Cleanest tour de france?

[Race Radio]

Wow!! and why was he not suspended from racing like the others who tested positive?? Is there some sort of conspiracy going on here?

Your faith in the UCI is misguided.

Please read the Asheden interview, and the follow up questions, an let us know why he is wrong.

 

[poupou]

the only trouble with ashenden.. 80 odd samples tested... only 13 or so positive for EPO..

if you beleive that youll believe anything

in the end lance doped in 99, as did everyone else, 2000 onwards, we can only speculate... to be honest it would be easier if they just retired every rider over 30 now and let us move forward from there

2 mains reasons they didn't test all positive:
EPO was injected every 4 or 5 days but is only detectable during the first 2 or 3 days.
And I am sure if testing were done today with their last methods, most of them would show EPO use.
Last point, a part of them had clearly EPO (2 of Lance) but not enough to be said positive.

I believe that Bassons, who had the same engine as Lance, and a few other guys were clean. Sure they were not in the top ranks!

 

[auscyclefan94]

Tone dude. Doesn't convey well online. I am chilled, no aggression. Catching a train is a dirty tactic, just thought some people might like a revision of history considering the thread topic, 'cleanest tour.' I wanted to highlight that cycling has never been clean. Some riders and teams are virtuous, but the sport has a filthy under current that is hidden and protected. It is a cancer and should be removed. I won't hold my breath waiting for the UCI and teams to be progressive. Heck catching someone like Lance doping that would be a nice catalyst for change.

My two cents on why aussiecyclefan94 believes Evans and Wiggins are more talented and cleaner than Valverde and Contador. I don't think they are on either count. Evans is arguably the third most talented cyclist in the world with Cancellara, but Contador and Valverde are 1 and 2. They are younger, one by 3 years, the other by almost 6. They've won more races and grand tours than Cadel has so far, all before 30 years of age. Cadel is 33 in February. Yes teams and pecking order played a part in this but pedigree cannot be denied. Dope aside the Spaniards are incredible. Personally anyone who has listened and read aussiecyclefan's posts knows that he loves Evans (read what you wish of this). Secondly he has taken playful digs at the Poms over Evans winning and being better than their boys. Conceding he has certain beliefs and opinions about Evans performance/preparation etc, he has to put Wiggins in the same boat. It would be hypocritical not to. Evans is clean or as clean as aussiecyclefan believes a GC rider can be. Wiggins gets the same benefit without any doubt over authenticity being raised because Britain is closer to Australia (culturally and in sporting relationship) and the Brits may rip him apart on the forum if Wiggins is not afforded this luxury. The Spaniards are fair game in this line of thinking. To the people who wonder why, be like me and many others here, they are all fair game. Nationalistic and patriotic vitriol are worthless when cheating and doping are unbridled. Cheaters and dopers don't care. Ego and greed are the currency of worth. Not integrity and patriotism. Hence, Cadel and Wiggins get no freebies, regardless of the image they advertise on home soil for their national populace. Heck, I believe we should call them out more because they are from our own shores.

By the way aussiecyclefan94, this is not me being mean or a ***. On the contrary I understand where you come from, I've simply moved on and treat everyone with the same brush. It is fair and I don't get let down when my hero falls from the pedestal I appointed them too is haste.

I will have to disagree with you on one point. of who is the most talented bike rider in the world.

I'm straight so don't get the wrong idea about my posts about evans. Just an obsessive fanboy.

Head to head in GT"s evans has and does beat Valverde.

Whatever, i personaly would only support a rider if i thought they were clean. Not because he is aussie as after evans i would only have mcewen in my top 10 favourite riders. The worlds issue of leadership made me lose a lot of respect for stephens, o'grady and gerrans as you would think as leaders would say no to having a vote. I don't support Allan Davis at all. he has a lot to clear up. I may be naive and have narrow minded opinions about evans but i believe he's clean as a gc rider comes.

 

[Ripper]

Ha ha ha ha ha ha!

 

[maylene]

Hi There!
Im new in this site!
Haha! nice post.
I hope I can have more friends here!
Im happy to be part of this community!
just keep on posting Guys!
Thanks!
Good Luck!

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I believe in the Ashenden interview, or in the extended link, he points out how many of the tests showed likely EPO use, but could not be considered + under UCI rules. So it was likely many more than 13, but the heaviest dopers showing up as those 13.

As to cleanest years, I agree with BroDeal, probably in the 1980's, as cortisone, steroids and amphetamines were all there were for years. They were used a lot however at times, but not game changing the way blood boosters are. Lemond was clean, Hinault very likely clean in 1985 and 86, maybe, possibly in 82. Joop and beyond? Who knows?

Dirtiest probably was 2003, that list is bigger than 1996 or 1998. The years really from about 1992 to probably 2006, or even the present have been pretty obviously dominated by a lot of blood doping. Just a few more cheats caught in the last couple years, and much more microdosing.

Cadel, Sastre, VandeVelde and a few others deserve to be called "cleaner", sure. I don't have much faith in Wiggins, but maybe, who knows. Two top 50 riders I would go out on a limb and say are riding clean these days are Cunego and Deignan. Several more are likely clean, but not getting results or high placings anywhere.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I believe in the Ashenden interview, or in the extended link, he points out how many of the tests showed likely EPO use, but could not be considered + under UCI rules. So it was likely many more than 13, but the heaviest dopers showing up as those 13.

As to cleanest years, I agree with BroDeal, probably in the 1980's, as cortisone, steroids and amphetamines were all there were for years. They were used a lot however at times, but not game changing the way blood boosters are. Lemond was clean, Hinault very likely clean in 1985 and 86, maybe, possibly in 82. Joop and beyond? Who knows?

Dirtiest probably was 2003, that list is bigger than 1996 or 1998. The years really from about 1992 to probably 2006, or even the present have been pretty obviously dominated by a lot of blood doping. Just a few more cheats caught in the last couple years, and much more microdosing.

Cadel, Sastre, VandeVelde and a few others deserve to be called "cleaner", sure. I don't have much faith in Wiggins, but maybe, who knows. Two top 50 riders I would go out on a limb and say are riding clean these days are Cunego and Deignan. Several more are likely clean, but not getting results or high placings anywhere.

Why say cunego and deignan?

 

[Galic Ho]

I will have to disagree with you on one point. of who is the most talented bike rider in the world.

I'm straight so don't get the wrong idea about my posts about evans. Just an obsessive fanboy.

Head to head in GT"s evans has and does beat Valverde.

Whatever, i personaly would only support a rider if i thought they were clean. Not because he is aussie as after evans i would only have mcewen in my top 10 favourite riders. The worlds issue of leadership made me lose a lot of respect for stephens, o'grady and gerrans as you would think as leaders would say no to having a vote. I don't support Allan Davis at all. he has a lot to clear up. I may be naive and have narrow minded opinions about evans but i believe he's clean as a gc rider comes.

I meant love in a non-erotic sense. a non homophobic manner. Basically you like him for the sportsman, not as a man. Enough on that it is too awkward to handle any more.

I disagree with your take on the team vote. Given results so far in the year I agree with the team vote on cycling dynamics alone. Up to that point in the year for a one day race my money was on Gerrans (as were 8 of the 9 votes). Cadel took issue with everyone else not voting for him. He raised his individual bias in the press to gain an upper hand for his future benefit, ie: I won they didn't believe in me. This says more about his self-esteem issues than anything. I ask, was Cadel asked to pull for the team? Everyone else did except Gerrnas, plus Rogers race was thrown out the window when this happened and he kept his mouth shut. Cadel is clearly a loner and still needs to learn a thing or two on the PR front. It didn't matter how the vote went, someone was individually favoured by all 9 member teams bar the Spanish who had two guys. Those riders were the strongest for the Italians and Belgians. The vote only ensured who made it to the end. Cadel didn't get the no.1 kudos mantle in the theoretical pre-race plan on who was to be protected above all others and this got to him. He really needs to stop caring what others think, what happens on the road is far more important.

I'll agree with Alpe on Deignan and Cunego. Cunego is about as clean as it gets these days.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Cleanest Tour? Any which had the max. 50-Hct. Rule. No blood transfusions, no need to take other stuff (as Rolf Järmann said) = almost even playing field.

I think that started with the Year 1996 or 1997 (as far as i remember) and ended in 2000 when Epo-Tests forced the riders to take "untested" products and life threatening blood transfusions.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

As to cleanest years, I agree with BroDeal, probably in the 1980's, as cortisone, steroids and amphetamines were all there were for years. They were used a lot however at times, but not game changing the way blood boosters are.

I really would like to believe it, but i have one disturbing Question may you or some Ex-Pro can answer:

How do we know, that there was not some "smart" guy like Epo-Lance in the 80s using secretly undetectable blood transfusions. You know, i am a fan of Lemond. But how do we know he didn´t came to like the advantages of blood transfusions since he knew them after his accident? Its a bitter question (and i am sorry for that), but it needs to be answered.

Its very likely that he had. He also saw the success of blood transfusions at the US-Olympic-Cycling-Team and Mosers Blood-World-Record in 1984.