Conta shuts da door

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 7, 2009
1,282
0
0
bommels said:
I think he just (way) overdid it. This is no fun anymore.

I bet this beach holiday he's had just before the Giro was on Mallorca.
I have to admit, I did not see the ITT stage yet. AC must have known through the radio that he had won after crossing the line. Did he do his "smoking gun" salute again???
 
Jul 23, 2009
20
0
8,580
I didn't see it either, but looking at the numbers from the live reports I just cannot believe it. Conti the kid beating Spartacus and the rest of the lot in a 40km ITT with only 200m of denivellation? I bet he's not going to put his passport blood values on the web anytime soon, is he?
 
May 7, 2009
1,282
0
0
I think the final “smoking gun” (pun intended) for me will be if he also wins on Ventoux tomorrow after crushing his opponents in the ITT today.

Still, would like to see some actual proof. But as they say usually "where there’s smoke, there’s fire"
 
Deagol said:
I have to admit, I did not see the ITT stage yet. AC must have known through the radio that he had won after crossing the line. Did he do his "smoking gun" salute again???
I doubt he had a radio in ear. If he did, he would have paced himself and lost by a more 'reasonable' minute or so. ;)
 
Deagol said:
I think the final “smoking gun” (pun intended) for me will be if he also wins on Ventoux tomorrow after crushing his opponents in the ITT today.

Still, would like to see some actual proof. But as they say usually "where there’s smoke, there’s fire"
I think that we all know he is into something, but winning in the Ventoux won't be proof, because he is better than the other riders anyway. Even if the power numbers are within believable range, the other riders could have lower numbers anyway. So it is relative to other riders.
 
May 7, 2009
1,282
0
0
Escarabajo said:
I think that we all know he is into something, but winning in the Ventoux won't be proof, because he is better than the other riders anyway. Even if the power numbers are within believable range, the other riders could have lower numbers anyway. So it is relative to other riders.

See, this is where it is hard to avoid that normal human behavior in speculating on something you don’t have enough information on. I have tried very hard to not get pulled into it all, but it seems I’m failing. I guess it just has to do with watching this stuff for so long and seeing the same (or similar) things happening time after time (riders looking like superman ala Floyd Landis, Lance, etal then getting incriminated somehow later). I fully admit I don’t know anything about what is “really” happening behind the scenes but it seems that what is happening in front of the scenes gives a very good idea. For me, AC winning day after day (you could even argue that he sort of/could have won Stage 17) in different types of races against all others is what I call the “smoking gun”. If he wins on Ventoux tomorrow, than that is sort of like winning 3 stages in a row, with the win in the ITT being a different type of riding as a climb like the other 2 stages. You are correct in that this is not “proof” but based on his victory salute, it is the metaphor of choice.
 
Jul 7, 2009
209
0
0
Deagol said:
See, this is where it is hard to avoid that normal human behavior in speculating on something you don’t have enough information on. I have tried very hard to not get pulled into it all, but it seems I’m failing. I guess it just has to do with watching this stuff for so long and seeing the same (or similar) things happening time after time (riders looking like superman ala Floyd Landis, Lance, etal then getting incriminated somehow later). I fully admit I don’t know anything about what is “really” happening behind the scenes but it seems that what is happening in front of the scenes gives a very good idea. For me, AC winning day after day (you could even argue that he sort of/could have won Stage 17) in different types of races against all others is what I call the “smoking gun”. If he wins on Ventoux tomorrow, than that is sort of like winning 3 stages in a row, with the win in the ITT being a different type of riding as a climb like the other 2 stages. You are correct in that this is not “proof” but based on his victory salute, it is the metaphor of choice.
I feel in a similar way, in that after seeing the performances of Riis, Pantani, Heras, Ricco. etc, when I have a bad 'gut' feeling, it always seems the person gets caught doping. I think we already have the smoking gun (as you put it), in that we have a TT winner (and not in a mountain TT), a winner of a substantial mountain top finish, and the ability to recup. after the queen stage (I don't think resting the final 2 km made a massive difference compared to, say, FC's final 40 km). It would be one thing if he was ahead of all the GC contenders, but now we are to believe he is the best TT rider, and the best climber, and the best at recovering. It just pushes it. His post stage performance did not help either ;)
 
Deagol said:
See, this is where it is hard to avoid that normal human behavior in speculating on something you don’t have enough information on. I have tried very hard to not get pulled into it all, but it seems I’m failing. I guess it just has to do with watching this stuff for so long and seeing the same (or similar) things happening time after time (riders looking like superman ala Floyd Landis, Lance, etal then getting incriminated somehow later). I fully admit I don’t know anything about what is “really” happening behind the scenes but it seems that what is happening in front of the scenes gives a very good idea. For me, AC winning day after day (you could even argue that he sort of/could have won Stage 17) in different types of races against all others is what I call the “smoking gun”. If he wins on Ventoux tomorrow, than that is sort of like winning 3 stages in a row, with the win in the ITT being a different type of riding as a climb like the other 2 stages. You are correct in that this is not “proof” but based on his victory salute, it is the metaphor of choice.
I did not say that he is not doping. I think he is.

My point was that even if we assume that all top contenders are riding clean, somebody has to win those stages anyway. There is nothing wrong with the most talented rider winning three stages. They are not even in sequence. So there could be time to recuperate anyway.

Maybe the win in Verbier was too explosive. But Andy Schleck was not that far back. Andy did well in today's stage also. He really was not a good time trialist. So we need to start the speculation about him also. What about Wiggins?. There is endless speculation already about him. Even worse than about Contador. Look at the threads. They are endless.

There are too many "smoking guns". Not only Contador. So, having said that, based on past history there should be a cloud of doubt on almost every GC contender.

This is a link to "Cycling Memories" where you can find all champions being great at TT and mountains too. Here I specially put the one from Greg Lemond from 1986 where he excelled at the two disciplines.
http://www.memoire-du-cyclisme.net/eta_tdf_1978_2005/tdf1986.php
 
May 7, 2009
1,282
0
0
Escarabajo said:
I did not say that he is not doping. I think he is.

My point was that even if we assume that all top contenders are riding clean, somebody has to win those stages anyway. There is nothing wrong with the most talented rider winning three stages. ....
Yes, I agree with everything you have said here. Too many smoking guns. To suspect one rider does not preclude you from suspecting others. It is frustrating. Perhaps it might be easier to throw up your hands and say “they all dope, I don’t care anymore”. Some times I go that way, some times not. But I think I have a reason to at least draw attention to the possibilities of AC being super-doped (as compared to just doped) after what has transpired in this tour and last year’s Giro. There is another league of (and I hate this term) “fanboys” growing on this forum. These are not LA fanboys, but rather AC fanboys. They display many of the same charachteristics of the LA fanboys that they deride. There are plenty of people drawing attention on the likelyhood/reality of what LA has done, but no where near as many addressing the possibility/likelihood that AC is benefiting from the same medical technology. Is AC better? Heck yeah he is. He is younger and faster. Even if AC & LA & who knows who else had the same medical program, or were actually clean, AC would probably be better due to his younger age. I don’t know the answers, but I am wondering if the domination we are witnessing this race is due to a few amazing riders being “super-doped” beating other amazing riders who are only “dopped”. Mix into that equation that some of these riders are more amazing than others, and some might actually be clean right now (Menchov) who probably dopped a few months ago for another race (Giro), Some are very good but are possibly clean (Evans) all the time ??? and it just becomes so confusing and tainted that you don’t know who/what to believe in. I agree that Wiggins seems a bit like Kohl last year. Sastre sort of seems clean, has a more believable riding style. Contador in the TT reminds me of Ricco on the climbs last year. I was always suspicious of Rasmussen and especially Vino based on their style (super-dopped compared to just dopped).
 
Jul 7, 2009
209
0
0
Deagol said:
I didn’t see that. What did he do post stage?
Thanks…
Here is one source from Bike Radar. A number of sites have the same info. Basically, AC just said "next question" when asked how he was fastest up the mountain and then fastest in the TT.
 
Jul 11, 2009
55
0
0
Izoard said:
Here is one source from Bike Radar. A number of sites have the same info. Basically, AC just said "next question" when asked how he was fastest up the mountain and then fastest in the TT.
Talk about getting it to suit your needs and making crap up. He was asked what his VO2 max was twice in which he responded, "Otra pregunta." both times. I
 
Jul 24, 2009
1
0
0
Dave Brailford gave a blank no when asked about Contador & he has the fastest rate of climb of any cyclist in history including Pantani nobody has ever proved his involvment in Puerto & he does seem to be clean but he does keep dodgey company that should change next year.
 
May 26, 2009
377
0
0
Hard to work out what that post said & too little punctuation & not really clear & id love to see that written properly anyway is refusing dna test no proof
 
Jul 20, 2009
11
0
0
I like the way you put it.

'Super-Doped' beats out only 'Doped'



Deagol said:
Yes, I agree with everything you have said here. Too many smoking guns. To suspect one rider does not preclude you from suspecting others. It is frustrating. Perhaps it might be easier to throw up your hands and say “they all dope, I don’t care anymore”. Some times I go that way, some times not. But I think I have a reason to at least draw attention to the possibilities of AC being super-doped (as compared to just doped) after what has transpired in this tour and last year’s Giro. There is another league of (and I hate this term) “fanboys” growing on this forum. These are not LA fanboys, but rather AC fanboys. They display many of the same charachteristics of the LA fanboys that they deride. There are plenty of people drawing attention on the likelyhood/reality of what LA has done, but no where near as many addressing the possibility/likelihood that AC is benefiting from the same medical technology. Is AC better? Heck yeah he is. He is younger and faster. Even if AC & LA & who knows who else had the same medical program, or were actually clean, AC would probably be better due to his younger age. I don’t know the answers, but I am wondering if the domination we are witnessing this race is due to a few amazing riders being “super-doped” beating other amazing riders who are only “dopped”. Mix into that equation that some of these riders are more amazing than others, and some might actually be clean right now (Menchov) who probably dopped a few months ago for another race (Giro), Some are very good but are possibly clean (Evans) all the time ??? and it just becomes so confusing and tainted that you don’t know who/what to believe in. I agree that Wiggins seems a bit like Kohl last year. Sastre sort of seems clean, has a more believable riding style. Contador in the TT reminds me of Ricco on the climbs last year. I was always suspicious of Rasmussen and especially Vino based on their style (super-dopped compared to just dopped).
 

iceaxe

BANNED
Jul 10, 2009
72
0
0
I'm pretty skeptical that these drugs help. What really helps is naturally produced adrenline. Some people just need to win more than others. Its no coincidence that homosexuals are overrepresented amongst the elite in every human endeavour. Contador looks jacked up with adrenaline. People have a great capacity to delude themselves. Almost the entire population drinks beer thinking it improves their lives. Same with all the rec drugs.
 

iceaxe

BANNED
Jul 10, 2009
72
0
0
Look at how much better hockey players play in the stanley cup finals even loser teams like the canucks.

As far as lance is concerned, he would not jeopardize his legacy by doping. Additionally, he would not come back and compete knowing his rivals are doping.
 
May 11, 2009
248
0
0
Contador's eyebrow raising performance in the time trial today certainly raises my suspicions about him. Seeing a rider like Contador who is essentially a climber go out and dominate in what was mostly a flat time trial today just doesn't seem credible.

Considering similar explosive performances we have seen recently by riders who later were caught doping (Ricco, DiLuca, Rassmussen etc), unfortunately you almost have to question whether Contador is clean.
 
Jul 24, 2009
2
0
0
rasmusen never got caught, he was either naive/stupid to not report his whereabouts, or doped. But we'll never know, ive never seen him linked to anything.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
It's all speculation until you catch them. Is he or isn't he? Who knows? LeMond may think he knows because it seems that if you are better than him than you must be a doper. But don't make mistakes I made by believing everything you read at first sight and take it as truth, especially math calculations and science that require more parameters to get an actual concrete answer.

Again, it's all talk until they get caught. So gawd-d@mmit!! Catch the dopers like DiLuca, Schumacher, et al...!!
 
iceaxe said:
I'm pretty skeptical that these drugs help. What really helps is naturally produced adrenline. Some people just need to win more than others. Its no coincidence that homosexuals are overrepresented amongst the elite in every human endeavour. Contador looks jacked up with adrenaline. People have a great capacity to delude themselves. Almost the entire population drinks beer thinking it improves their lives. Same with all the rec drugs.
iceaxe said:
Look at how much better hockey players play in the stanley cup finals even loser teams like the canucks.
As far as lance is concerned, he would not jeopardize his legacy by doping. Additionally, he would not come back and compete knowing his rivals are doping.
So for you having a power output in the range of 6.6 W/kg to 7.2 W/kg day in and day out is ok for an athlete?

So natural adrenaline will do the trick better than blood doping and EPO?

Can you provide me with some sources please? This one is a new one that I need to learn.
Thanks.
 

iceaxe

BANNED
Jul 10, 2009
72
0
0
Escarabajo said:
So for you having a power output in the range of 6.6 W/kg to 7.2 W/kg day in and day out is ok for an athlete?

So natural adrenaline will do the trick better than blood doping and EPO?

Can you provide me with some sources please? This one is a new one that I need to learn.
Thanks.
just look at the intensity of the stanley cup playoffs compared to regular season. it is like night and day.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS