to know.
Wait. You just said it's not black and white, but now you're saying "less doping is a joke" is nonsense?

It's nonsense, but you're not sure.

Gee whizz, that sure sounds to me like you think it's nonsense.

You do know what nonsense means?

If I think (think, not know) that there is the same amount of doping as there always has been (ie the same % of riders doping) then it's my opinion.

And you think it's nonsense?

Gotcha.

ETA: The insult is the constant exaggeration / rhetoric in your posts ("screaming" nothing has changed) etc.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Franklin said:
Again, if you knew we did not say that why bring it up other than to imply we hold that position? In other words a strawman.
Firstly, I am responding to you, not anyone else. Unless you are multi-personality, we does not apply to my posts replying to you.

As I posted, I was reminded of Marin Vickers "I hate Wiggo" and then constant attacks aimed at anyone saying Wiggo dopeds, and another conversation I had with Krebs Cycle who spent about 10 pages of posts saying maxium accumulation of oxygen deficit proved Wiggins aerobic potential to win a GT, before we unearthed the fact that Krebs had no idea what Wiggins MAOD was, or if it had in fact ever been tested.

And I realised, you were in the same boat.

Despite insulting me ("scream", implying hysteria, etc) and expressing arrogant amusement at the position I hold, all of which seeks to put me and by extension my position down, you don't in fact hold a position yourself.

Rather than delete my post, I wrote down the revelation as it occurred to me.
 
Aug 13, 2010
3,317
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Wait. You just said it's not black and white, but now you're saying "less doping is a joke" is nonsense?

It's nonsense, but you're not sure.

Gee whizz, that sure sounds to me like you think it's nonsense.

You do know what nonsense means?

If I think (think, not know) that there is the same amount of doping as there always has been (ie the same % of riders doping) then it's my opinion.

And you think it's nonsense?

Gotcha.

ETA: The insult is the constant exaggeration / rhetoric in your posts ("screaming" nothing has changed) etc.
I think you might have lost the plot here. The statement being discussed was the less tests than ever. Fact. You seem to have migrated to something else altogether.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
And I want to clarify, I have no problem with someone being unsure about things.

But if all they do is put the "doping riders dope" people down, and insult them, then it looks really dubious that they do in fact hold an "I don't know" position.
 
DirtyWorks said:
http://veloclinic.tumblr.com/post/87026142603/catching-up-on-the-2014-giro-performance-analysis

This fits with what I've seen. But, I'm just an anonymous w@nker.


This is very encouraging as I thought the giant hole in the bio-passport (ex. Horner Vuelta) would become the norm.
Thank you DW.

Benotti's claim that everyone's who believes things have improved is basely purely on JVs claim is just complete BS.

It is more like the works of Vayer and others who give credence about things improving that is more relevant.

There is also the fact the French seem to have improved again having been invisible in the 00s. Now that might be down to numerous reasons but is it more likely the French started doping more once the BP came in, or that everyone else dialled back?

Also, the Italian's and the Spanish were the major nations during the 90s/00s but they are but a patch of what they used to be. Yes, they still have top riders but think back to the mid 90s when the Tour de France field was half made up of Italian teams. Now they have 2 teams at the Tour. Again could be down to numerous reasons but food for thought.

Younger riders also seem to be coming through quicker again, more like back in the 80s. Even in this Giro, there is a number of young guys doing well. Again this could be down to numerous reason's, doping earlier or again, maybe a sign of things improving. A current 24 year old rider was 18 when the BP was intoduced, 16 when Puerto happened:eek:.

To me, when Thibaut Pinot put in a Tour Top 10 in his very first Tour, I took it be a very positive sign but I could easily be wrong about that.

Benotti blathers on about the culture to dope not changing but that same culture to dope was as strong during the 80s as any other time yet Benotti believes LeMond won 3 Tour's totally clean. Is it the culture to dope that makes one dope or the necessity to dope as it was in the peak EPO era.

Anyone who ever read Rough Ride will know how open doping was on team's in the 80s yet even Di Luca has said that doping has now become a private thing so that is a clear change in culture. Surely when a young guy joins a team now, he is no longer as likely to see his colleagues jacking up in front of him so how will they know the norm is to dope like it was back in the 80s. I guess they would need to be told by a fellow rider or DS. How private is private?

Also I see people talking about A and B team's within teams and claims that the B team riders might be clean but they won't know what the A team riders are doing. Well if that is the case, then clearly that is also very different to how Kimmage potrayed it in his book.

Yes we are not in the 80s anymore but neither are we in the peak EPO years or even in the 00s slighlty less doping era. We seem to be somewhere between the former and the latter and taking into account how much progress nas been made in training, specific targeting of event's etc, it would be foolhardy to believe the general level has not improved over the last 25 years.

As I said before that is what interest's me. If a clean rider could win the biggest event totally clean in the 80s, how far could the same athlete go in the modern era. Impossible to answer but very interesting to analyse......without the hyperbole.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
http://veloclinic.tumblr.com/post/87026142603/catching-up-on-the-2014-giro-performance-analysis

This fits with what I've seen. But, I'm just an anonymous w@nker.


This is very encouraging as I thought the giant hole in the bio-passport (ex. Horner Vuelta) would become the norm.
The norm seems to be to juice up to the max human limit. And then there are some that go full mutant.

I dont think its surprising that Quintana was slow on such a brutal stage in that awful weather. But the other MTFs have been pretty fast. Too close to the human limit for my liking. I dont believe Aru can do almost 6.0w/kg for an hour cleans. Seems like a big jump from what he did last year.
 
the sceptic said:
The norm seems to be to juice up to the max human limit. And then there are some that go full mutant.
I'd argue we haven't seen full mutant this year like a Horner. That is an improvement! There are still a couple of days for riders to go full mutant.

I hope veloclinic compares the third week power to weeks one and two. For me, that's a key comparison to judge the level of PED use.

Separately, who told the teams to get off the PED's all at once? Very interesting.
 
pmcg76 said:
T
As I said before that is what interest's me. If a clean rider could win the biggest event totally clean in the 80s, how far could the same athlete go in the modern era. Impossible to answer but very interesting to analyse......without the hyperbole.
He/she would have to be a good responder to the modern (2014, whatever modern is) regime. The best example is JV vs. Wonderboy.

All of the IOC sports are a long, long way off from clean-ish. So, Benotti's pessimism is justified. Don't disregard it entirely. We might miss some valuable observation.

There are fundamental problems with the IOC and sports federations enabling doping. The UCI is still treating the positives we hear about almost randomly. And, the huge hole in the bio-passport for grand tours might still be open.
 
Dear Wiggo said:
There are 3 possibilties:

1. incomplete data (works for both years)
2. less doping (bahahahahhahahahaa ahem)
3. anti-doping is now less effective than it was in 1998 (most likely imo)

Positive tests registered on dopeology.com:

1998: 30 matches for your search

2013: 18 matches for your search

That's a 40% reduction in positive tests, despite the alleged increase in testing.

Dopers are improving year on year. Testing is not keeping up.

The problem with your raw numbers is LA never tested positive. Khol only tested positive once. etc.
But 23 of those 30 are from the 2004 retests of the 1998 samples, 2 are on the back of the Gendarmes finest work, so there were only 5 positives actually triggered in 1998 by doping authorities.
 
wansteadimp said:
But 23 of those 30 are from the 2004 retests of the 1998 samples, 2 are on the back of the Gendarmes finest work, so there were only 5 positives actually triggered in 1998 by doping authorities.
You are splitting hairs, dont you understand.
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
1
0
Even if what wansteadimp is saying weren't true, anti-doping could nonetheless be more effective today because

-it limits the gains riders can make from doping without being detected. those used to be large
-the lower number of positives is due to a fewer riders doping ie deterrence
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
I'd argue we haven't seen full mutant this year like a Horner. That is an improvement! There are still a couple of days for riders to go full mutant.

I hope veloclinic compares the third week power to weeks one and two. For me, that's a key comparison to judge the level of PED use.

Separately, who told the teams to get off the PED's all at once? Very interesting.
I agree. This is the most "normal" GT in a while. Lets hope it stays that way.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
wansteadimp said:
But 23 of those 30 are from the 2004 retests of the 1998 samples, 2 are on the back of the Gendarmes finest work, so there were only 5 positives actually triggered in 1998 by doping authorities.
appreciate the correction.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
BlueRoads The Clinic 168
Similar threads
State of the peloton 2021

ASK THE COMMUNITY