Dan Martin - "Now I know you can win clean"

[Parker]

Personal trainer skybot, personal. Perhaps he even has a dayjob as well

Name one pro rider he's trained in recent years. (Since Peraud ten years ago).

 

[Parker]

He is also currently working with Peraud.

According to this, that was only until 2004.
http://www.cyclisme-dopage.com/portraits/vayer.htm

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Back on topic. LBL is a seriously long and difficult race. It's also a one day event which makes it easy to slip through the antidoping noose. I'll spare the lecture on glow times, etc. I respect Vayer but I have serious doubts about winning LBL clean.

Succinctly put, and a good reminder of the realities of racing and the assistance available and where you can apply it with reduced chance of being caught.

In fact it's a perfect corollary to the test JV boasted he put Nava through post big race win. A fanciful protocol at best.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Well if you think some of those guys were in top form for L-B-L then that shows how clueless you are. Hesjedal was riding for Martin so that leaves Valverde and Scarponi. So Martin beating two dopers in a race is conclsuive proof, wow amazing stuff.

Must be like LeMond in 89
or how about LeMond in 1990

I realise it's my own laziness to ask, but can you find another example other than LeMond?

Comparisons of supposed clean riders to someone of his ilk as proof that a race can be won clean, seem a little lacking in substance. Primarily:

* the rider in question is no LeMond.
* those races (I believe) were conducted pre-EPO.

 

[sittingbison]

I have deleted all of yesterdays OT posts after the Vayer one.

I haven't given them the dignity of moving to another thread this time.

Seriously gentle(wo)men, if this crud keeps up someone (several) is going to buy the farm

cheers
bison

 

[blackcat]

Succinctly put, and a good reminder of the realities of racing and the assistance available and where you can apply it with reduced chance of being caught.

In fact it's a perfect corollary to the test JV boasted he put Nava through post big race win. A fanciful protocol at best.

we both believed that was BS that he got Ramūnas Navardauskas the day after that for his tests, and then retested him at a random time for Nava, but not for JV.

Any reporter/journo wanna see if they can triangulate the (potentially conflicting) chronology about how Nava was tested and got signed off on for bio bona fides by JV.

I would like to catch out such an convoluted tale*, that was completely fictional, then watch JV squirm as he was called on the bald faced lie.

so intricate a story, that one could not back out of it and say it was perceived incorrectly or misconstrued.

 

[red_flanders]

For me personally, the big unknown is how much advantage blood transfusions/EPO give's since the introduction of the passport. We know in the peak EPO era, it was significant but again there were good responders and bad responders. Too many people here are assuming that the advantages are still as big as they were before but very often that is based on performances at the GTs. Also blood transfusions are more about recovery than actual performance gains, the ability to go out and ride 6.5 on a climb in week three of the Tour.

Yep, it's tough to figure out. It would seem, in general, that guys are being limited somewhat by the passport. I have the impression you think it's more of a limiter than I do, but I can't really say.

The trouble is that you have a few guys, Froome and Horner for example, who seem to have gotten a large, large boost from something–what we don't really know. Or maybe they're both clean, but I strongly doubt either is.

This is what's infuriating about it all. It seems (again) that some people are able or willing to push the boundaries further than others without getting caught, and that's what sparks so much debate on these boards.

What's (apparently) keeping guys like Valverde and Contador from going full gas appears to be fear of getting caught given previous sanctions.

Maybe that's keeping things in check enough such that a guy like Martin can win on the odd day.

 

[Hugh Januss]

yep, it's tough to figure out. It would seem, in general, that guys are being limited somewhat by the passport. I have the impression you think it's more of a limiter than i do, but i can't really say.

The trouble is that you have a few guys, froome and horner for example, who seem to have gotten a large, large boost from something–what we don't really know. Or maybe they're both clean, but i strongly doubt either is.

This is what's infuriating about it all. It seems (again) that some people are able or willing to push the boundaries further than others without getting caught, and that's what sparks so much debate on these boards.

What's (apparently) keeping guys like valverde and contador from going full gas appears to be fear of getting caught given previous sanctions.

Maybe that's keeping things in check enough such that a guy like martin can win on the odd day.

+1 on every point.

 

[sniper]

+1 on every point.

indeed quality posts/points from red flanders.

wrt Contador:
do we know for a fact he's going slower than in 2007/2009?

 

[sniper]

What's (apparently) keeping guys like Valverde and Contador from going full gas appears to be fear of getting caught given previous sanctions.

wrt Contador:
do we know for a fact he's going slower than in 2007/2009?

 

[The Hitch]

wrt Contador:
do we know for a fact he's going slower than in 2007/2009?

Err yes. his watts kilo numbers etc are down. If you want to make direct comparisons he was slower on ventoux, and on mur d huy he was well down on Moreno whereas in 2010 when he wasn't even at his strongest he was a handful of seconds behind Evans who did it in a similar time.

 

[SaxonUK]

Err yes. his watts kilo numbers etc are down. If you want to make direct comparisons he was slower on ventoux, and on mur d huy he was well down on Moreno whereas in 2010 when he wasn't even at his strongest he was a handful of seconds behind Evans who did it in a similar time.

So does that mean he is clean or that he has already peaked as a rider and this is the back side of his career?

 

[blackcat]

So does that mean he is clean or that he has already peaked as a rider and this is the back side of his career?

it he knows you can now win clean, is it about time he can get his teeth fixed. \

those chompers could do with some of the orthodontic skill of hollywood

"mark mark where did you get yur teef?"

"the hgh and the orthadontix, its the nursery fairytale that beats Cadel's standing on dogs and reading asterix and obelix"

* from asterix tintin to championing the rights of tibet

 

[SaxonUK]

it he knows you can now win clean, is it about time he can get his teeth fixed. \

those chompers could do with some of the orthodontic skill of hollywood

"mark mark where did you get yur teef?"

"the hgh and the orthadontix, its the nursery fairytale that beats Cadel's standing on dogs and reading asterix and obelix"

Reading your posts is like being faced by an ancient text in a long forgotten language.

 

[The Hitch]

So does that mean he is clean or that he has already peaked as a rider and this is the back side of his career?

We can't know. I always say the clinic should avoid making predictions because there are too many variables, too many things at play it's not like discussing whether a certain rider is doping when there are only 2 possibilities and evidence can pull you towards or away from one of them. With this question there are too many possibilities and no real evidence pointing to one above the others.

Did Contador stop doping, did he dope less, did he train less, was he more scared of testers, is he losing form, is he past it, did he not care, did he underestimate the opposition, Etc who knows.

It could be any of them or none of them or all of them. don't think there's any evidence that makes any of the above standout particularly. I doubt though that it's merely a case of he stopped doping because Ferrari Kreuziger on his team was on some never before seen form.

it he knows you can now win clean, is it about time he can get his teeth fixed. \

those chompers could do with some of the orthodontic skill of hollywood

"mark mark where did you get yur teef?"

"the hgh and the orthadontix, its the nursery fairytale that beats Cadel's standing on dogs and reading asterix and obelix"

* from asterix tintin to championing the rights of tibet

Wtf does any of that have to do with anything in this thread.

 

[blackcat]

Wtf does any of that have to do with anything in this thread.

not mutch mitch not much

 

[pmcg76]

Yep, it's tough to figure out. It would seem, in general, that guys are being limited somewhat by the passport. I have the impression you think it's more of a limiter than I do, but I can't really say.

The trouble is that you have a few guys, Froome and Horner for example, who seem to have gotten a large, large boost from something–what we don't really know. Or maybe they're both clean, but I strongly doubt either is.

This is what's infuriating about it all. It seems (again) that some people are able or willing to push the boundaries further than others without getting caught, and that's what sparks so much debate on these boards.

What's (apparently) keeping guys like Valverde and Contador from going full gas appears to be fear of getting caught given previous sanctions.

Maybe that's keeping things in check enough such that a guy like Martin can win on the odd day.

Your post more or less summarises my personal feeling on the current situation and also is close to what Vayer said in his article. Gap closing overall between doper's/non-dopers, more clean riders in the peloton capable of winning but still a group who are pushing the boundaries of what is possible re doping.

I think there are a lot of individual performances that really raise the eyebrow currently but even if there might be the odd rider doing crazy things now, in the peak EPO era there were 10-20 guys capable of doing the same thing but nobody noticed much because it looked normal with so many doing it.

I know I keep referencing LeMond but he seems to be the one guy who most people believe was clean. In the infamous 1992 Luxembourg Tour TT, LeMond finished 5th, now he was spanked by Indurain but he also beat guys who many believe were on EPO at the time, for example Roche, Breukink, Chiappucci, Alcala.

You could argue some were not noted TT riders e.g Chiappucci, but Roche for example was a fantastic TT rider long before the advent of EPO. Breukink was also a good TT rider, what about Jeff Bernard??

If people are prepared to believe that totally clean LeMond was beating guys on EPO in TTs, no tactics, no team-mates, no hiding from the wind, no limit to EPO usage and then turn around and say it is impossible for a current clean rider to beat dopers in a one day race, then frankly you are being totally hypocritical.

I think in one days races there are a lot of mitigating factors that might allow a clean rider to win on a given day. For example I could point out that Valverde/Rodriguez/Scarponi were all 33 so possibly not as sharp in one day races as they once were but then Valverde/Rodriguez were a lot better than D.Martin at the Tour so again, what does that suggest!!. It is not simply a case of saying rider X beat rider Y who is a doper so rider X must automatically be a doper as well. In that case LeMond was very much a definite doper as he beat guys who were on EPO.

 

[BYOP88]

@PMCG76

I'm also of the view that clean riders can/could beat a doped up rider in a 1 day race. But when it comes to a clean rider and doped rider in a stage race the clean rider should not come close to the doped rider.

 

[pmcg76]

@PMCG76

I'm also of the view that clean riders can/could beat a doped up rider in a 1 day race. But when it comes to a clean rider and doped rider in a stage race the clean rider should not come close to the doped rider.

Agreed, but again it comes down to size of advantage that current doping practices give one rider over another. For example I think cleaner riders might possibly make Top 10 at the Tour but how high in the Top 10 I would say not very high. Again it may vary from year to year depending on circumstances.

The Giro and Vuelta are a little more difficult to gauge as I don't think there are as many people focused on being in top shape in those races, particularly the Vuelta so its hard to say what the limit is.

 

[GuyIncognito]

In the infamous 1992 Luxembourg Tour TT, LeMond finished 5th, now he was spanked by Indurain but he also beat guys who many believe were on EPO at the time, for example Roche, Breukink, Chiappucci, Alcala.

You could argue some were not noted TT riders e.g Chiappucci, but Roche for example was a fantastic TT rider long before the advent of EPO. Breukink was also a good TT rider, what about Jeff Bernard??

Breukink and Alcalá had been beaten in 1990 and 1991 already, no change going into 1992.

Bernard was never the same since his 1988 crash and injuries. Roche was 33 (and careers were far shorter) and on a sharp downturn, he retired just after.

If people are prepared to believe that totally clean LeMond was beating guys on EPO in TTs, no tactics, no team-mates, no hiding from the wind, no limit to EPO usage and then turn around and say it is impossible for a current clean rider to beat dopers in a one day race, then frankly you are being totally hypocritical.

Agree completely with that part.
They can't have it both ways, pick one.

I think in one days races there are a lot of mitigating factors that might allow a clean rider to win on a given day. For example I could point out that Valverde/Rodriguez/Scarponi were all 33 so possibly not as sharp in one day races as they once were but then Valverde/Rodriguez were a lot better than D.Martin at the Tour so again, what does that suggest!!. It is not simply a case of saying rider X beat rider Y who is a doper so rider X must automatically be a doper as well. In that case LeMond was very much a definite doper as he beat guys who were on EPO.

Rominger said it himself. In a one day race you could even win in the 90s provided you did everything perfectly. In a stage race, forget it.
However, a word of caution about being those guys better than Martin at the Tour, Martin was sick before halfway in

 

[jens_attacks]

I know I keep referencing LeMond but he seems to be the one guy who most people believe was clean. In the infamous 1992 Luxembourg Tour TT, LeMond finished 5th, now he was spanked by Indurain but he also beat guys who many believe were on EPO at the time, for example Roche, Breukink, Chiappucci, Alcala.

very,very few were doing epo in 1992 and we can't know how well it did work. most of guys you named likely started only in 1993. carrera for example.
without a doubt, in 1992 lemond could achieve these kind of results.

you have to find another comparison because this one can't be made.

 

[Red Lobster]

I know I keep referencing LeMond but he seems to be the one guy who most people believe was clean. In the infamous 1992 Luxembourg Tour TT, LeMond finished 5th, now he was spanked by Indurain but he also beat guys who many believe were on EPO at the time, for example Roche, Breukink, Chiappucci, Alcala.

You could argue some were not noted TT riders e.g Chiappucci, but Roche for example was a fantastic TT rider long before the advent of EPO. Breukink was also a good TT rider, what about Jeff Bernard??

If people are prepared to believe that totally clean LeMond was beating guys on EPO in TTs, no tactics, no team-mates, no hiding from the wind, no limit to EPO usage and then turn around and say it is impossible for a current clean rider to beat dopers in a one day race, then frankly you are being totally hypocritical.

These are reasonable points, but some cautions. I think Guy Icognito addressed a bunch of important considerations. I would also raise an eyebrow at taking a LeMond-Chiappucci/Alcala/etc. comparison and applying it today. I don't believe we have a LeMond-type talent riding today, nor have we seen one recently. Probably as great a stage racing talent as has ever thrown a leg over a bike. Probably a guy who would own the record for Tour wins if he hadn't been shot and if EPO had arrived a few years later. I mean we just don't have that kind of yardstick available today.

 

[pmcg76]

very few were doing epo in 1992 and we can't know how well it did work. most of guys you named likely started only in 1993. carrera for example.
without a doubt, in 1992 lemond could achieve these kind of results.

you have to find another comparison because this one can't be made.

I would contest that is your personal opinion that those guys were not on EPO in 92, I don't know but to rule it out is folly. I think it was increasing year on year from 1990 with a huge switch in 93/94 so that 75% of the top level peloton were on EPO. I would say there are quite a few who feel the PDM affair was related to EPO, not intralipid as their rider Johannes Draaijer died in 1990.

I am also working of the clinic standard that the likes of Valverde/Scarponi/Contador are always doping to the max so I am applying the same standards to the riders mentioned.

 

[martinvickers]

These are reasonable points, but some cautions. I think Guy Icognito addressed a bunch of important considerations. I would also raise an eyebrow at taking a LeMond-Chiappucci/Alcala/etc. comparison and applying it today. I don't believe we have a LeMond-type talent riding today, nor have we seen one recently. Probably as great a stage racing talent as has ever thrown a leg over a bike. Probably a guy who would own the record for Tour wins if he hadn't been shot and if EPO had arrived a few years later. I mean we just don't have that kind of yardstick available today.

I understand where you're coming from, and GL was a truly phenomenal rider. But there's a certain danger in suggesting humanity peaked in cycling terms in 1989 in the form on one man never to be surpassed before or since. Not least because the World Champ, tour winning '89 LeMond was still, presumably given his injuries, at least partially inferior to a hypothetical LeMond who'd never been shot - he could have been even better. The truth is, we just don't know what we have riding today. And we can't know, not being clairevoyant. Time may tell that we found Lemond's equal. Or Riis equal. Or something in between. We don't know yet.

The hard bit is accepting we can't know, and having the patience to wait. This forum ain't the place for patience.

 

[sniper]

breukink was possibly clean, or low on the juice in 1992, post-intralipid.
let's count him out.