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

[ChrisE]

I think you are right

It was probably a joke but not a funny one (at least not IMO - I'm sure some people will find it funny)

I thought it was funny.

 

[ChrisE]

If you can train using test + XYZ for recovery and thus train harder, more often, given OOC testing happens on average 3 times a year and you have something like a .5% chance of being tested and caught, then no, I still do not believe a truly clean rider should be winning anything.
.

Careful, that kind of stuff was happening before EPO with no OOC testing, and the clinic hero was still able to win.

 

[Big Doopie]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1238655&postcount=105

holy crap, that is one brilliant post. sums up the facts just perfectly. thanks for reposting it!

who wrote that piece of awesomeness?

when martin, or pinot, or peraud wins, i can at least believe that it was a true win -- until proven differently -- and enjoy it.

when dirty clentadopucci and piti and scarponi win, i can only doubt, because they are proven serial cheaters with known connections to doping doctors and doping teams, who came back from their bans determined to try and persuade the stupid fans that they did absolutely nothing wrong.

so when they win again, i can't believe it and don't enjoy it. i don't know how any fan could. unless they have persuaded themselves that everyone does it exactly the same. that could be the only justification. and that is why you have posters here who are absolutely determined to say everyone dopes equally. because otherwise they would have to face the ugly truth that the rider they want is simply not very talented.

we saw exactly the same reaction with armstrong and landis and hamilton, exactly the same. the clentadopucci fans are exactly the same type of fanboys. exactly the same.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Martin beat Valverde.

Either Valverde gained benefit from Op Puerto circumstances, and still is, or he didn't and was wrongly accused.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

(i) Sounds like you did not watch the race. Although Martin won, it was everyone else in the group waiting for someone else to bridge the gap that cost them (including Valverde) the win.

(ii) You assume that if someone is doping then they are alway doping with the same level and with the same effects for every race.

 

[gooner]

On the point Dan Martin beating known dopers, there will always be doping at some level in cycling. If you have that view for a one day race you're working from a default position where no matter who wins they should be considered dopers.

I have seen a lot of nonsense on here, twitter and other forums in the wake of Iglinsky's positive. Like saying because Iglinsky was 120 odd in the Tour, most that were ahead of him must have been juiced up. It's spin doctoring to push a certain narrative. It can easily be done the other way. Vayer hss spoken positively about Martin and Barguil in the Vuelta. Does that mean the majority of riders below them are clean as a result? Including Pepe Marti boy himself Dani Navarro. Of course that can't be said either. You can bring in Pinotti and Phinney performing high up in TTs. Two guys who some on here consider the more believable guys. What if Phinney finishes ahead of Luigi?

I have no issue with Wiggins and Froome getting attention with big leaps in performances, yet Martin with a more realistic progress path is also now getting it in the neck. I'm not surprised in the slightest to see him do well in these type races considering what he did in his early days in Lombardia.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Why would the peloton clean up for 1 day races?

I would've thought it would be easier to 'prepare' for big one day races than GTs.

No, just the opposite. The bio-passport system is set up for one-day style events or weekend meets. That's how most IOC sports operate.

There is a massive hole in the bio-passport system where there appears to be no process for "too normal" values over a GT. Ex, Horner's values. An indifferent UCI mean grand tours are ripe for exploit. But, looking at many of the power values over the three grand tours of 2014, we had some of the most normal values in a decade(more?) with notable exceptions. I'm very unsure how suddenly 2014 becomes so real-ish. How/Why suddenly everyone except a couple slow down to real-ish?

2014 was made far more real-ish by some unfortunate crashes, but, 2-10 in grand tours look much more real to me. Dan's riding seems more legit. I would like it to be so. This is UCI cycling though...

 

[No_Balls]

holy crap, that is one brilliant post. sums up the facts just perfectly. thanks for reposting it!

who wrote that piece of awesomeness?

I LOL'ed at the stupidity.

when martin, or pinot, or peraud wins, i can at least believe that it was a true win -- until proven differently -- and enjoy it.

Did you just say there is a possibility that three riders - against the juiced up rest - are able to win against these cheaters ciean? And that the system you seem to trust allows this to happens?

when dirty clentadopucci and piti and scarponi win, i can only doubt.

So if i get this straight: you dont doubt the system when the system clears three riders but doubt the system when it clears Valverde (which have happened this entire season) and Scarponi? Chiapucci has retired.

How does your logic applies for Valverde today? Clean enough for Martin to win but micro-dozed to beat the other dopers? Please, let me now how a mind of a bot works.

Because they are proven serial cheaters with known connections to doping doctors and doping teams, who came back from their bans determined to try and persuade the stupid fans that they did absolutely nothing wrong.

And this is the universe in which you believe Dan Martin can win clean? You both say that you believe and dont believe in the system.

and that is why you because otherwise they would have to face the ugly truth that the rider they want is simply not very talented.

You do know the history of this sport right? Because if you would you wouldnt say these borderline comments. Talent has not always been awarded but the ones riding clean were/is not always the most talented, as well as the dopers are the least talented. In some cases they have been forced by their managers, sponsors, teammates or themselves to catch up and secure a contract. You said it yourself that you believe only three riders are riding clean and this does not of course means that the rest are not talented.

 

[LaFlorecita]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1238655&postcount=105

Ah so he's just a fanboy.

 

[pastronef]

when dirty clentadopucci and piti and scarponi win, i can only doubt, because they are proven serial cheaters with known connections to doping doctors and doping teams, who came back from their bans determined to try and persuade the stupid fans that they did absolutely nothing wrong.

so when they win again, i can't believe it and don't enjoy it. i don't know how any fan could. unless they have persuaded themselves that everyone does it exactly the same.

there's the fact we come up with everyday.
Fans want enjoy their favourite rider's wins, at any cost. that's where the big question mark is.

 

[Benotti69]

That's fair enough, and while not directing this at yourself I don't think that would make the slightest difference to some around here if they did so.

I laugh when I hear Benotti calling out for this and guys like Nico Roche and Rui Costa have done it for their wins in the past, yet he still doesn't hesitate to label them dopers.

Not saying these guys are clean by any means, just pointing out if Martin did this it would be no different.

I call riders out because the system is a joke. The UCI has not changed.

When teams talk the clean talk and then dont walk the clean and transparent walk, well it points to one thing in this sport.

Dont know why fans believe the sport is cleanER, oh yeah JV told them it was in 2008.

They'd just go on to something else to argue about.

And guys like you would find an excuse to believe the sport has changed because JV and Brailsford told you so and then lambast posters who point out that there has been no real change.

Dan Martin has won 2 monuments and not from long breaks, he was there at the end mixing it up with the big doping boys and he won. Yes he might have won GdL because Piti wanted others to chase, but he was there with a host of big name dopers. You dont get there on bread and water imo. Go on believing that Martin is another huge talent that can beat the huge advantages doping gives. I wont till i see real changes.

The idea that the French dont dope is another joke in the sport. i suppose y'all believe Longo was not taking epo but her husband was! Yeah those French teams so steeped in tradition wont do a Anqeutil or a Hinault or Fignon, but do it on bread and water.

 

[Benotti69]

If they have cleaned up at all, it will still be more likely to win a one day race than a GT. Can you at least agree to that.

I dont believe the sport has cleaned up. Op Puerto scared Landis and Pereiro real bad in 2006 and also put Contador and Rasmussen off juicing in 2007....

No I think the teams dont know any other way. The sport is full to the brim of guys who believe doping is part of the fabric of the sport. It has always been thus and until a monumental change comes to change that thinking it will always been part of training, diet, bike technology and the other parts that make up the fabric of the sport.

When i look at the list of monument winners i dont see clean riders? Do you?

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Dont know why fans believe the sport is cleanER, oh yeah JV told them it was in 2008.

A simple question for you. Do you think that riders in the last year (not just the top few but in general) are doping to the extremes that we saw when there was no HCT limit, no EPO test and no BP i.e. Early to mid/latter 90s?

Or to put it another way... Do you think Dan Martin could have won LBL or Lombardy during that time given the speeds he is racing at now?

 

[SeriousSam]

If you can train using test + XYZ for recovery and thus train harder, more often, given OOC testing happens on average 3 times a year and you have something like a .5% chance of being tested and caught, then no, I still do not believe a truly clean rider should be winning anything.

This is why most pro athletes in any sport are probably doping. Together with the fact that performing well makes one more likely to dope, winners in any physical sport are unlikely to be clean, period.

I can think of only one reason why you wouldn't hold that position, namely if you think people generally have such a strong sense of ethics that they won't do what's good for them if it breaks a rule. But there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Incentive effects are real and more than anything else, incentives are why we stick to rules. If the punishment for doping is a 0.5% chance of getting caught and the rewards are much improved performance, on which your livelihood depends, well.

 

[blackcat]

he could get his teeth fixed with the winners check.

just sayin

but you were thinkin

 

[blackcat]

This is why most pro athletes in any sport are probably doping. Together with the fact that performing well makes one more likely to dope, winners in any physical sport are unlikely to be clean, period.

I can think of only one reason why you wouldn't hold that position, namely if you think people generally have such a strong sense of ethics that they won't do what's good for them if it breaks a rule. But there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Incentive effects are real and more than anything else, incentives are why we stick to rules. If the punishment for doping is a 0.5% chance of getting caught and the rewards are much improved performance, on which your livelihood depends, well.

they prolly get the fark out of dodge then

wont see them on the team list

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

he could get his teeth fixed with the winners check.

just sayin

but you were thinkin

Of course you would then say he was using HGH.

just sayin

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Yes, Martin finished ahead of Valverde. I would have beat him too if I attacked and Valverde sat around waiting for someone else to chase.

There are good points to bring up: hiding the power data, riding in the pro peloton, teammate (ex)dopers.

There is a difference between beating and finishing ahead of a competitor.

 

[blackcat]

A simple question for you. Do you think that riders in the last year (not just the top few but in general) are doping to the extremes that we saw when there was no HCT limit, no EPO test and no BP i.e. Early to mid/latter 90s?

Or to put it another way... Do you think Dan Martin could have won LBL or Lombardy during that time given the speeds he is racing at now?

yeah, i reckon he could have won. They are using different stuff for the same ends.

In three weeks tho, the ol tried and true and trusted 60 hematocrit with epo dosing every third night and testo nightly... well, that is tough to do now with the restrictions, so i reckon it is toung to win a Grand Tour unless you have leeway like the Brits were given.

 

[HSNHSN]

I do, I find it highly amusing that Dan Martin beating known dopers proves the peloton is clean(er), but when he doesnt win it proves its dirty. (the rest of the year)

I guess a new new clean era has started today.

Or he just fell in the last corner of the race... Apart from that, good point. Facts are just twisted either way, when they're actually inconclusive.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

yeah, i reckon he could have won. They are using different stuff for the same ends.

So you reckon he could have beaten guys on maybe 60+% HCT? Seems reasonable.

In three weeks tho, the ol tried and true and trusted 60 hematocrit with epo dosing every third night and testo nightly... well, that is tough to do now with the restrictions, so i reckon it is toung to win a Grand Tour unless you have leeway like the Brits were given.

So, the British excepted, you would say that everyone else would actually be riding cleaner (in the sense that the doping has less effect) relative to other years?

 

[Benotti69]

Yes, Martin finished ahead of Valverde. I would have beat him too if I attacked and Valverde sat around waiting for someone else to chase.

There are good points to bring up: hiding the power data, riding in the pro peloton, teammate (ex)dopers.

There is a difference between beating and finishing ahead of a competitor.

Would you have been one the last nine in the race after 254 kilometres? To be in that position and win against dopers aint done on bread and water!

Yeah Piti probably was the strongest(and stupidest) in the race and most definitely doping but Martin was there and would've finished with 1 second of Piti if he had not jumped in the last K, you think being there to do that is on bread and water?

I dont.

 

[Benotti69]

A simple question for you. Do you think that riders in the last year (not just the top few but in general) are doping to the extremes that we saw when there was no HCT limit, no EPO test and no BP i.e. Early to mid/latter 90s?

Do I think a clean Dan Martin can beat riders who are performing to the same level as when they were implicated in Operation Puerto? No i dont.

Or to put it another way... Do you think Dan Martin could have won LBL or Lombardy during that time given the speeds he is racing at now?

Or put it another way, do you think Dan Martin can beat a Valverde who is racing at his Op Puerto levels? Do you think a rider racing clean can beat riders working with the likes of Ferrari (Aru) and Ibauguren's team, never mind Max Testa's boys!

Sorry the UCI doesn't play fair, anti doping is a joke, ASO dont give a fig, RCS are not credible and on and on........

 

[sniper]

Dan Martin is in business with Canadian Dominique Rollin (formerly Cervelo and FDJ, now retired I think). In addition to selling bikes together, it seems they also sell sweet cookies together. Rollin in 2009:

Dominique Rollin Canada (Toyota), firmly believes in a healthy cycling: "Vande Velde finished fifth in the Tour de France with plain water. It is possible to make results in cycling or any sport without doping "and warns against potential cheaters unhealthy side effects:" From doping, I have seen. I know how it feels. One week the guy wants to rip your head, the other after, it's a ghost. It's always ups and downs. It's not for me. "

 

[blackcat]

Dan Martin is in business with Canadian Dominique Rollin (formerly Cervelo and FDJ, now retired I think). In addition to selling bikes together, it seems they also sell sweet cookies together. Rollin in 2009:

was not rollin under cyrille guimard at the o so o so o so clean VC Roubaix? Or was he at La Pomme Marseille?

Did not he have to go back and ride domestic pros in America before he got the gig landing at FDJ in the mid-late-2000s?


gees, dopers spout so much $hit

shoutout to Libertine Seguros, she always corrects me <thumbsup>