Cadel Evans is a Clean Champion

[del1962]

You can't really be taken seriously with rubbish like that.

 

[The Hitch]

As i recall when Evans won the tour last year one of their sougneiurs got caught with some drugs or some such. Maybe i got.mixed up though.

Anyway a question i have for the ozzies is why would Evans not dope? With those riders who we know were clean we know that they had some ethical problems with it and they either spoke out or kept quiet and to themselves and away from the cesspool.

With Evans that's clearly not the case as he is best buds with half the dopers in the sport.

He also does not seem to care for showing that he is clean as he has never been outraged about dopers beating him and he doesn't have a care in the world for how suspicious his teams are.

So what is this mentality ya'll propose he has that he would spend all of his career living competing drinking with the dopers, one of the brothers,; and losing and doing it clean, when a quick word in the ear and a little boost would prove sufficient to make all his dreams come true.

Its like with people who decide to swim the Atlantic , its interesting what the mindset behind such behaviour is.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

You can't really be taken seriously with rubbish like that.

What's rubbish about anything I have said? Do you want proof?

 

[Ferminal]

Ferminal you are being disingenuous and you know it.

BTW although teams has been discussed previously specifically brought up again by me, I will repeat joining teams is a poor argument. Bassons on Festina and Moncoutie on Cofidis shows clean riders on dirty teams. Funnily enough Tyler riding paniagua on USPS joins the list (came 100th?). Which teams are clean? And he is a genuine GC contender so will be on teams that have wealth resources and endeavour to win ie bigger teams.

Anyway, the joke is none of those teams have contributed diddly squat to his performance. Unlike TeamSKY this year, CSC for Sastre or USPS/Discovery for LA and Banesto for Big Wig.

BTWx2 Yes Sky hiring Leinders is almost the stupidest worst thing they could do. Far more than anything Evans has done.

Sorry I don't think I am.

If you base an argument on someone being dirty on a single member of staff at one of their teams, then you can't argue that someone is clean despite dozens of dodgy staff and suspect team practices over their career.

The people who worked for Evans does not make him a doper beyond doubt, so neither should Leinders with the Fab Four.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Sorry I don't think I am.

If you base an argument on someone being dirty on a single member of staff at one of their teams, then you can't argue that someone is clean despite dozens of dodgy staff and suspect team practices over their career.

The people who worked for Evans does not make him a doper beyond doubt, so neither should Leinders with the Fab Four.

You aren't, you are absolutely consistent.
Sittingbison is the disingenuous one.
Clearly his real agenda remains Sky's "collective" Tour performance.
Emphasises the fluctuating standards of proof around here, once again.

Might just as well argue that Cadel is more "suspicious" than Wiggins, because he won his Tour with minimal team support and rode everybody off his wheel on the Galibier.
There is no evidence of anything dodgy in the above, in case anybody is wondering.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Might just as well argue that Cadel is more "suspicious" than Wiggins, because he won his Tour with minimal team support and rode everybody off his wheel on the Galibier.

And then defended it for the next 13 days. Oh wait.

2012: 28 days as leader vs 4. Big difference, I don't care who's on your team.

 

[sittingbison]

Lol you guys are a hoot.

Ferminal, Mellow Velo, I made a multi paragraph post addressing an issue, and you choose ONE WORD to accuse me of being disingenuous? And what would that word be?

Leinders!!

That's it, in a post of hundreds of words. Leinders, listed as a doping doctor along with luminaries Ferrari Feuntes and del Moral. And you take THAT as an attack on Sky? lol getting a bit twitchy are we? Bit close to the bone? Pressure getting a bit touch to bare? Better HTFU lads.

In fact I was kind of expecting a bunch of sky apologists to try and derail this thread, and voila! they magically appear when the exposed rotten tooth of Leinders is touched.

This is a thread about Evans not sky. I'm more than happy to keep exposing sky there, not here

 

[Galic Ho]

Chill out Garlic Ho, what has got into you?

I have highlighted the KNOWN dopers in the top 10 TdF that Evans was behind and in front of - to make it clear where he was in relation to them all. There is no opinion one way or the other on any of them including Menchov. Of course I know about him, Sastre etc. however no matter what we think they are not busted.

I have then mentioned Ricco (sore thumb obvious) and Armstrong (revealed in Evidence) as being EASY to spot as opposed to the more intangible aspect of Evans, which makes it more difficult to definitively accuse him of doping. Which is why this thread exists. Get a grip.

You reckon I'm a sheep? A pleb? I politely say get frakked.

You went to effort of putting in tags to colour every name. Every name. You knew exactly what you were doing and have changed your wording not once, but twice in an effort to pass the buck. First it was 'convicted' dopers then changed it to 'known.'

Menchov is a 'known' doper. So is Sastre and so to Evans. Because of the manner in which they rode and beat convicted and proven dopers. Sastre in four consecutive GT's from the 2008 Tour to 2009 Tour had one off performance. The 2009 Tour. He was on another planet in all the other races especially the 2009 Giro. If he'd acted earlier, he'd have been up there with DiLuca and Menchov. Oh BTW, second and third from that race both served doping bans from that race (DiLuca and Pellizotti) and yes it was pretty obvious they were doping.

BTW I was calm. If you write something off, it will be challenged on this forum and if really off key, corrected. I still am calm...now you might not like someone replying to you...build a bridge and move on.

As for me asking a question. Well the answer is up to you. I never said your were a sheep or pleb...I asked you. So should I go frak myself? Provide Katee Sackoff and I'll gladly frak off from here.

One last thing Bison. Perrerio has never been talked about as doping other than by Floyd who vaguely mentioned him. He also mentioned every other rider imaginable. BTW, guess who beat Perreiro almost every time they raced? Evans. And Cadel did it alone, mostly without a team. Seriously people, look at how he raced before his World Championship win. Alone and still winning, just not as classy. Afterwards? Lots of flair, attacking and still relatively the same performance relative to his big rivals. They're all still doping, nothing changed, except for the guys getting popped and banned.

I do note that someone mentioned Popovich as evidence Evans was clean in 2008. Not a chance. Popo was crap because his best mate had just been busted for EPO use. That's old news here in the Clinic. Popo was scared and backed off. Then got back on with Bruyneel. Anyone remember the stage win Sastre got in the 2009 Giro. The second win I believe. Popo was in a break and Sastre attacked and made him look beyond pathetic. I am still laughing today over that, was some funny stuff to watch. Actually that whole Giro was full of lol moments.

Interesting to note the mention of Kohl. Yes, Evans and Sastre racing clean beat a doped the gills Gerolsteiner rider. Evans final chrono was poor. He needed the same time Vande Velde put in to be on par with Sastre and equal on time. Contrast to his performance relative to everyone else in 2007 in the ITT's. Big difference. Cleaner perhaps, but the 2007 was still dirty. Take Kohl for example...he admitted with another blood bag, he'd have won the Tour. IMO he'd have come close. That's the anomaly. How much extra doping did they get over usual. 2008 for Cadel, well IMO Sastre got a bit extra, hence his Alpe blitz and above average ITT in relation to Cadel. 2011 Evans learnt and didn't leave it to chance. He got his extra blood and thus, for the first time since 2007, his chrono was damn impressive. After all, he was only 7 seconds behind Tony Martin.

No, for me, it comes down to schedule and management. Organising your doping around your training and racing and ensuring you are healthy, crash free and in a high enough place in the final week to utilise fully your prep work regarding doping (reinfusion). That is why Menchov won in 2009, Carlos in 2008 and Cadel in 2011. Same deal, same latent and natural talents, they just dotted the 'i's and crossed their 't's better than anyone at their respective GT wins. All the current GT winners are in the same boat...Wiggins is different and an exception to that though.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Let's just say for the sake of discussion that Greg LeMond and Evans are the 2 biggest natural talents of the past 30 years.
How many tours did LeMond win after the advent of blood vector doping? How close did he even come? OK so maybe Evans is that much more talented than LeMond was.
There's a chance. A small chance.

 

[Galic Ho]

actually, in defense of Evans and his wife here.

I dont believe she is Odessa Gunn nor Haven Parchinski. I dont believe she was or is, crucial, or an enabler. But I do not believe she is Betsy Andreu.

I have only heard Evans announce platitudes and motherhood statements about Armstrong, "great champion", challenge to go against him on his return... etc. And Chiara is a little like Elisa Basso, always seen around races. She knows what the culture is. But UNLIKE Elisa Basso, if Elisa was selling stuff or a mule, apart from Eddie Mazzoleni's squeeze, I presume the best for her and she just brings Cadel's dog to races. She would not be that stupid.

When Rob Arnold publishes Evan's blood parameters and his hematocrit, I believe the numbers, and there is no blood manipulation nor plasma expanders obfuscating the real numbers. I think he probably just used recovery therapy, and if he saw Ferrari beyond the test for Rominger, I dont think he took the jump to oxygen vector drugs or techniques. Which makes his results and achievements all the more remarkable. I dont think the current crop use such little supplementation. This may be naive of me. Sort of contradicts everything I have said on the professional peloton in Europe. Its a smidgin' AusCyclingFan94 thats what it is <blackcat holds his or her head in shame>

I agree. I wasn't suggesting Chiara hauls dope, takes Cadel to get blood drained or sells stuff to the other riders on the side. I was simply saying she has been around Cadel during the LA years and married him in spite of knowing exactly what goes on in the peloton behind the prying eyes of the public.

When? Good question. When the data gets published, well that will be another story. But it if it does, it will simply look like Ivans or Ryder's. Not exactly what you'd hope, but not glaringly obvious like Lance's. Makes one wonder though doesn't it. Valjavec and Pellizotti must have had sinister looking Bio Passports given their sanctioning and bans and Valjavec was only ever around 10th. Pellizotti is now, not the same rider he was. He'd have won the 2010 Giro if he wasn't sanctioned. That's how far he'd progressed from what I could see result wise. So given Cadel had a UCI suspicion index rating of 4, one mark below Contador and Wiggins, and Rogers had one of 8 and Menchov was 9 and we know Ashenden said Contador's entire Passport and old samples were really suspect...well it speaks for itself. Another Aussie had an 8 on that list. Matt Lloyd. Cadel's old room mate at Lotto.

Better not mention that to the Tan Man hey? I might drop by SBS and see what they're cooking up. Passing the buck would be my guess. Protect Aussie riders is what I suspect will be the main agenda.

 

[Galic Ho]

Let's just say for the sake of discussion that Greg LeMond and Evans are the 2 biggest natural talents of the past 30 years.
How many tours did LeMond win after the advent of blood vector doping? How close did he even come? OK so maybe Evans is that much more talented than LeMond was.
There's a chance. A small chance.

Given Cadel's VO2max is 5 to 7 marks below Lemonds that is stretching it.

IMO, definite contender in a clean peloton, no doubt. But no more than Bassons. And we know what Voet said about Bassons. His VO2max is 1 mark below Cadel's. Lemond and Evans are also similar builds, both in height and weight.

So a good comparison. But there lies my problem with it all. I could make a case for Lemond in career best form MAYBE, just maybe finishing near Evans in a Tour. But that would be this year, and Cadel was 15 minutes back and sick. That is me being super, super, super duper optimistic. My mind says Lemond would have been 20 minutes back, possibly 30. Somewhere between those two times. That's still quicker than Cadel and he was off this year. Thus I can only conclude that makes 2011 and the other years kind of the off points. They are the clinchers IMO.

As for best natural talent. In terms of oxygen uptake in litres on rider is hands above everyone else. Cancellara. His VO2max is the same or about a point higher than Cadels and he is the best part of almost 20kg heavier. Put it this way, the litre uptake of Cadel vs Lemond is where the difference comes in. Lemond simply had an extra notch to turn it up. I think Cadel has that over almost everyone riding ATM, especially a lot of the other winners, but he isn't Lemond or Hinault pedigree. Close, but still enough to warrant being a class below. The only current or recent rider I have heard of with a VO2max in the 90 or 90+ range was Floyd surprisingly. Read his was 90ml/min/kg. Can't confirm it though. Was on here 2 years back. I think if we had that and the weight and maximal power output @VO2max for every rider, we'd know who should be winning big races and consistently performing. BTW, Cadel doesn't have the highest VO2max recorded at the Institute of Sport...Brett Aitken does. Same as Hinault's @ 92ml/min/kg.

 

[Galic Ho]

I agree with you.

But that Tour, or the one he lost to a far inferior timetrialler, Sastre, Bruyneel was adament he was not gonna win going into the final chrono.

He was in arrears an amount of time he would have exceeded 3 or 4 fold, if it had been a chrono in the first week. Which leads me to believe, Bruyneel knew Evans performances were deteriorating thru the 3 weeks, and he was not getting his blood bags, and his recovery doping was vastly inferior to his competition.

That is what I have always thought about it. I remember distinctly Bruyneel was the only DS who called it. He said Cadel wouldn't win. I've been pretty sure he had word that Cadel was not getting enough blood bags.

Are you saying Cadel didn't blood dope? I'm a bit perplexed with your wording in multiple posts so I thought I'd ask. IMO, he blood doped, he just didn't get as much as his opposition at all times. Like in 2006 and 2008. And also relative to how much Levi put in during the last week of the 2007 Tour. Cadel always seemed like he didn't get as much as some guys did. Can't say that though for 2011, unless they all came down to his level, which is a possibility. However that ain't the case for 2012 and sadly says a great deal about Sky and Nibali.

 

[Mellow Velo]

And then defended it for the next 13 days. Oh wait.

2012: 28 days as leader vs 4. Big difference, I don't care who's on your team.

Sticking to Le Tour, since wearing the leader's jersey in Paris-Nice and Romandie is totally irrelevant.

Did Wiggins really have to defend for 13 days on that awful course and against who? Just Nibali.
Also 13 is just a number. By my recollection, it was race 5 days of "defence".
The two, post rest days, were further rest days.
I'd say that's a lightweight argument, at best.

Imo, without strong team support, Cadel's 3 day, Alpine exploits are equally suspicious.

 

[Galic Ho]

Because the most vonciferous of Sky accusers here are Australian

Nothing an Aussie likes more than to deride British sporting success

The first people on Sky picked on WERE THE AUSSIES BY THE AUSSIES. Nice job genius. Once again using your double digit IQ to waste time. Go use your fingers to whack off over your poster of Wiggo rather than pester the forum with your keyboard.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Lol you guys are a hoot.

Ferminal, Mellow Velo, I made a multi paragraph post addressing an issue, and you choose ONE WORD to accuse me of being disingenuous? And what would that word be?

Leinders!!

That's it, in a post of hundreds of words. Leinders, listed as a doping doctor along with luminaries Ferrari Feuntes and del Moral. And you take THAT as an attack on Sky? lol getting a bit twitchy are we? Bit close to the bone? Pressure getting a bit touch to bare? Better HTFU lads.

In fact I was kind of expecting a bunch of sky apologists to try and derail this thread, and voila! they magically appear when the exposed rotten tooth of Leinders is touched.

This is a thread about Evans not sky. I'm more than happy to keep exposing sky there, not here

Not at all.
You multi-paragraph post concludes with this:

the flip side is all those dopers he competed against and largely beat HAVE ALL BEEN CAUGHT. Almost to a man especially applying the clinic standard (bang bang you're dead Menchov, Oscar, Carlos, TommyV et al).
All but Evans. Food for thought.

Carlos Sastre is guilty by dodgy team association only.
Feminal then names Cadel's lengthy list of dodgy teams.
TommyV et al? Suspicious performance only.
Only dodgy team suspicions.

To me, this is an example of fluctuating standards of proof.

So, I'm not comparing just Wiggins to Evans, but Evans to the acceptable level of proof of "suspicion".

Having said that, that one word "Leinders" does seem to carry a heck of a lot of weight, when it comes to tipping the scales of justice round here.

 

[JimmyFingers]

The first people on Sky picked on WERE THE AUSSIES BY THE AUSSIES. Nice job genius. Once again using your double digit IQ to waste time. Go use your fingers to whack off over your poster of Wiggo rather than pester the forum with your keyboard.

Humour fail. But then you are Australian

 

[del1962]

Aussies have a specific ire for their own working for Brits though (especially succesful ones)

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

2012 Cadel = Rode completely clean. Great champion who gave everything.

Pre-2012 = Who knows? Probably cleaner than most.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Aussies have a specific ire for their own working for Brits though (especially succesful ones)

You are talking as a Brit. I suggest you do not know what you are talking about.

Also - you still have not answered the question: what did I make up in the Sky thread?

 

[Alphabet]

2012 Cadel = Rode completely clean. Great champion who gave everything.

How can you say that for sure? In the Tour he may have been clean, but he still did very well at the Dauphine.

 

[sittingbison]

You went to effort of putting in tags to colour every name. Every name. You knew exactly what you were doing and have changed your wording not once, but twice in an effort to pass the buck. First it was 'convicted' dopers then changed it to 'known.'

Menchov is a 'known' doper. So is Sastre and so to Evans.....

garlic ho, I largely agree with all your analysis and observations which is excellent, I am pointing out you are shooting the messenger. I am not obfuscating at all, you are jumping to conclusions. What you are saying bolded is opinion, which is probably correct but thats not the same as being busted or named/admitted. I have said several times now the names highlighted are "known" dopers. I included Oscar in that because of what was said by Floyd and what he admitted himself.

I am more than happy to enter debate, more than happy to have mistakes I make corrected, and more than happy to change my mind when presented with a good case. I am not happy at people twisting my words, purposely misunderstanding what I say to suit themselves, or purposely mislead by cherry picking a word or phrase from a complete argument. In this case you took exception to my intention, which is fine but I have explained why I did what I did and that should be the end of it.

I was considering putting an asterix or a different colour for guys like Menchoz, but didn't want to confuse the issue.

 

[sittingbison]

...


Carlos Sastre is guilty by dodgy team association only.
Feminal then names Cadel's lengthy list of dodgy teams.
TommyV et al? Suspicious performance only.
Only dodgy team suspicions.

To me, this is an example of fluctuating standards of proof.

So, I'm not comparing just Wiggins to Evans, but Evans to the acceptable level of proof of "suspicion"....

Mello Velo, look at what I said "...Almost to a man especially applying the clinic standard (bang bang you're dead Menchov, Oscar, Carlos, TommyV et al).

You might have noticed some flak about this issue up thread? And I originally have NOT included Sastre Menchov and TommyV as "dopers" as they are not justed. Some in the clinic insist they are all dopers, which is specifically included in my comment.

BTW there is zero comparison between wiggo and Evans. Career trajectory completely different. team support completely different etc etc. And wiggo with team sky have a plethora of circumstantial evidence against them, Evans is very light on. The only real argument, which is what garlic ho bangs on about, is he successfully competes against proven and alleged dopers. Which is impossible to ignore.

 

[sittingbison]

Sticking to Le Tour, since wearing the leader's jersey in Paris-Nice and Romandie is totally irrelevant.

Did Wiggins really have to defend for 13 days on that awful course and against who?....

hmmm. Sky should be in the sky thread. Anyway wiggo was second just ten seconds off the maillot jeune for the first week when it was held by Canc, who was no threat. He defended this position then he assumed yellow himself.

The reality is he held it the entire Tour. And there was never the slightest threat from anyone.

 

[Ferminal]

Lol you guys are a hoot.

Ferminal, Mellow Velo, I made a multi paragraph post addressing an issue, and you choose ONE WORD to accuse me of being disingenuous? And what would that word be?

Leinders!!

That's it, in a post of hundreds of words. Leinders, listed as a doping doctor along with luminaries Ferrari Feuntes and del Moral. And you take THAT as an attack on Sky? lol getting a bit twitchy are we? Bit close to the bone? Pressure getting a bit touch to bare? Better HTFU lads.

In fact I was kind of expecting a bunch of sky apologists to try and derail this thread, and voila! they magically appear when the exposed rotten tooth of Leinders is touched.

This is a thread about Evans not sky. I'm more than happy to keep exposing sky there, not here

Close to the bone? I think Sky dope, beyond enough doubt to satisfy me.

Leinders means close to nothing in that decision. The comparison between a team doping doctor and Ferrari and Fuentes is hilarious. Leinders is not a smoking gun and the idea that if Leinders or another doctor with a past (Max Testa?) is the central argument for believing a rider dopes is ridiculous.

My decision to believe Evans dopes is hardly based upon a BMC soigneur being busted with large supplies of EPO the same year he wins the Tour. Or the fact that his boss gave a doping blank cheque to his last team leader.

 

[blackcat]

2012 Cadel = Rode completely clean. Great champion who gave everything.

Pre-2012 = Who knows? Probably cleaner than most.

this would be my take