Arnaud De Lie

[F_Cance]

looks like it's time

 

[Red Rick]

Forum's not dead yet.

 

[Pantani_lives]

Somebody has won something. He must be on drugs!

 

[Hugh Januss]

Yawn!

 

[Netserk]

It’s always time.

Somebody has won something. He must be on drugs!

Do you think he isn't doped?

 

[Black Betsy]

The Clinic loves them all like UCI all the dictators of this fookin world! lol! Love The Clinic! Missing The Hog, Snipper, Benotti etc.

 

[BR2]

So far I don't see how he's any more suspicious than your average cyclist. He's winning in a very strong way, but he's winning a specific kind of races, looks like he's been a talented junior and has had a relatively steady trajectory. Surely not saying he's clean, but if we look at strength alone I guess we might just quit watching cycling.

 

[Netserk]

He's more successful than your average cyclist, and he is more powerful than your average cyclists (especially considering his age). So obviously that implies that he is more likely to be doped than your average cyclist.

If not, you must have a very funky model of how doping works and who dopes.

 

[hrotha]

He's probably doping unless it's possible to be one of the top riders of the peloton while riding clean (and even then he could just be doing it dirty). There's literally nothing to discuss here. Without anything concrete about De Lie specifically, this is just a superfluous iteration of the State of the Peloton thread.

 

[BR2]

He's more successful than your average cyclist, and he is more powerful than your average cyclists (especially considering his age). So obviously that implies that he is more likely to be doped than your average cyclist.

If not, you must have a very funky model of how doping works and who dopes.

I think we all know that riders might just as well dope to keep up, get a contract, win a race at all, get a better contract or simply because they think everyone does it. Enough amateurs dope without ever getting amazing results.

 

[Netserk]

I think we all know that riders might just as well dope to keep up, get a contract, win a race at all, get a better contract or simply because they think everyone does it. Enough amateurs dope without ever getting amazing results.

Sure, there are dopers on all levels. But they are diluted by clean riders more on the lower levels, which is why the level of the rider is a predictor of doping.

 

[pastronef]

it's all fun and games, and the "guess the PEDs" is a game we played at least once on here.
but it's absolutely useless and gratuitous guessing that could lead to unfounded accusations

 

[Nick2413]

Sure, there are dopers on all levels. But they are diluted by clean riders more on the lower levels, which is why the level of the rider is a predictor of doping.

Yep. Hence why even most of the mid level riders in the peloton are probably doped. Not really much room to be one of the best ~200 cyclists in the world when there’s magnitudes more of talented riders taking various things. The only difference in the pro ranks is the level of doping and a bit of genetics.

 

[Red Rick]

5.55W/kg for like 17 minutes.

Hardly mutant.