CNF Clinic Award: Most Suspicious Performance of 2013

[Netserk]

What are you suggesting?

Ciolek MSR: hardly suspicious, MSR often ends with random results and a lot of different rider types have won over the years

Cancellara RVV: only just beating Sagan on the last hill. Cance wasn't lightyears ahead of Sagan, he's just more powerful and has better technique on cobbles + more experience. Not really suspicious

Cancellara PR: closest battle in PR for a long time. Cancellara showing humanity by not destroying everybody else like he did in 2006 and 2010. Not suspicious at all.

Martin LBL: Dan Martin winning in an uphill battle against JRod, after having teammate Hesjedal doing all the work for him in the last 10k or so. Not suspicious when knowing Martin's talent.

Il Lombardia: JRod winning was no surprise really, a kind of race that suits him + strong showings all year in numerous of races. He did demolish everyone on the last hill, but thats just JRod as we know him. Not suspicious.

Overall, monument wins were not suspicious in any way

LMFAO. Especially at Canc and Purito. They are both in or close to the top-5 of most suspicious cyclists atm.

 

[Carols]

Voted Froome, but Horner only lost by .05%

 

[Netserk]

Voted Froome, but Horner only lost by .05%

Are you sure you don't mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yypE0rq0gr4

 

[roundabout]

so the baiting season is officially open, huh

 

[Netserk]

so the baiting season is officially open, huh

When is it closed?

 

[Carols]

Are you sure you don't mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yypE0rq0gr4

I thought this was a 2013 poll?????

Nevermind....ok .00000005% Horner lost by

 

[Dazed and Confused]

The one with the most impact was Froome's TdF annihilation.

Porte punched the "captain for the future card" after he "dropped" Quintana in the d'Eze TT as if the Colombian was a club rider.

Honer lost everything after becoming too greedy, a bit like Madoff's ponzi scheme. Too good

Nibali improved in all departments, but we still need to see an alien performance somewhere. Vino will solve that problem I'm sure.

 

[Fatclimber]

I'll take gramps. You know you're suspicious when you can't find a ride in cycling. Froome could get another job if necessary.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Now, this is a really tough one. On the face of it Nibali is the least suspicious, and after his Giro win and his riding for Astana and having been connected to Ferrari that's pretty surreal.

However, it was a tough competition in the way of crazy suspiciousness this year. In many years Richie Porte riding such a fast Col d'Èze TT (looking like smashing the record of the guy he was not even the #1 domestique for the previous year) that Séan Kelly, who we may remember knows a thing or two about cycling - and doping - stopped to ask if there was a timing error because the time was so preposterous, would have easily been the most suspicious performance of the year. But this year, no.

This year is almost impossible to choose, since Froome's general level has been red flags waving, klaxons blaring, screaming obscenities dope-suspicion all year, but with his being at least in a cyclist's peak years on his side he comes up against stiff competition from Papy Horner, who for all the crap we give Froome about his early career, had only won a couple of domestic competitions by the time he was Froome's age, failed miserably when riding for FDJ (although they were shady at the time, they are now considered one of the cleaner teams in the bunch) and returned to Europe in his mid-30s with Saunier Duval (considered a very shady team), and has continued to improve in level into his 40s in the most preposterous of manners. I mean, from scraping 10th in the Tour after gaining several minutes in breakaways at 38 to winning the Vuelta with multiple mountaintops and by being the strongest climber at 41, it's just stupid.

Can it unseat Chris Froome? It's a really agonizingly tough pick, because pretty much everything about Chris Froome is suspicious, while people genuinely want to believe in him. Even those that support Horner don't believe in him and just want his ridiculousness to show up how hollow the calls of cycling having changed truly ring. I think over the course of the whole season, Froome, but for a specific race that was most suspicious, Horner would take it.

I'd also add in the category for suspicious non-performances of 2013, i.e. how the chronically poor seasons endured by Bradley Wiggins and Alberto Contador make their 2012s look. At least Cobo has the medical explanation.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Now, this is a really tough one. On the face of it Nibali is the least suspicious, and after his Giro win and his riding for Astana and having been connected to Ferrari that's pretty surreal.

However, it was a tough competition in the way of crazy suspiciousness this year. In many years Richie Porte riding such a fast Col d'Èze TT (looking like smashing the record of the guy he was not even the #1 domestique for the previous year) that Séan Kelly, who we may remember knows a thing or two about cycling - and doping - stopped to ask if there was a timing error because the time was so preposterous, would have easily been the most suspicious performance of the year. But this year, no.

This year is almost impossible to choose, since Froome's general level has been red flags waving, klaxons blaring, screaming obscenities dope-suspicion all year, but with his being at least in a cyclist's peak years on his side he comes up against stiff competition from Papy Horner, who for all the crap we give Froome about his early career, had only won a couple of domestic competitions by the time he was Froome's age, failed miserably when riding for FDJ (although they were shady at the time, they are now considered one of the cleaner teams in the bunch) and returned to Europe in his mid-30s with Saunier Duval (considered a very shady team), and has continued to improve in level into his 40s in the most preposterous of manners. I mean, from scraping 10th in the Tour after gaining several minutes in breakaways at 38 to winning the Vuelta with multiple mountaintops and by being the strongest climber at 41, it's just stupid.

Can it unseat Chris Froome? It's a really agonizingly tough pick, because pretty much everything about Chris Froome is suspicious, while people genuinely want to believe in him. Even those that support Horner don't believe in him and just want his ridiculousness to show up how hollow the calls of cycling having changed truly ring. I think over the course of the whole season, Froome, but for a specific race that was most suspicious, Horner would take it.

I'd also add in the category for suspicious non-performances of 2013, i.e. how the chronically poor seasons endured by Bradley Wiggins and Alberto Contador make their 2012s look. At least Cobo has the medical explanation.

Great post.

I'd add Gilbert to that list. He was pretty much a no show...

 

[DirtyWorks]

...In many years Richie Porte riding such a fast Col d'Èze TT (looking like smashing the record of the guy he was not even the #1 domestique for the previous year) that Séan Kelly, who we may remember knows a thing or two about cycling - and doping - stopped to ask if there was a timing error because the time was so preposterous, would have easily been the most suspicious performance of the year. But this year, no.

... Froome's general level has been red flags waving, klaxons blaring, screaming obscenities dope-suspicion all year,

All good! Especially the bits above.

Honorable mention to the Sky TdF domestiques who somehow had one, single, TERRIBLE day only to recover in 24 hours and drag Froome and Porte all around France.

A round of golf-clapping for ASO. An all-Sky TdF podium would have been "suspicious."

 

[Afrank]

Got to be Froome, although it was entirely expected. You can't get more suspicious, or more hilarious, then Ventoux. Tie between Horner and Porte for 2nd.

 

[roundabout]

Really? Apart from Porte and Kennaugh they were terrible. Okay, Lopez recovered a bit by the Alps, but all in all as a team they were hardly great.

 

[thehog]

Voted Froome, but Horner only lost by .05%

Neither Horner or Froome were suspicious.

Both them was the most outright blatant cheating I've ever seen in any cycle race anywhere in the world.

Chinese swimmers from the 90s would blush at those two.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Really? Apart from Porte and Kennaugh they were terrible. Okay, Lopez recovered a bit by the Alps, but all in all as a team they were hardly great.

They were doing their job in a grand tour. It doesn't lead to good overall ranking. They were there doing the work every single day, except one.

 

[William H]

No Quintana?

 

[Eshnar]

I'd also add in the category for suspicious non-performances of 2013, i.e. how the chronically poor seasons endured by Bradley Wiggins and Alberto Contador make their 2012s look. At least Cobo has the medical explanation.

Very good idea. I'll make it as soon as I have some time.

 

[sniper]

what about 2013's most suspicious underperformance?
hesjedal, contador, wiggo?

edit: libertine beat me to it.

 

[The Hitch]

what about 2013's most suspicious underperformance?
hesjedal, contador, wiggo?

edit: libertine beat me to it.

Porte Pyrenees easy.

1 of the most ridiculous performances in the history of cycling on Ax3, a domestique who had been pulling on the front, absolutely toying with the best climbers in the world even trying to initiate conversation with them on the mountian before dropping them and doing a non breakaway 1-2 on the mountain for his team that made Gewiss Ballan in Fleche look like a close race.

Then 1 bad day that decreases Sky's chances of winning a 2nd consecutive Tour by exactly 0 and the Sky PR office pounces on it as irrefutable proof that he and Sky cannot possibly be doping because if they were they would continue to give their domestique needless stage podiums behind the wins.

And with that, Porte is back as potentially the 2nd best climber in the world for the rest of the TDF.

 

[dolophonic]

Hitch calling it !

I could vote for

Froome

Horner

PORTE !

 

[Cance > TheRest]

LMFAO. Especially at Canc and Purito. They are both in or close to the top-5 of most suspicious cyclists atm.

Well, we all have our bias. Not surprised to see you write that considering your general hate against Cancellara.

 

[Bexon30]

And all done whilst having the worlds biggest smirk. Dark day Hitch, good call.

 

[the sceptic]

No Quintana?

#TDF, Stage 20. Semnoz (10.65 km, 8.56 %, 912 m). Nairo Quintana: 31 min 18 sec, 20.42 Kph, VAM 1745 m/h, 6.12 W/kg [DrF].

I almost forgot about him. I feel bad for him, such a fine mutant performance in week 3 of a GT and it gets overshadowed by the likes of Froome and Horner.

Any other year and this would be what people would talk about but alas.

 

[BroDeal]

David Walsh by a large margin.

 

[maltiv]

I almost forgot about him. I feel bad for him, such a fine mutant performance in week 3 of a GT and it gets overshadowed by the likes of Froome and Horner.

Any other year and this would be what people would talk about but alas.

No, it's not even nearly as disgusting when it comes from a rider who's clearly incredibly talented and has had a natural development. It also helps that his style on the bike is beautiful and his body is made for cycling.

It's a lot more suspicious when such performances come from people who were absolutely rubbish for much of their career before they became aliens, and who also have ridiculously ineffective techniques (constantly standing at 40 rpm or raping the bike and wobbling back and forth).