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

[red_flanders]

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

1.LeMond
2.Fignon
3.Delgado
4.Theunisse
7.Alcala
8.Rooks
9.Kelly
10.Millar
11.Bugno

or how about LeMond in 1990
1.LeMond
2.Chiappucci
3.Breukink
4.Delgado
7.Bugno
8.Alcala
10.Indurain

Just becasue someone is doped does also not make them infallible on a given day. Even jacked up Armstrong had bad days at the Tour, Landis had his bad day, there were very few doped riders who didn't have bad days. The thing is in a three week Tour, it is possible to get away with it. In a one day race, not so much; With the benefits of doping limited, it is far more plausible for a clean guys to beat a doped rider in a one day race. In a GT, not so much, thus why Martin struggled when he came up against these guys in the Tour.

Some good points, but you can't compare Lemond beating a bunch of guys on 'roids to Dan Martin beating a bunch of guys potentially doped up EPO or blood transfusions.

Dan Martin isn't a Lemond level talent and steroids aren't oxygen vector doping.

 

[pmcg76]

Some good points, but you can't compare Lemond beating a bunch of guys on 'roids to Dan Martin beating a bunch of guys potentially doped up EPO or blood transfusions.

Dan Martin isn't a Lemond level talent and steroids aren't oxygen vector doping.

Well I would argue that Testosterone, Cortisone and a few other steroids over three weeks could make a bigger difference than blood transfusions for a one day race.

I edited the post you quoted so maybe re-read it for my extra points.

 

[red_flanders]

Well I would argue that Testosterone, Cortisone and a few other steroids over three weeks could make a bigger difference than blood transfusions for a one day race.

I'm not with you on that. Clearly recovery is critical and those drugs are a major boost, but the studies I've read on the difference that EPO can make would make me tend to lean strongly in that direction. But I can't certainly say for sure one way or another.

There used to be this argument during the 90's that "sprinters don't dope because it doesn't help them" which is IMO similar to the one-day race argument. Turns out it helps a LOT not to be exhausted at the end of a 200+ km race, and EPO affects time to exhaustion dramatically.

I do think the level of doping of the "dopers" he beat has dropped of in some part due to the passport and other factors. I think this is what explains why likely clean riders can think about competing in one-day races.

I still don't see any way a clean rider can win or place in a GT at this point, but that's speculation on my part. Certainly it's going to be an order of magnitude harder to beat doped riders using drugs which affect recovery and time to exhaustion over 3 weeks.

 

[sniper]

No disagreement. I also think if you're going to say "hey, this one guy is clean" it would be good to show the evidence like he does when he says he thinks someone is doping. Just my personal curiosity.

I do think in general things have gotten better. I also think it's a fragile truce and when one or a couple teams are pounding everyone, eventually there's going to be a reaction and send us backwards.

Cleaner is a thin-ice proposition given the culture and the history. More than anything young riders need to feel sure that things have in fact changed. Illustrating that with evidence would help.

When I see the horse manure a young guy like Talansky (presumably from the generation that should think they can do it clean) spouts all too often, it becomes clear that there is a loooong way to go before we are having real conversations around the topic in the sport. He's got a lot to learn. The problem is that he doesn't seem atypical in any way.

formiddable post.

the part in bold is all i've been saying (or trying to say).
if vayer comes up with some arguments, i'm very willing to listen and be convinced of martin's cleanlihood.

 

[lean mean &green]

Yup, nuance.....like "HTFU or go away"

It sounds like we agree, it is very difficult to have a nuanced discussion here.

no one told you to go away. i asked you to stop whining. big difference. you continue to distort and exaggerate to appear the victim. it isn't working. let's agree to stay on topic which is really the main point i was making.

 

[Hugh Januss]

No disagreement. I also think if you're going to say "hey, this one guy is clean" it would be good to show the evidence like he does when he says he thinks someone is doping. Just my personal curiosity.

It is a lot easier to show evidence that points towards doping than that which points towards "clean", to a large extent we are left with faith in what the rider says, for a long long list of reasons faith is and should be in short supply with regard to Pro cycling. Lots of the "new clean generation" could be just that, but they could be just as easily doping within the parameters of Bio Passport and not failing any tests. The proliferation of Doctors around every pro cycling team could point towards the second choice.

 

[Benotti69]

Well if you think some of those guys were in top form for L-B-L then that shows how clueless you are.

Always the insults.

First you said Dan Martin didn't beat all those guys and now you move the goal posts saying they weren't on form for LBL!!! Any of those guys would love a monument.

Valverde podiumed.

I dont believe the doping culture has gone from the top level of the sport. All that has happened has been a more secretive approach.

Will riders tell Vayer the truth knowing the sport cant take more scandal? Doubt it. Vayer is a loose cannon, telling him anything might get you in trouble. I like Vayer, but that dont mean he is write.

Look at Hesjedal, he kept his past a secret on the transparent 'clean' team aka Garmin till he was outed by Rasmussen. Dont believe the hype.

I dont have an agenda, if i did i wouldn't make it here in this 'echo chamber' I would have a blog, a twitter account, facebook etc etc and i dont do any of that. I voice my opinion that i dont belive the sport's culture to dope has gone.

 

[red_flanders]

formiddable post.

the part in bold is all i've been saying (or trying to say).
if vayer comes up with some arguments, i'm very willing to listen and be convinced of martin's cleanlihood.

Thanks, and just to carry it a bit further, I don't think anything he could use as evidence would be proof or even utterly convincing. Even if he just said, "Hey, this is what I'm hearing from a lot of riders competing against the guy" that would be useful. Like Hugh says, it's tough to show a guys is clean. Just wanted to hear more detail on where he's coming from.

 

[sniper]

It is a lot easier to show evidence that points towards doping than that which points towards "clean", to a large extent we are left with faith in what the rider says, for a long long list of reasons faith is and should be in short supply with regard to Pro cycling. Lots of the "new clean generation" could be just that, but they could be just as easily doping within the parameters of Bio Passport and not failing any tests. The proliferation of Doctors around every pro cycling team could point towards the second choice.

good point.
but vayer had his methods to show at what level of suspicion certain riders were performing during the tour.
would be nice to see him do some math on martin's lbl victory and assess the credibility of that performance.

 

[pmcg76]

I'm not with you on that. Clearly recovery is critical and those drugs are a major boost, but the studies I've read on the difference that EPO can make would make me tend to lean strongly in that direction. But I can't certainly say for sure one way or another.

There used to be this argument during the 90's that "sprinters don't dope because it doesn't help them" which is IMO similar to the one-day race argument. Turns out it helps a LOT not to be exhausted at the end of a 200+ km race, and EPO affects time to exhaustion dramatically.

I do think the level of doping of the "dopers" he beat has dropped of in some part due to the passport and other factors. I think this is what explains why likely clean riders can think about competing in one-day races.

I still don't see any way a clean rider can win or place in a GT at this point, but that's speculation on my part. Certainly it's going to be an order of magnitude harder to beat doped riders using drugs which affect recovery and time to exhaustion over 3 weeks.

I agree with all this more or less. When Martin came up against a lot of the same guys at the Tour they were a lot better than he was. He did win a mountain stage but that was again more due to opportunism than strength.
For sure blood transfusions give a bigger advantage at GTs than one day races.

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.

Lets say they give a 3% advantage now, can a clean athlete overcome a 3% headstart? Well firstly we don't know if the athletes are starting off on equal talent footing so maybe it's possible if the clean athlete is more talented. I think it was alleged to be around a 10% advantage in the Wild west EPO days and I would think there are very few clean athletes who could overcome such an improvement. That is why you had donkeys turning into racehorses.

 

[sniper]

Even if he just said, "Hey, this is what I'm hearing from a lot of riders competing against the guy" that would be useful.

very much agree.
for the same reason, i'm still not quite sure why kimmage believes in martin.
he may of course genuinely believe in him, but kimmage too failed to provide even the smallest of tangible arguments. (we had to make do with some comment about martin's parents, iirc)

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Thanks, and just to carry it a bit further, I don't think anything he could use as evidence would be proof or even utterly convincing. Even if he just said, "Hey, this is what I'm hearing from a lot of riders competing against the guy" that would be useful. Like Hugh says, it's tough to show a guys is clean. Just wanted to hear more detail on where he's coming from.

As you say, there is no evidence or proof that he can offer.
But with Vayer he does not need to have, he has worked in the sport for 30 years as a trainer so he would have the experience and ability to know what is possible.

Obviously, Vayer thinks its possible to win LBL clean.
If someones view is that its impossible to win a monument clean, then they don't even have to access the riders ability, its a done deal regardless of who they are or who they ride for or where they are from.

 

[sniper]

...
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.

you hit the nail on the head when you say it's a big unknown.
that's the whole point: as long as it's an unknown, recent history compels us to remain agnostic/skeptic in the face of world-class perfomances.

an increased transparency could help remove some of the unknowns.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

very much agree.
for the same reason, i'm still not quite sure why kimmage believes in martin.
he may of course genuinely believe in him, but kimmage too failed to provide even the smallest of tangible arguments. (we had to make do with some comment about martin's parents, iirc)

Iirc, Kimmage sat down with Martin sometime last year where they talked about doping etc. Based on that discussion Kimmage declared that Martin would be riding the Tour clean.

This is very much "I looked him in the eyes....", but there could be more behind Kimmage's backing.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

very much agree.
for the same reason, i'm still not quite sure why kimmage believes in martin.
he may of course genuinely believe in him, but kimmage too failed to provide even the smallest of tangible arguments. (we had to make do with some comment about martin's parents, iirc)

Kimmage rode LBL.
And Kimmage rode it clean, coming in somewhere in the mid 40s or 50s.
I think thats give him a very good idea of what is possible to do.

 

[sniper]

Iirc, Kimmage sat down with Martin sometime last year where they talked about doping etc. Based on that discussion Kimmage declared that Martin would be riding the Tour clean.

ok, thanks

This is very much "I looked him in the eyes....",

but there could be more behind Kimmage's backing.

agreed.

Kimmage rode LBL.
And Kimmage rode it clean, coming in somewhere in the mid 40s or 50s.
I think thats give him a very good idea of what is possible to do.

fair point.

 

[red_flanders]

As you say, there is no evidence or proof that he can offer.
But with Vayer he does not need to have, he has worked in the sport for 30 years as a trainer so he would have the experience and ability to know what is possible.

As my boss once said to a co-worker, once you start using your resume as an argument, you've lost.

I'm willing to take what he says into serious consideration, but at the end of the day until he gets more specific, I can't just take it as gospel.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

As my boss once said to a co-worker, once you start using your resume as an argument, you've lost.

I'm willing to take what he says into serious consideration, but at the end of the day until he gets more specific, I can't just take it as gospel.

Your boss has a point - but with Vayer its not just his resume.
It is his hands on experience and access - he is there and he is not shy in asking questions.

When he speaks to riders about others, they usually are not in a position to declare someone clean.
But if you mention someone that they believe dopes there is usually a reaction. It can be specific in saying who they are working for etc, a rumour on what they heard, right down to a mere shrug of suspicion that things are 'not normal'.
As you say, it certainly is not gospel (and indeed he should be queried on specifics) but he is in a strong position to assess the overall picture.

 

[Parker]

But with Vayer he does not need to have, he has worked in the sport for 30 years as a trainer so he would have the experience and ability to know what is possible.

No, he hasn't. He still bills himself as the trainer of a team which disbanded in 2001. He may do a little training on the side but he doesn't work in cycling.

This is his job. A PE teacher:
http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...&rlz=1C2CHFX_en-GBGB459GB459&biw=1366&bih=643

 

[Dr. Maserati]

No, he hasn't. He still bills himself as the trainer of a team which disbanded in 2001. He may do a little training on the side but he doesn't work in cycling.

This is his job. A PE teacher:
http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...&rlz=1C2CHFX_en-GBGB459GB459&biw=1366&bih=643

Ok - he is a PE teacher. Physical Education, so he would know what he is talking about.
And he has worked with many riders after Festina, and appears still very much involved with the sport.

So he "has the experience and ability to know whats possible".

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Ok - he is a PE teacher. Physical Education, so he would know what he is talking about.
And he has worked with many riders after Festina, and appears still very much involved with the sport.

So he "has the experience and ability to know whats possible".

To be a bit more precise, Vayer knows how a transformation of a donkey to a racehorse works. And, to get back on topic, Dan Martin knows too. Hey, he even called out the not sufficient doping controls a few years back. Bet he had a good laugh since Vuelta 2011.

 

[Parker]

Ok - he is a PE teacher. Physical Education, so he would know what he is talking about.
And he has worked with many riders after Festina, and appears still very much involved with the sport.

So he "has the experience and ability to know whats possible".

Well, we'll have to differ on how much experience we think he has. I just reckon that he was half as knowledgable and involved as he tells us then someone would have given him a job sometime in the last 15 years. By bringing up Festina all the time he seems like a desperate ex-90s boyband member clinging to small scraps of fame.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Well, we'll have to differ on how much experience we think he has. I just reckon that he was half as knowledgable and involved as he tells us then someone would have given him a job sometime in the last 15 years. By bringing up Festina all the time he seems like a desperate ex-90s boyband member clinging to small scraps of fame.

I find it endearing how skybots keep distorting reality.

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

But, please, back to Dan Martin please, sorry for the intermezzo.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Well, we'll have to differ on how much experience we think he has. I just reckon that he was half as knowledgable and involved as he tells us then someone would have given him a job sometime in the last 15 years. By bringing up Festina all the time he seems like a desperate ex-90s boyband member clinging to small scraps of fame.

But he has a job - he is teaching Physical Education, you just linked to it.
He is also currently working with Peraud.

If he is a 90s boy band then he's "Take That".

 

[Ventoux Boar]

I find it endearing how skybots keep distorting reality.

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

But, please, back to Dan Martin please, sorry for the intermezzo.

"Someone disagrees with me. They must be a brainwashed moron." Is that what passes for argument here?