• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

being on the record...manifesto baby

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 6, 2009
3,488
1
0
RedheadDane said:
Uhm... did you just agree with your own post?
He is mocking the poster who has had more comeback attempts than Lance but unlike Lance is not banned for life.....but should be.
 
pmcg76 said:
He is mocking the poster who has had more comeback attempts than Lance but unlike Lance is not banned for life.....but should be.
They also both present false information as insider stories (hog's notorious breaking news posts from 2009 to 2011 which included Lance pulling out of the TDF and Contador signing for Garmin)
 
May 26, 2009
2,762
0
0
The Hitch said:
They also both present false information as insider stories (hog's notorious breaking news posts from 2009 to 2011 which included Lance pulling out of the TDF and Contador signing for Garmin)
To be fair, Contador could sign for Garmin he'd fit right in.
 
BYOP88 said:
To be fair, Contador could sign for Garmin he'd fit right in.
The negotiations did happen, and JV said he believes Contador is clean because his tests were really really good.

Don't say JV doesn't learn from his mistakes though. His method for telling whether or not Froome is clean is far better thought out and more substantial.

He has seen that Froomies test results are really really good.
 
Race Radio said:
I think that several of SKY performance are not normal and I have made this clear several times. Froome on the top part of Ventoux showed he could likely put :30-1min on Quintana on a 30-40 min climb. That would put him around 38:30 on Alp d'Huez, or even faster on an easier stage. Not Normal. Semnoz is also not normal, highest output of the race. Uran in the Giro? Not normal. I think Sky knows this and that is why they didn't resign him. JTL? Doper. They would have to have been idiots to not know this. Classics riders using Cortisone OOC without a TUE, legal but certainly not ethical. I still don't know what to make of Wiggins or Porte. I also don't think there is a team program.....Flame away I just don't know.

As much as I think this w/kg stuff is interesting I am far from an expert at it. I think it is an interesting data point but far more interesting is a disgruntled wife, SKY has one of those, or a former rider like Flecha spilling the beans.

The weight thing makes no sense to me. There is clearly something going on but none of the people I talk to can figure it out. Sure some say various substances but nothing that is traceable or had been found on anyone.

I have written all of this several times, often with far more detail, but some like to pretend I have not.

Not directed at you but I am sure others will flame away but don't expect me to respond. Really tired of the endless nonsense here
Sure Uran's doctor sucked big time before!

His new Doctor for the Giro, whomever that is, and he has to be different to the one that he was using before, is a lot better because he was ripping everybody apart. His performances were so eye opening that he was off the power scales in my calculations.

Race Radio, I am not naive to know that Colombians dope as much as other riders from other countries, but if I am going to pick a rider or performances from Colombian riders as a reference for doping surely is not going to be Uran. In fact you could have picked any other Colombian and I could have believed you. But Uran, really.
 
1 I have no hope that many of current and former riders tell the truth about their doping knowledge or doping past
2 if they do they are OUT: Frei, Jaksche, Landis...
3 that's the way the system works not only from Pro level, but before. many real clean riders maybe have not even done it to U23.
4 example: would I slash O'Grady if I were McGee? no, why? because the clinic and journalist ask me to do that? meh...
4bis: all the other people, using peds or not, witnesses or not, talking or keeping their mouths shut are part of the system anyway. (ex: Phinney, Nieve, Brajkovic, Agnoli, R.Dennis, Quinziato, Tiralongo, just to name a few)
5 the pro cycling world is a closed environment, I don't look at it as black or white.
6 CSC team was a very good example of what Pro cycling is about.
7 do I trust someone or some teams more than other? yes. some examples: Nick Squillari (@tinea_pedis) Jono Lovelock, Avanti Pro cycling team, Giant-Shimano, Matt Brammeier, T. Phinney, Bennett, Wurf, Stephen Farrand...
8 I don't follow races thinking this guy is doped, this one not.
9 I did enjoy Pantani and Big Mig and Museeuw: we had those riders and those riders were making the races.
10 Pro cycling is entertaiment, as any Pro sport.
11. I would be in favour of a clean sport, but it is not doable at the moment, and I don't know if it will ever be. so if it stays like this, either you stop watching or take it for what it is: isn't it great when, on those April Sunday, the tv goes live and we get the first images of cobbles of Valenciennes or the morning break in Bastogne ... we follow the races anyway...
 
BYOP88 said:
To be fair, Contador could sign for Garmin he'd fit right in.
The Hitch said:
The negotiations did happen, and JV said he believes Contador is clean because his tests were really really good.

Don't say JV doesn't learn from his mistakes though. His method for telling whether or not Froome is clean is far better thought out and more substantial.

He has seen that Froomies test results are really really good.
Haha :D having a good laugh :)
 
Dec 7, 2010
4,453
0
0
It is not my intention to be presumptuous by posting someone else's thoughts in this thread, I just felt that this belonged here.

Master50 said:
I have always assumed that while I don't arrive at the same conclusion in this discussion that we are all here for the same purpose.

I will state mine:
To make cycling a better sport and that all results are achieved fairly and according to all of the rules. I think that doping is cheating and as I have also made clear I believe that for a penalty to be fair it must be applied with due process.
 
Aug 20, 2009
76
0
8,680
I believe that cheating is inherent in pro and amateur cycle racing.
I still believe that Contador is a special talent, with or without enhancement.
I'd like to believe that Garmin are clean.
I believe that Springsteen must have a come around when classic rock hit a real dead spot or experienced a lull in creativity. Springsteen is terrible.
I believe that Cancellara is a better rider Boonen.
I don't and never have believed in the Myth.
I believe that mountain biking is much more fun than road cycling.
I like Ullrich.
Sagan is the shjt.

Paz Afuera
 
I would like to go on record also.

While I am a big big fan of Contador, I believe he is a doper. I am sure he doped before his ban, and probably also now though I still have some hope he's clean now. And like papisimo98 in the post above, I believe he is a little bit special :) not just for me but objectively also.

I also think Team Sky and especially Froome are doped to the gills. Froome's transformation is a big mark against them but also the way their statements always seem to contradict each other.
 
Feb 18, 2013
459
0
0
On the record for me:

1. I have followed cycling / TdF since the early 80s and the names of Millar, Roche, Hinault, Fignon, etc.
2. I’m surprised Armstrong used PEDs after his cancer because of the health risk, but not surprised (and even suspected) that he used transfusions. We don’t know the whole story here – I believe he used new / unreleased drugs and was indeed a few years ahead of the game. I’m hoping Bruyneel can be persuaded to cough it all up.
3. I get annoyed when people try to lay all the blame @ USPS’s feet – they wouldn’t have been the only team with a sophisticated doping program, although possibly theirs was the most extensive in terms of number of riders involved.
4. I’m willing to give Cookson a go as I believe McQuaid was bad news – I didn’t like the way he tried to change the UCI election rules for his own end.
5. I believe Berty has been a long term doper (Puerto, dodgy beef and plasticisers) but don’t think he was that juiced (if at all) in last year’s tour as he looked toasted in the mountains.
6. I believe blood doping is a lot less prevalent nowadays due to improved testing for EPO / transfusions / plasticisers and also longitudinal testing.
7. I believe SKY are clean – Brailsford and Ellingworth have been long time well know and vehement anti dopers. The fact that their PR often isn’t slick is ok with me – if it all agreed to the letter there would be many on here who would claim it was too perfect.
8. I believe Garmin is clean and trust Vaughters. I’m not bothered that there have been ex-USPS riders involved since many of these were happy to escape the Armstrong / Bruyneel vice and lead a more normal life.
9. The presence of Bjarne Riis and Oleg Tinkov in owning / running a team is very bad for cycling.
10. I have no idea who Dr Maserati is / was but the name makes me laugh.
 
Sep 29, 2012
8,087
0
0
I believe people who consistently support a narrative that Froome and Wiggins are believable or have explainable performances are, in fact, Sky supporters, despite their protestations to the contrary.
 
Apr 16, 2009
351
0
0
I believe the following: Team Sky are clean, unicorns, Bigfoot, creationism.

Here is the evidence to support my belief.



.
 
Jun 16, 2010
1,036
0
0
Mantras

I think cycling is one of the most beautiful sports in the world combining athleticism, endurance, speed, tactics, verve and panache. My mantra:



When I ride, I feel the wind, it soothes my soul until the end. How I love the silent power, as I glide along for the hours.

Great cycling music lifts my day. The Boss is good, but cycle music he cannot play. Whatever happened to John Tesh, whose cycling music was finesse.

The UCI deserves to die, but Cookson can resurrect the pie. Their commitment to doing clean, would improve the cycling scene.

Doping is cycling's biggest bane, cuz riders want the money-fame. WADA's code sorts out the mess, but what we need is more Travis.

Cycling teams make up the sport, but transparency always comes up short. Make them publish all their data, and I will cancel the Intifada.

Sponsors need a set of rules, so in the end they won't look like fools. Nike, Trek and Oakley people, stumbled badly looking feeble.

Riders need to get on board, so as not to fall upon a sword. If they want a legacy, they need a cleaner policy.

Armstrong cheated for celebrity, because he has no modesty. He's cycling's resident psychopath, which caused a massive personal crash. One he deserved for sure, for sure, because its obvious he ain't pure.

Commentators like Phil Liggett, need to learn to close the spigot. Paul and Bob and all talkfest, should close up shop and take a rest.

We the fans deserve to see, the race is clean, not tainted pee. Otherwise it's all BS, and I turn the channel to DeGeneres.
 
Sep 29, 2012
8,087
0
0
Justinr said:
On the record for me:

1. I have followed cycling / TdF since the early 80s and the names of Millar, Roche, Hinault, Fignon, etc.
2. I’m surprised Armstrong used PEDs after his cancer because of the health risk, but not surprised (and even suspected) that he used transfusions. We don’t know the whole story here – I believe he used new / unreleased drugs and was indeed a few years ahead of the game. I’m hoping Bruyneel can be persuaded to cough it all up.
3. I get annoyed when people try to lay all the blame @ USPS’s feet – they wouldn’t have been the only team with a sophisticated doping program, although possibly theirs was the most extensive in terms of number of riders involved.
4. I’m willing to give Cookson a go as I believe McQuaid was bad news – I didn’t like the way he tried to change the UCI election rules for his own end.
5. I believe Berty has been a long term doper (Puerto, dodgy beef and plasticisers) but don’t think he was that juiced (if at all) in last year’s tour as he looked toasted in the mountains.
6. I believe blood doping is a lot less prevalent nowadays due to improved testing for EPO / transfusions / plasticisers and also longitudinal testing.
7. I believe SKY are clean – Brailsford and Ellingworth have been long time well know and vehement anti dopers. The fact that their PR often isn’t slick is ok with me – if it all agreed to the letter there would be many on here who would claim it was too perfect.
8. I believe Garmin is clean and trust Vaughters. I’m not bothered that there have been ex-USPS riders involved since many of these were happy to escape the Armstrong / Bruyneel vice and lead a more normal life.
9. The presence of Bjarne Riis and Oleg Tinkov in owning / running a team is very bad for cycling.
10. I have no idea who Dr Maserati is / was but the name makes me laugh.
Not forgetting:

Justinr said:
I happen to believe what i believe (and i have said this a number of times) because of what Brailsford and co did with track cycling.
 
1. Something's definitely off about Sky. Every time I've seen something similar to it happen in cycling, it's been doping.

The way they ride, the way they answer questions, the lies, inconsistencies and omissions of truths and the people involved. There's so much dirt beneath the shiny surface they claim to have. Froome and Wiggins are definitely doping. It wouldn't shock me the slightest to see Porte get caught. Not looking good for Henao either. Urán has switched teams, but it'd be naive to think he wasn't on something either. It wouldn't shock me at all if Kennaugh and/or Thomas start smacking the peloton up and down the parcours during stage races soon, sadly.

2. Horner's not clean and is probably the most obviously dirty rider in the Peloton. The fact that he's still riding is a joke.

3. The punishment for getting caught is way to low. Start doling out five year bans at the very least for riders who are cleary using PEDs deliberately. If it were up to me, serious offences would result in lifetime bans.

4. It's completely ludicrous that former dopers are allowed to manage teams. The first step to cleaning up the sport is getting the filth out of the top jobs.

5. I have no reason to believe that most top riders are clean. Beating tests seems to be quite easy for those who want to beat the system. Look at the amount of dopers who never tested positive and the amount of dopers who said they beat hundreds of tests before they got careless and tested positive. If it's that easy, there's probably a lot of it going on. I do however think that the biopass and more sophisticated tests limit how effective the doping is for the vast majority of dopers.

6. If a new super drug becomes available and testers can't detect it I refuse to believe that riders won't just start using it en masse just like they did with EPO in the 90s. In fact, that might be what's happening at the moment. An arms race, started by Sky. Contador is looking fishy again, at least. We'll know more after the Grand Tours, but I have a feeling we're in for something special this year.
 
(Yeah, I know I sorta already did this...)

1: I believe the sport is getting cleaner, but I do not think it will ever be 100 % clean. No sport ever will; there will always be some so determined to win they'll do whatever it takes.

2: Everyone is innocent until proven guilty. However, as has been seen recently 'proven guilty' does not have to involve positive doping tests.

3: It's important to move forward, but just as important to remember the past. Drawing a line in the sand and going "that was all in the past!" only creates the risk that past mistakes might be repeated.

4: I still think that everyone deserves a second chance. After that, however, it's



5: Young up-and-coming riders need to know from the moment they get on race bike that doping is not the way forward, no matter what anyone may tell them.

6: Anyone who tells a young rider that he/she has to dope should be burned!
Not really....
 
May 26, 2009
2,762
0
0
I'm against doping in all sports. I'll probably be thought as an extremist by some/maybe all here, but c'est la vie.

1) Banned for life after first offense.

2) Jail time, minimum of 5 years.

3) The busted athlete has to pay back all career earnings.
 
I believe that road biking is glorified commuting, so why not use a car, the only real type of biking is mountain biking and it's only mountain biking if there are at least three 4 foot + drops and is 75%+ single-track...



On a serious note, I wouldn't be surprised if any cyclist tested positive but I like discussing the evidence behind it and importantly the evidence and science involved in anti-doping efforts.
 
Merckx index said:
Explain how the data would look for there to be nothing suspect. If he had power/weight values comparable to what Grappe claims they are for post-2011, how would you explain his much poorer performances? Are you aware that we have already compared his ITT times pre- and post 2011 Vuelta, and found an indication of a 15% increase in power? How does someone with Froome’s current power ride ITTs so poorly? Do you think better bike handling, not wobbling around so much, can produce a 15% increase in power? Without so much as a visit to a wind tunnel? Seriously?

OTOH, if his power values were consistent with his poorer performance, how would he explain the large increase over a period of a few months in 2011? Michele, who never answered some pertinent questions put to her when she was on the forum recently, implied that it might have resulted from weight loss, but there are no data supporting that claim, either. It’s pure speculation. And even if there were data, they wouldn’t explain a 15% increase in power/surface area. He would have to lose more than 30% of his body weight to accomplish that.

She also didn’t seem aware that Grappe never measured Froome’s V02max; he estimated it, based on assumptions that may or may not be correct. Grappe thinks it’s over 85, and that it might be over 90. How in the world can someone with a V02max that high show so little promise for so long? How many Tom Danielsons are there, who never proved to be quite elite as GT contenders, but who set all kinds of hill climbing records in situations where tactics, bike handling skills and the ability to conserve energy over a three week race did not come into play? And yet a guy with a V02max that might be off the charts is never noticed?

You know the most disappointing part of this entire coverup? Not that they won’t measure and publish his V02max; not that they won’t publish his power values pre-2011; not that they won’t publish his weight during these time periods. It’s that they won’t even admit that there is a problem to address. If Froome is really clean, they should be publishing all the data they can, shouting from the rooftops that a huge increase in performance is possible without doping.

Walsh wants to write a book? How about a detailed description of how such a transformation was made? That would be one of the most inspirational sports science stories of all time, if it could be documented in terms of a detailed analysis of all the relevant parameters. There has to be an explanation for Froome's big jump in performance, and any real trainer or doctor associated with the team would want to know more than anything else in the world how it happened. Maybe it really happened clean, but how will we ever know if they make no effort whatsoever to find out, apparently not even privately, among themselves. That says volumes about what they believe is the answer.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS