Cavendish: class of his own?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
?

the sceptic said:
You dont think Cav can win the giro one day?

His climbing is about the same as Wiggins at the same age. And he could use his sprint to pick up lots of bonus seconds. Time trials might be a problem though, he would have to work on that.
so if it looks like chocolate...............it must be chocolate...............

you're talking..............................

Mark L
 
Franklin said:
So far nothing is there that says he isn't clean. And yes, that goes for his old mates as Sky as well.

Now if we look at the likelihood it becomes a bit more murkey. He certainly didn't pick a clean team, but it's anyone guess if that means he is under team control. If the latter I'm not hopeful considering we are dealing with Lefevere.

But no hard evidence yet, so it's okay to claim he's clean. Just don't say it's without any doubts ;)
If he were doping, i think he would not be getting dropped or going backward on the hills. He barely manages in the MSR. The only thing that he has going for him is in the sprints. Viviani, Degenkolb etc. do much better than him. So the possibility of him doping is remote. The results of doping are not seen in his palmares.
 
Aug 13, 2010
3,317
0
0
IndianCyclist said:
If he were doping, i think he would not be getting dropped or going backward on the hills. He barely manages in the MSR. The only thing that he has going for him is in the sprints. Viviani, Degenkolb etc. do much better than him. So the possibility of him doping is remote. The results of doping are not seen in his palmares.
Not sure that really makes sense. There are some riders who have been caught that barely have a professional win among them. Not only that but his palmares is currently heading towards the most successful sprinter of all time so to say there are no results that would be helped by doping is, again, not true.
 
Jul 16, 2010
116
0
0
IndianCyclist said:
If he were doping, i think he would not be getting dropped or going backward on the hills. He barely manages in the MSR. The only thing that he has going for him is in the sprints. Viviani, Degenkolb etc. do much better than him. So the possibility of him doping is remote. The results of doping are not seen in his palmares.
Usain Bolt would get dropped on hills too does that mean he is clean? There are different kinds of doping. I have seen rumors on SARM-S regarding Cav.
 
Jan 20, 2013
897
0
0
IndianCyclist said:
If he were doping, i think he would not be getting dropped or going backward on the hills. He barely manages in the MSR. The only thing that he has going for him is in the sprints. Viviani, Degenkolb etc. do much better than him. So the possibility of him doping is remote. The results of doping are not seen in his palmares.
What a load of nonsence from start to finish (paying particular attention to the bold bits). Tell you what, you try putting in a seven hour stage, with hills, and see how much sprinting power and acceleration you have at the end of the race. Go on I dare you, you clearly never have making comments like this.
 
Aug 7, 2010
1,247
0
0
It would seem logical to me that if Cav was on a program, his performances in TT and hills could be better, if he in fact chose to display those improvements, which would then trip the clinic wire big time.

The caveat to all of this is that he has to be at least fast enough to finish a GT to keep whatever jersey he is wearing till the end.

Finally, if OPQS rides 100% for Cav's green at the tour, his job is made easier in that there are no divided energies and loyalties which we saw perfectly at SKY.

That OPQS is sniffing around at a Columbian GC rider for next year will surely make for some interesting pillow talk in the 'here we go again' bedroom.
 
coinneach said:
The only thread I can find on Cav relates to his teeth, so thought his achievement today warranted some acknowledgement:

I see the only 4 other riders who have points jerseys from all 3 GTs are Merckxx, Adbdojaperov, Jalabert & Petacchi.
My memory tell me they have all served time for doping infractions, (please advise about the accuracy of this)

Does this make Cav the first (official) clean winner of these points jerseys?
Can anyone confirm Jalabert not being clean? Any established sanctions? I mean, we can all have our opinions about riders, but they don't change facts

The only potential negative fact I know about Cav is that Rob Hayles (mr 50.3%) drives a motorbike while Cav trains
 
coinneach said:
Can anyone confirm Jalabert not being clean? Any established sanctions? I mean, we can all have our opinions about riders, but they don't change facts

The only potential negative fact I know about Cav is that Rob Hayles (mr 50.3%) drives a motorbike while Cav trains
Just out of curiosity, whats wrong with 50.3%? I'm 49.5%, does that say something suspicious about me?
 
ToreBear said:
Just out of curiosity, whats wrong with 50.3%? I'm 49.5%, does that say something suspicious about me?
Well, it wasn't legal, unless you had dispensation for it at the time, which Halyles got after the event (IIRC)

It could easily have brought the entire investment in British Cycling project to a shuddering end
 
coinneach said:
Well, it wasn't legal, unless you had dispensation for it at the time, which Halyles got after the event (IIRC)

It could easily have brought the entire investment in British Cycling project to a shuddering end
0,3 above isn't anything at all. And if he got a dispensation afterwards, that means he was around that level naturally. That means there is nothing suspicious with his 50,3% at all.
 

ianfra

BANNED
Mar 10, 2009
313
0
0
There is no chance of Cav being a doper. There is as much probability of him being a doper than there is of me being a pork sausage.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
ToreBear said:
0,3 above isn't anything at all. And if he got a dispensation afterwards, that means he was around that level naturally. That means there is nothing suspicious with his 50,3% at all.
Good friggin' grief. Back up a bit here, please?

Someone competes for 8 years at an international level and then the day before the World champs, blows the 50% Hct rule for the first time ever (??) and then gets a dispensation so there's nothing suspicious and he was around that level naturally?

Man alive.

Either one of us is incredibly cynical, or one of us is incredibly gullible.

1996 is the year the 50% Hct rule was introduced.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Good friggin' grief. Back up a bit here, please?

Someone competes for 8 years at an international level and then the day before the World champs, blows the 50% Hct rule for the first time ever (??) and then gets a dispensation so there's nothing suspicious and he was around that level naturally?

Man alive.

Either one of us is incredibly cynical, or one of us is incredibly gullible.

1996 is the year the 50% Hct rule was introduced.
and in full training. crit should not have set records
 

ianfra

BANNED
Mar 10, 2009
313
0
0
I think if Hayles was on the juice it would have shown up in all the tests he had over the years. At the time there was a good explanation for it we should all accept.
To quote him: "My main frustration is not with the testing - I believe it has to be there - but I think there needs to be anonymity. The situation now is that I'm guilty until proven innocent, and it's a bit ironic that I was stood down on health grounds - the stress I've had in the last week has probably knocked a few months off my life."

He was cleared and it was found that RH has a naturally high level.
 
Jul 28, 2009
898
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Either one of us is incredibly cynical, or one of us is incredibly gullible.
50% isn't some kind of magic number. Could've been 50.3, could've been 49.7. Just an arbitrary parameter designed to put a lid on crazy doping. Anyway, 0.3 is trivial (probably within Hct error depending on method) and system has mechanisms for dealing with naturally higher Hct. So no need for you to start getting on the trail of another 'doping conspiracy' .
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
rata de sentina said:
50% isn't some kind of magic number. Could've been 50.3, could've been 49.7. Just an arbitrary parameter designed to put a lid on crazy doping. Anyway, 0.3 is trivial (probably within Hct error depending on method) and system has mechanisms for dealing with naturally higher Hct. So no need for you to start getting on the trail of another 'doping conspiracy' .
I'm glad it was within error - again - so curious that there was no error for any of the other tests conducted on Hayles for the 8 years before that test.

I'm well aware that 50% is an arbitrary number. It is based on population samples though. I have read and posted the AIS study from the period of introduction more than once. And their findings were only a very small percentage (of any type of athlete) were over 50%. 25% of weightlifters though. Only 2% of netballers. I'm sure that's just error though. Or natural. Or something. I am sure testosterone has nothing to do with it.

I am aware that 0.3 (over 50) is trivial.

I am also well aware of the system in place to handle naturally high Hcts.

Like I said, the two ends of the spectrum are gullibility and cynicism.

Why is a tapered, well-rested, (should be) well-hydrated athlete testing over the threshold (> 50%) for the first time in his well established international-level cycling career? Why does he not have a dispensation given Brailsford claims to know Hayles' Hct has always been high?

I was hoping for much better analysis from you, rata.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,320
0
0
ianfra said:
I think if Hayles was on the juice it would have shown up in all the tests he had over the years. At the time there was a good explanation for it we should all accept.
To quote him: "My main frustration is not with the testing - I believe it has to be there - but I think there needs to be anonymity. The situation now is that I'm guilty until proven innocent, and it's a bit ironic that I was stood down on health grounds - the stress I've had in the last week has probably knocked a few months off my life."

He was cleared and it was found that RH has a naturally high level.
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/347216/blog-andy-jones.html

During the two week suspension Hayles underwent numerous blood tests, which all returned a haematocrit value of between 45 and 48%.
Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/347216/blog-andy-jones.html#E64lZofgM8USc1B6.99
Never tested positive, would be nice if we knew the percentage of isoforms.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
0
0
ianfra said:
I think if Hayles was on the juice it would have shown up in all the tests he had over the years. At the time there was a good explanation for it we should all accept.

lets try this shall we.

i think if Hayles had a naturally high, over 50 crit, it would have shown on all the tests he had over the years, At the time there was a good explanation for it, the Manchester Worlds were in three weeks, and they served as the BC qualification races for the Athens selection, (team at Olympics)

see, whose version reads more applicable?

go elsewhere with your chariots of fire propaganda dude. we have seen it all before. doping in and of itself, is not a major character flaw and crime, thus, cannot defame a bikie for alluding to PEDs in his/her armory. now, trottle on back to the BC hq and leave us alone.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
blackcat said:
lets try this shall we.

i think if Hayles had a naturally high, over 50 crit, it would have shown on all the tests he had over the years, At the time there was a good explanation for it, the Manchester Worlds were in three weeks, and they served as the BC qualification races for the Athens selection, (team at Olympics)
.
They were the next day - his test was the day before.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY