Cleanest GC Rider of the Doping Decade

[Ferminal]

Actually, no rider who currently has a very realistic chance at a GT podium deserves to be mentioned in this thread. It is extremely difficult, if possible, for a very talented clean rider to reach the top 10.

I know, it's still funny how the Aussie is always more clean than the Spaniard!

Let's play who is the first clean rider in the 2007 TdF.

Evans?
Sastre?
Soler?
Arroyo?
Kurtains?
Horner?
Garate?
Gutierrez?
Txurruka?

Colombian... Hmm I don't believe that. I have a hard time believing anyone on Caisse. Horner may have an argument, given he was in good form but not at his peak program form of 2010.

Txurruka!

 

[Von Mises]

I know, it's still funny how the Aussie is always more clean than the Spaniard!

Let's play who is the first clean rider in the 2007 TdF.

Evans?
Sastre?
Soler?
Arroyo?
Kurtains?
Horner?
Garate?
Gutierrez?
Txurruka?

Colombian... Hmm I don't believe that. I have a hard time believing anyone on Caisse. Horner may have an argument, given he was in good form but not at his peak program form of 2010.

Txurruka!

It is not funny, it is just logical, if there is less evidence, it gives more credibility (it does not necessarily mean that he is clean, just that there is lack of evidence compared with some other riders).

And btw, I would not exclude from your list even Contador or post-Puerto Valverde.

 

[la.margna]

forget about any successful rider being clean. get real. get a life. no way. just do the math.

 

[Von Mises]

forget about any successful rider being clean. get real. get a life. no way. just do the math.

What math?

 

[**Uru**]

I work with a guy who used to race with Tom Danielson. He says that he is the real deal. This comes from a guy who believes pretty much every pro cyclist dopes.

 

[Jonathan]

I work with a guy who used to race with Tom Danielson. He says that he is the real deal. This comes from a guy who believes pretty much every pro cyclist dopes.

Isn't Danielson always mentioned in those "Who is the biggest wasted talent" threads? Those discussions might be a good place to start looking for clean riders.

 

[Galic Ho]

Moncoutie might be clean, perhaps Cunego. In the previous decade, Charly Mottet has been named as a clean GC rider. I'm also thinking of Bradley McGee.

What are the chances that Zuelle was clean in the 1999 Tour? If he was, that would have been the most amazing clean performance ever.

Please, Zulle and then McGee. Why is it that McGee has struggled to get a team in recent years? Because when he hopped off the sauce he sucked and no results does not bode well for contract negotiations. From monster in the early naughties to a shadow a few years later. That is McGee. Not clean. As for Zulle, well known in the Clinic as a user.

ACF94, Evans does not make the list. I could tear him a new one. The evidence and points against him went up. Look at who Floyd just shamed. All of BMC's big boys bar Evans. Rihs, Lelangue and Big George. Not to mention every arguement put forth against Cadel before. He is no cleaner than Contador.

As for the doping decade. They are all doping decades. This one is somewhat cleaner than the 90s, but still bad. Cleanest GC rider right now is probably a tie between Cunego and Gerdemann. Definitely not one of the top 5 guys. Not someone on RadioShack, Saxo, Astana, Caisse, Liquigas, Sky, HTC and sadly, on 2008 and 2009 form, not a Garmin rider.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Please, Zulle and then McGee. Why is it that McGee has struggled to get a team in recent years? Because when he hopped off the sauce he sucked and no results does not bode well for contract negotiations. From monster in the early naughties to a shadow a few years later. That is McGee. Not clean. As for Zulle, well known in the Clinic as a user.

ACF94, Evans does not make the list. I could tear him a new one. The evidence and points against him went up. Look at who Floyd just shamed. All of BMC's big boys bar Evans. Rihs, Lelangue and Big George. Not to mention every arguement put forth against Cadel before. He is no cleaner than Contador.

As for the doping decade. They are all doping decades. This one is somewhat cleaner than the 90s, but still bad. Cleanest GC rider right now is probably a tie between Cunego and Gerdemann. Definitely not one of the top 5 guys. Not someone on RadioShack, Saxo, Astana, Caisse, Liquigas, Sky, HTC and sadly, on 2008 and 2009 form, not a Garmin rider.

Ok, If you want guilt by association then Cunego rode for Saeco. Cunego is actually implicated in a doping scandal but lampre pulled nobody out. Don't you remember mantova? cunego far more suspicion than evans.

Evans is not in Contadors league of doping.

 

[Von Mises]

Define "The Doping Era"? Doping has been around forever. One could argue there was more doping in the 1970's than 1990's. Just that the doping at the time was much less effective (mostly amphetamines, cortisone, and pain killers).

No one has yet said Christophe Bassons, nor Gilles Delion. Two good riders who were outspoken against doping during the 90's, and had their potential ruined because of it. Willy Voet backs both as being completely clean, and apologized to both. In a clean world, Delion would have won the Tour in about 1994 or so. Instead, he couldn't even keep up with the autobus and was forced into retirement, at 27.

From the mid-1990's through mid-2000's I'd venture a guess to say few if any riders won any major races during that time clean. We may have not even had a clean rider able to even finish a GT during some of those years.

I also think that mid-1990's through mid-2000's was dirties era, but to say that clean rider was not even able to keep up with the autobus, it seems exaggeration. Indurain´s average speed in 1994 was less than Delgado in 1987 or Hinault 1988.
I am sure that there was widespread doping in mid 1990-s, but saying that you cant keep up with autobus..., well, I am not sure.

 

[Archibald]

i'm inclined to look at riders like O'Grady or Voight...

 

[sublimit]

Michael Rogers, he seems to have a ridiculous amount of natural talent so i dont see him doping.

 

[Galic Ho]

I also think that mid-1990's through mid-2000's was dirties era, but to say that clean rider was not even able to keep up with the autobus, it seems exaggeration. Indurain´s average speed in 1994 was less than Delgado in 1987 or Hinault 1988.
I am sure that there was widespread doping in mid 1990-s, but saying that you cant keep up with autobus..., well, I am not sure.

Delgado won in 1988, Roche won in 1987. Hinault retired in 1986. WTF have you been smoking? You need to get the years and race schedules right dude. Point stands, but looks silly with the wrong data to back it up.

Ok, If you want guilt by association then Cunego rode for Saeco. Cunego is actually implicated in a doping scandal but lampre pulled nobody out. Don't you remember mantova? cunego far more suspicion than evans.

Evans is not in Contadors league of doping.

No, Cunego is nowhere near as consistent as Evans. Cunego is close in a lot of events, but seems to be lacking the extra bit. Cadel has improved, more so than Damiano, though he has been a bit better this Giro/year than the last two seasons. Cunego is cleaner than Evans. Also you did not say Cadel was clean...but still tried to defend him. I expected you to respond first. Why do you always do that?

Contador is arguably more naturally talented than the others. Andy Schleck would be annihilated if he rode clean. Not Contador. Evans is also naturally gifted, so too Valverde. They are doing the same stuff. It is RS that are pushing the limits, the older guys. Evans is on par medically with the two Spanish guys. It is why he is often so close to them. But yes, Contador does have more than the others. He can't be the only guy with deep pockets to procure medical help, so natural ability (be it riding or recovery) explains his better performances.

If they were all clean who would win? Valverde or Cunego. Maybe Contador. Contador would lose out on his chrono. Valverde and Cunego are about the most balanced riders going around. Evans comes in high as well. They'd all do well if everyone were clean. Dilemma? Yep, because that is how things are going right now. All comes down to style and stamina.

Is anyone else inclined to think that maybe, just maybe, the drugs, blood doping etc has been mitigated slightly by the BioPassport? Sure the parameters allowing doping but think of it this way. Basso in 2006 was a monster. He clearly isn't the same rider now. Why? He is close to the podium but nowhere near his 2006 form. This suggest to me his program (assuming he is on one) cannot deliver now what the 2006 one could. He is still relatively young, early 30s. I think he cannot use anymore or he'll be caught like Franco was. So yes, I think it is feasible the drug programs are not as inhuman as a few years back. That could to a degree explain Evans and his recent improvements for ACF94's thinking. Competition has to tone down program, I rise up the GC ladder doing what I did in 2005, 2006. Just an idea...

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

@AFC94: Two words against Evans:

T-Mobile, Mapei

 

[Archibald]

Michael Rogers, he seems to have a ridiculous amount of natural talent so i dont see him doping.

he's another that came to mind - so many "near misses" or "almost got there"s...

 

[auscyclefan94]

No, Cunego is nowhere near as consistent as Evans. Cunego is close in a lot of events, but seems to be lacking the extra bit. Cadel has improved, more so than Damiano, though he has been a bit better this Giro/year than the last two seasons. Cunego is cleaner than Evans. Also you did not say Cadel was clean...but still tried to defend him. I expected you to respond first. Why do you always do that?

Because even though i believe that evans' (hence partially why i support him), I still believe and have to be prepared that it is a reasonable possibility that a positive test could come back.

DekkerT... dissagre with your arguement completely.

 

[Jonathan]

Please, Zulle and then McGee. Why is it that McGee has struggled to get a team in recent years? Because when he hopped off the sauce he sucked and no results does not bode well for contract negotiations. From monster in the early naughties to a shadow a few years later. That is McGee. Not clean. As for Zulle, well known in the Clinic as a user.

ACF94, Evans does not make the list. I could tear him a new one. The evidence and points against him went up. Look at who Floyd just shamed. All of BMC's big boys bar Evans. Rihs, Lelangue and Big George. Not to mention every arguement put forth against Cadel before. He is no cleaner than Contador.

As for the doping decade. They are all doping decades. This one is somewhat cleaner than the 90s, but still bad. Cleanest GC rider right now is probably a tie between Cunego and Gerdemann. Definitely not one of the top 5 guys. Not someone on RadioShack, Saxo, Astana, Caisse, Liquigas, Sky, HTC and sadly, on 2008 and 2009 form, not a Garmin rider.

Sorry about that. Zuelle is just my example of "he's such a nice guy, he wouldn't dope, and if he did, he wouldn't do it again." We all indulge ourselves every now and then.

I'm still not sure about McGee. The period you mention seems to coincide with the beginning of EPO testing. This may have opened up possibilities for some riders. Perhaps there was a window between the start of these tests and the setting up of organized networks that took care of transfusions. Perhaps in this period, most riders relied on microdosing EPO, lessening its effects. We know now that Armstrong tested positive for EPO in 2002, so riders must have been careful in that period. It's possible that a clean rider could do relatively well then.

 

[Von Mises]

Delgado won in 1988, Roche won in 1987. Hinault retired in 1986. WTF have you been smoking? You need to get the years and race schedules right dude. Point stands, but looks silly with the wrong data to back it up.

Sorry, my mistake, lack of concentration, I meant Hinault´s 1981 and Delgados 1988 win, what had higher average speed than Indurain in 1991, 1993, 1994.

 

[auscyclefan94]

We know now that Armstrong tested positive for EPO in 2002, so riders must have been careful in that period. It's possible that a clean rider could do relatively well then.

Hmmm. I wonder who also did well in 2002 and then flonked in 03-04?

 

[Von Mises]

Hmmm. I wonder who also did well in 2002 and then flonked in 03-04?

David Moncoutié came 13th overall in 2002 Tour. I would not say he flonked later, but next time he was that close to overall GC standing was in 2008 Vuleta when he came 8th.

 

[Non Grimpeur]

So you think that LeMond didn't take drugs?

Explain then, how in the course of a couple of days, mid 1989, he could go from being shelled out the back at even dropped by the sprinters in the mountains of the Giro to finishing on the podium during the final time trial - and then going onto win the Tour and the Worlds. Seeing Greg go up the final climb in the worlds just made a complete mockery of everyone in the race. An impressive piece of big gear climbing.

A lot of people have suspicions on him as well.

I happen to believe Greg LeMond was a first class doper, just not with EPO.

The above is an absolutely ridiculous comment.

Lemond was an athlete with a prodigious natural talent and very high Vo2 max. He was always a good rider right from being a junior world champion in 1979 and his natural ability and body shape can explain his performances. His treatment for iron deficiency in the 1989 Giro is perfectly credible.

Importantly, his performances are believable. He actually shows exertion on the climbs by riding with his mouth open to take in oxygen. Take this in stark contrast to the EPO era where riders climb with their mouths shut and look as if they are going to the shops for a loaf of bread.

If Lemond was a doper, there is no way that he would have struggled in the mountains like he did during the 1991 TDF. The fact that he never again finished a grand tour also suggests that he did not resort to doping.

Greg Lemond may be a little emotionally unstable (understandable given his shooting accident and being abused as a child) but I believe that he is an honest man who cares about cycling. He was also, in my opinion, the last clean winner of the Tour. He, along with riders such as Andy Hampsten and Charly Mottet are examples of clean riders whose performances were beyond question.

 

[ludwig]

Genuine question, and I may have missed it, what leads you to think Moncoutie is not clean? Or do you believe that is very hard to win clean? And is something from past doping scandals that have led you to be cynical (I don't mean that to be an insult, that is just how your posts read), or have you raced at a fairly high level and you have come to this conclusion?

I don't believe guys like Le Mevel, Casar, di Gregorio, amongst others to dope, for if they were, they got some **** products.

It's very simple. I have nothing against Moncoutie. I hope I am wrong and he is clean.

The problem is he wins big mountain stages against prominent climbers from prominent doping teams. Yes, many of these stages are wins via break, but riding in a break and defeating excellent pro riders also takes stamina and power, which are greatly enhanced by PEDs. The whistle blowers have indicated it is not possible to win Vuetla stages clean, and I give more credence to them than anyone else.

Generally, I don't think it's possible for clean riders to win any significant professional race, and that's mostly because oxygen-vector drugs convey a decisive advantage. It's the same in any sport where endurance and power are factors.

 

[Jonathan]

It's very simple. I have nothing against Moncoutie. I hope I am wrong and he is clean.

The problem is he wins big mountain stages against prominent climbers from prominent doping teams. Yes, many of these stages are wins via break, but riding in a break and defeating excellent pro riders also takes stamina and power, which are greatly enhanced by PEDs. The whistle blowers have indicated it is not possible to win Vuetla stages clean, and I give more credence to them than anyone else.

Generally, I don't think it's possible for clean riders to win any significant professional race, and that's mostly because oxygen-vector drugs convey a decisive advantage. It's the same in any sport where endurance and power are factors.

So it's very difficult to draw conclusions about clean riders since doping is so pervasive. The best idea is not to let one's personal preferences about a rider hinge on the assumption that he's clean - that way you won't have to go scrambling for uncertain observations just to decide who you'll support.

 

[User Guide]

Which is the doping decade again?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

....................................

 

[delbified]

i suspect cadel is clean. he has been outspoken against doping:

Prior to Rasmussen being ejected, Evans was asked how he would feel if he finished second to the Dane, given the cloud over Rasmussen's participation in the race. "I don't know if 'disappointed' would be quite the word for it," Evans said. "I'm sure I've been beaten by cheats before - I know I have - and I'm sure I'll be beaten by cheats in the future.

Evans said it was wrong for cynics to claim the sport was full of cheats.

"Cycling, despite what the media report, hasn't had that much of a drug problem in the last nine years," he said. "But because we're so tightly controlled and they find all the cheats, or most of them anyway, that gets a little bit blown out of proportion by the media actually.

"In the case of Rasmussen . . . he doesn't have much credibility among any of his colleagues. I'll say that much at least."

you've never heard anything of the sort from Armstrong. he has the guilty aura of a person who is just keen for the discussion of doping to go away. it's hard not to guess why he would want that.