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

[skidmark]

Why would WADA or USADA waste money and time testing clean riders?

Comical JV really has pulled the wool over peoples eyes.

Internal testing, yep that is another way to perfect getting riders programs to the point where they know how much and when they can do it before they flag the BP or test positive.

At some point, wouldn't it just be easier to not dope? This is an honest question, not a rhetorical one, because I don't know how meticulous a program would have to be to guarantee it doesn't trigger anything on the biopassport. What is the percentage performance difference a substance will make? The detectability? The side-effects? The schedule you have to keep? The way it's administered (no needles, right)?

I just don't have a clear picture of how modern doping would work. It seems like old solutions (EPO, bribing the UCI) are out because they're too risky in high levels and the spotlight is too strong on cycling. Blood doping to a certain level triggers red flags on the passport level (obviously a corollary to this is the seemingly declining level of monitoring the passport, which is a worrying addendum) - but at what level? A smaller boost, or a cocktail of things to give a boost, would require some coordination. At some point, it's just gotta be simpler to say 'screw it, I'm just going to train'. But I have no idea where that point is. Does anyone here? I'm curious.

 

[Benotti69]

At some point, wouldn't it just be easier to not dope? This is an honest question, not a rhetorical one, because I don't know how meticulous a program would have to be to guarantee it doesn't trigger anything on the biopassport. What is the percentage performance difference a substance will make? The detectability? The side-effects? The schedule you have to keep? The way it's administered (no needles, right)?

Not really. The testing is pathetic. They know what to take, what time, when etc etc. Remember the OOC tester will only arrive between a certain time after that they are free to dope. As for side effects, what side affects? What ex pro is going to tell them dont do it???

I just don't have a clear picture of how modern doping would work. It seems like old solutions (EPO, bribing the UCI) are out because they're too risky in high levels and the spotlight is too strong on cycling.

Doping is risky, racing down mountains is risky. Doping is considered part of the culture and the docs, DS, soignuers all accept it as part of the sport and the risk is minimal in their eyes no different than the racing.

Blood doping to a certain level triggers red flags on the passport level (obviously a corollary to this is the seemingly declining level of monitoring the passport, which is a worrying addendum) - but at what level? A smaller boost, or a cocktail of things to give a boost, would require some coordination. At some point, it's just gotta be simpler to say 'screw it, I'm just going to train'. But I have no idea where that point is. Does anyone here? I'm curious.

Take Armstrong's BP for 2009 and 2010, apparently it showed doping but he got a free pass. Why not Froome, Wigans, Evans and others?

Wigans 2009 BP had an anomoly in the 3rd week of the TdF that JV blamed on machine/lab error, Hesjedal had a similar anomaly for 2012 Giro that again JV blamed on machine error. Convenient

The culture is to dope and all that entails is par for the course. Heck even a team stopped their team bus to all take a blood bag on a mountain side.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I just don't have a clear picture of how modern doping would work. It seems like old solutions (EPO, bribing the UCI) are out because they're too risky in high levels and the spotlight is too strong on cycling. Blood doping to a certain level triggers red flags on the passport level (obviously a corollary to this is the seemingly declining level of monitoring the passport, which is a worrying addendum) - but at what level? A smaller boost, or a cocktail of things to give a boost, would require some coordination. At some point, it's just gotta be simpler to say 'screw it, I'm just going to train'. But I have no idea where that point is. Does anyone here? I'm curious.

Not sure if you're trolling, but this is crazy. Just going to train? What do you think happens after training? Recovery? Then supercompensation? What if your recovery was a quick pill (test, Hgh) down the gullet and then wake up the next day, fresh and ready to smash out another 160-200km through mountains?

PEDs help you train harder. More often. If you could only dope OOC you would still smash people who were not doping at all. And that would happen because you could train harder and more often.

How do you think LA got the tag of "trained harder than anyone else"?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

At some point, wouldn't it just be easier to not dope? This is an honest question, not a rhetorical one, because I don't know how meticulous a program would have to be to guarantee it doesn't trigger anything on the biopassport. What is the percentage performance difference a substance will make? The detectability? The side-effects? The schedule you have to keep? The way it's administered (no needles, right)?

In the past month alone, we have head of Rasmussen, teaching Hesjedal et al how to dope using EPO.

Ferrari taught Lance.

Leinders taught Rabobank.

It's not something any cyclist has to work out for themselves, nor is it something you have to learn to do from scratch. Collective knowledge and experience, as with all facets of training and life in general, becomes part of the culture and is passed on to new entrants to said culture.

Back in the dim dark ages, Paul Kimmage sat in a room and was offered the drug du jour by an experienced user.

It's the way it's always been.

 

[sniper]

At some point, wouldn't it just be easier to not dope? This is an honest question, not a rhetorical one, because I don't know how meticulous a program would have to be to guarantee it doesn't trigger anything on the biopassport. What is the percentage performance difference a substance will make? The detectability? The side-effects? The schedule you have to keep? The way it's administered (no needles, right)?

I just don't have a clear picture of how modern doping would work. It seems like old solutions (EPO, bribing the UCI) are out because they're too risky in high levels and the spotlight is too strong on cycling. Blood doping to a certain level triggers red flags on the passport level (obviously a corollary to this is the seemingly declining level of monitoring the passport, which is a worrying addendum) - but at what level? A smaller boost, or a cocktail of things to give a boost, would require some coordination. At some point, it's just gotta be simpler to say 'screw it, I'm just going to train'. But I have no idea where that point is. Does anyone here? I'm curious.

Legitimate questions, me thinks, but i gotta agree with dear wiggo and benotti69.

At some point, it's just gotta be simpler to say 'screw it, I'm just going to train'.

Many athletes will no doubt say just that, for the reasons you mention.
But their chances of becoming a proathlete are correspondingly low, me thinks.

if your existence depends on a pro contract, on the other hand, why not look for easy ways to get an edge. The easiest way being peds (for reasons pointed out by dear wiggo and benotti69).

if you're an upcoming pro and you hear the success stories of guys like hesjedal and others who doped to get a fat contract and got away with it even after being exposed, well, the choice doesn't seem that difficult.

I wouldn't underestimate the incentives to dope if (the quality of) one's existence depends on it.
You no doubt know of the investigations into motivations to dope? they show how many athletes are willing to dope to get a medal, even if it would shorten their lives.

I also wouldn't underestimate the advances made in doping technology.
Just that we're unlikely to hear alot about those advances. I assume that part of the advances made in doping land is that the trade secrets are better kept secret now than before.

 

[pastronef]

"Festina Boy" Antoine Vayer interview here http://velonews.competitor.com/2014...ome-but-doesnt-have-enough-information_318036


Those who want to race clean can do it and post results. Riders like Dan Martin winning Liège-Bastogne-Liège is a very good sign. He is a rider we can believe. That’s very encouraging.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Why would WADA or USADA waste money and time testing clean riders?

Because JV wants us all to believe his crap, and wants us to turn a blind eye to the real dopers.

Comical JV really has pulled the wool over peoples eyes.

Yep, and like normal, some people bought into it(those who have/still backed Wonderboy)

Internal testing, yep that is another way to perfect getting riders programs to the point where they know how much and when they can do it before they flag the BP or test positive.

This. if they know when the testing's done, and who's being tested, they can easily do what it takes to pass the tests.

 

[pmcg76]

"Festina Boy" Antoine Vayer interview here http://velonews.competitor.com/2014...ome-but-doesnt-have-enough-information_318036


Those who want to race clean can do it and post results. Riders like Dan Martin winning Liège-Bastogne-Liège is a very good sign. He is a rider we can believe. That’s very encouraging.

Ha, ha this is too funny. That is a great interview with someone on the inside of the sport and not someone to just merely go along with things. Someone who has shown they are prepared to call out riders and performances without fear of consequence.

The response in the clinic......tumbleweed. Not a single response related to the article

Is that because what Vayer is saying is actally backing up what JV and others have been saying for a few years now yet all people do here is attack that message. It must be hard on those poster's when someone they give great credibility to, backs what JV has been saying and even namechecks one of his riders.

I guess everyone must be too busy on SKY and Froome. The culture has not changed at all, why would it change with the same people posting all the time. It is clear that people here are only interested in news related to doping and not in anything that might suggest the sport is indeed cleaner.

 

[sniper]

Ha, ha this is too funny. That is a great interview with someone on the inside of the sport and not someone to just merely go along with things. Someone who has shown they are prepared to call out riders and performances without fear of consequence.

The response in the clinic......tumbleweed. Not a single response related to the article

Is that because what Vayer is saying is actally backing up what JV and others have been saying for a few years now yet all people do here is attack that message. It must be hard on those poster's when someone they give great credibility to, backs what JV has been saying and even namechecks one of his riders.

I guess everyone must be too busy on SKY and Froome. The culture has not changed at all, why would it change with the same people posting all the time. It is clear that people here are only interested in news related to doping and not in anything that might suggest the sport is indeed cleaner.

well yeah, it's certainly nice propaganda for martin/garmin, both kimmage and vayer naming him as potentially/probably clean.

clearly it's en vogue to believe in dan martin.
the question then is why?
clearly, I strongly doubt vayer has any direct evidence of martin being clean. He seems to be taking Kimmage's word for it.

Generally, I think besides being major critics, both kimmage and vayer also want to spread a positive message now and again, and apparently have chosen martin/garmin for that purpose.

Regardless of martin's cleanliness, it speaks in favor of JV's personal/PR skills that he has managed to get the blessings from kimmage and vayer.

 

[pmcg76]

well yeah, it's certainly nice propaganda for martin/garmin, both kimmage and vayer naming him as potentially/probably clean.

clearly it's en vogue to believe in dan martin.
the question then is why?
clearly, I strongly doubt vayer has any direct evidence of martin being clean. He seems to be taking Kimmage's word for it.

Generally, I think besides being major critics, both kimmage and vayer also want to spread a positive message now and again, and apparently have chosen martin/garmin for that purpose.

Regardless of martin's cleanliness, it speaks in favor of JV's personal/PR skills that he has managed to get the blessings from kimmage and vayer.

My God that sounds like the sort of utter BS politicians spin when they find themselves in a jam.

Kimmage and Vayer have fallen for JVs spin, I think both would be incredibly insulted to hear someone suggest that they were convinced by a bit of mere spin. It also would suggest both are incredibly stupid.

 

[sniper]

My God that sounds like the sort of utter BS politicians spin when they find themselves in a jam.

Kimmage and Vayer have fallen for JVs spin, I think both would be incredibly insulted to hear someone suggest that they were convinced by a bit of mere spin. It also would suggest both are incredibly stupid.

well, they are journalists.
they can't only sell piles of dirt on cyclists, they also have to present a more positive message now and again.
i'm not saying they don't really believe in martin.
they (or at least kimmage) might. Vayer i think he's just taking kimmage's word for it (but again i could be wrong).

Imo we shouldn't declare him clean until we have evidence to that extent.
Until then, it's historically more responsible to stay agnostic on whether or not he dopes.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Ha, ha this is too funny. That is a great interview with someone on the inside of the sport and not someone to just merely go along with things. Someone who has shown they are prepared to call out riders and performances without fear of consequence.

The response in the clinic......tumbleweed. Not a single response related to the article

Is that because what Vayer is saying is actally backing up what JV and others have been saying for a few years now yet all people do here is attack that message. It must be hard on those poster's when someone they give great credibility to, backs what JV has been saying and even namechecks one of his riders.

I guess everyone must be too busy on SKY and Froome. The culture has not changed at all, why would it change with the same people posting all the time. It is clear that people here are only interested in news related to doping and not in anything that might suggest the sport is indeed cleaner.

lol so true. you couldn't have hit the nail any harder

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

well, they are journalists.
they can't only sell piles of dirt on cyclists, they also have to present a more positive message now and again.
i'm not saying they don't really believe in martin.
they (or at least kimmage) might. Vayer i think he's just taking kimmage's word for it (but again i could be wrong).

Imo we shouldn't declare him clean until we have evidence to that extent.
Until then, it's historically more responsible to stay agnostic on whether or not he dopes.

no we should declare him clean unless you have evidence he is doped. but pls share it with us. since you seem to know it all.

 

[sniper]

no we should declare him clean unless you have evidence he is doped. but pls share it with us. since you seem to know it all.

i prefer to stay agnostic, but i'm willing to listen to good arguments why he's clean.
to be honest, i don't recall kimmage providing any.
just kimmage's word isn't good enough for me (though clearly good enough for many others).

 

[More Strides than Rides]

i prefer to stay agnostic, but i'm willing to listen to good arguments why he's clean.
to be honest, i don't recall kimmage providing any.
just kimmage's word isn't good enough for me (though clearly good enough for many others).

Agreed. Innocent until proven guilty is no longer valid in this sport. I forget the twitter account that suggested the "degree of potential disappointment" scale, but that is more or less what I use.

 

[Benotti69]

Ha, ha this is too funny. That is a great interview with someone on the inside of the sport and not someone to just merely go along with things. Someone who has shown they are prepared to call out riders and performances without fear of consequence.

The response in the clinic......tumbleweed. Not a single response related to the article

Is that because what Vayer is saying is actally backing up what JV and others have been saying for a few years now yet all people do here is attack that message. It must be hard on those poster's when someone they give great credibility to, backs what JV has been saying and even namechecks one of his riders.

I guess everyone must be too busy on SKY and Froome. The culture has not changed at all, why would it change with the same people posting all the time. It is clear that people here are only interested in news related to doping and not in anything that might suggest the sport is indeed cleaner.

This is the Dan Martin thread!

Vayer was talking about Froome's unbelievability not Dan Martin's doping.

Hence the tumble weed.

I dont beleive Garmin are clean. They dope. They spend loads on internal testing. Will it come out in future years? Probably, it always does.

 

[Benotti69]

lol so true. you couldn't have hit the nail any harder

Suprised you haven't claimed Dan Martin is a Colombian

 

[blackcat]

This is the Dan Martin thread!

Vayer was talking about Froome's unbelievability not Dan Martin's doping.

Hence the tumble weed.

I dont beleive Garmin are clean. They dope. They spend loads on internal testing. Will it come out in future years? Probably, it always does.

JV is one of the smarter guys. they dont do the official thing, there is no chance of this coming out.

what may come out, in a decade, is some disaffected rider, having a whinge on how it turned out when they all got the 3 month offseason plea(s).

and then got back to winning monuments and GTs, and everyone knows you dont top 10 in a GT unless you get on something. And tell the difference was you were not allowed to go all Ricky Riccio with your blood numbers, you needed to maintain the plausible deniability parameters.

so no, nothing will ever come out on Garmin. And i think that is fair too.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

My God that sounds like the sort of utter BS politicians spin when they find themselves in a jam.

Kimmage and Vayer have fallen for JVs spin, I think both would be incredibly insulted to hear someone suggest that they were convinced by a bit of mere spin. It also would suggest both are incredibly stupid.

I am looking forward to the new threads here:
Is Kimmage on the Garmin Bandwagon?
Is Vayer on the Kimmage bandwagon?

They have bought cleanER cycling BS. And it is BS unless you have evidence that Martin is clean.
Kimmage had all his money stolen, was unemployed JV probably diverted money from his secret fund. Kimmage is a journo, he will write anything.
Vayer is a crazy, bitter drunk who is bitter and crazy, and drunk.
What do either of these guys know about Pro cycling? You might say a lot - as they are members of such a corrupt sport, so they too are corrupt.
Or something.

 

[Race Radio]

Ha, ha this is too funny. That is a great interview with someone on the inside of the sport and not someone to just merely go along with things. Someone who has shown they are prepared to call out riders and performances without fear of consequence.

The response in the clinic......tumbleweed. Not a single response related to the article

Is that because what Vayer is saying is actally backing up what JV and others have been saying for a few years now yet all people do here is attack that message. It must be hard on those poster's when someone they give great credibility to, backs what JV has been saying and even namechecks one of his riders.

I guess everyone must be too busy on SKY and Froome. The culture has not changed at all, why would it change with the same people posting all the time. It is clear that people here are only interested in news related to doping and not in anything that might suggest the sport is indeed cleaner.

This

Vayer, the patron saint of calling out riders because they are fast, made everyone's head explode. Cue the cherry picking

 

[pastronef]

Ha, ha this is too funny. That is a great interview with someone on the inside of the sport and not someone to just merely go along with things. Someone who has shown they are prepared to call out riders and performances without fear of consequence.

The response in the clinic......tumbleweed. Not a single response related to the article

Is that because what Vayer is saying is actally backing up what JV and others have been saying for a few years now yet all people do here is attack that message. It must be hard on those poster's when someone they give great credibility to, backs what JV has been saying and even namechecks one of his riders.
I guess everyone must be too busy on SKY and Froome. The culture has not changed at all, why would it change with the same people posting all the time. It is clear that people here are only interested in news related to doping and not in anything that might suggest the sport is indeed cleaner.

that's why I posted the link to the interview and quoted the line about Dan Martin: to see how this would be discussed here...

 

[Dr. Maserati]

that's why I posted the link to the interview and quoted the line about Dan Martin: to see how this would be discussed here...

Yes, but we were remaining agnostic, thank God.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

So is it the opinion of the posters above (RR, DrMas, Ryo) that Dan Martin won LBL clean in 2013?

 

[RownhamHill]

It's an interesting interview.

 

[gooner]

i prefer to stay agnostic, but i'm willing to listen to good arguments why he's clean.
to be honest, i don't recall kimmage providing any.
just kimmage's word isn't good enough for me (though clearly good enough for many others).

This is the Dan Martin thread!

Vayer was talking about Froome's unbelievability not Dan Martin's doping.

Hence the tumble weed.

I dont beleive Garmin are clean. They dope. They spend loads on internal testing. Will it come out in future years? Probably, it always does.

This is the thing now, you two obviously don't agree with Kimmage on Martin/Garmin but yet hammer Walsh for his reporting on Sky while at the same time saying no way would Sky have gotten away with the same thing had Kimmage being around them. I don't get this.

All I see with the everyone dopes clan is one where they know full well they can never be proved wrong and when we see a couple of positives pop up here and there, come up with the usual "the culture hasn't changed". It's like when Froome and Porte dominate on AX3 Domaines, it's immediately said we are back in the early 00s of the Lance days and things are as bad as they ever were. All this while not painting the full picture that the peloton that day in general was slower than in 2001. The same with Alpe d'Huez. I remember when Costa won his MTT in Suisse last year and his time was significantly slower on that climb compared to previous editions, there was barely a mention of it around here(only one poster). The argument is just propaganda to one way of thinking. It like Kittel calling out Sayar. How dare he does that when we see what Froome is doing. The same Sayar who was in a team who had a positive the previous year with Grabovsky, wasn't in the passport and was spotted with needle marks in the peloton. But then we hear he picked on the small guy and he's a coward. Yet the same guys don't acknowledge he has called out Contador, Sanchez, Indurain and Vino. He even did a lie detector test to help prove his worth. Omerta is criticised, speaking out is also criticised. It's a doping only view.

I can tell you now, if Phinney wins P-R in the future, they will repeat the same thing without judging each situation on its own merits. It was the same with Martin who's win in LBL was off the back of a more steady realistic career curve. 2nd in Catalonia in 2009 to win it in 2013, 8th in Lombardy in 2009, 2nd in 2011, 4th in 2013, 6th and 4th the last 2 years in FW and 6th in LBL in 2012 before winning it last year. No big transformation in the Froome mould but that isn't good enough. So what we have is a huge transformation in the mould of Froome is doping, a more realistic one in the mould of Martin also equals doping. This is what we're arguing with at the moment.

All I see is twisting of words and scenarios to suit narratives and the point of internal testing at Garmin is just one where it's implied that it's done in a way so riders don't trip the wire. It's an adding of arms and legs to things.