Evans and his meeting with Ferrari?

[Ferminal]

Yeh my list is something like:

Telegraphe-Galibier 2007
Alpe d'Huez 2006
Pla de Beret 2006
Aubisque 2007
Courchevel 2005
Lautaret-Galibier 2011

 

[The Hitch]

Great Post noddy69, sounds very similar to recent posts...Delbified and co. do not believe you/us. Your post will be classified as heavy-handed and arrogantly eruditious. I guess Cadel was just magic, magic!

It's not like I don't understand your arguments. But I think you're close-minded to the possibility he was clean. It's easy to be cynical. Statistically you'll be right most of the time and pat yourself on the back for your wisdom. I'd argue the real challenge is to be clever enough to be able to spot the exception. And there are always exceptions.

Am I that clever? No, I'm just guessing. I don't know if Cadel is clean or doping. But my belief is he's clean. Tentatively.

There are people who watch sport, hear a few doping stories, read about Lance, and come to the opinion that all sport is doped.

Then there are people who pay far closer attention to doping and how it works than you give them credit for. They have been reading books on doping (and not the "I was clean and doped once but it didn't help" variety) for way over a decade. They have read the accounts and seen the interviews with doping experts, like Ashenden and those way less known than Ashenden that the media sweeps under the rug and never give attention to. They find the obscure radio appearances, from people who have lived doping, who have admisnistered it and run doping programmes. They read the clinic (or more recently follow certain accounts on twitter). They hear about the semi pro athlete in Judo who tests positive, when no newspaper in the world picks up on it, and they follow the legal case and follow the arguments and excuses, to the end until they see how it turns out. They hear about the 1 article in the Norwegian press that some anti doping expert publishes explaining what the recent evidence he has seen on doping has lead him to conclude. They read the biographies of long forgotten cyclists who doped in the 2000's and read the passages about training camps which they can then tie to their greater library of information. They read the updates about what drugs are now being tested for, and how testing is adminitered.

And they have been doing it for over a decade.

You cannot accuse the second group of just being mindless cynics. Their belief that sport is doped and that people don't podium the Tour de France in the 2000's without being on some sort of mega programme, is not based of mindless cynicism or an inability to understand basic arguments from the "riders can be clean" side. Its not that they think everyone dopes and humans are all evil and will always cheat. They have just built up a library of experiences and evidence that paints a very clear picture that riders don't mix it with mid 2000's epo chargers for 3 straight weeks, year after year, without doping. They also don't believe people run 9.7 in the 100m clean, and people don't win biathlon gold medals at age 40 clean. In the same way that they don't belief that a crime boss facing trial for murder didn't have a hand in killing all those witnesses that happened to die in mysterious circumstances just before the trial.
You portraying the possibility that Evans was clean, as being equal to the possibility that he was dirty, to these people, is ridiculous and in contradiction with all their experience, and the evidence in the case.

Yes its possible that Evans was clean. Its also possible that he will make a comeback this year and win the Tour de France. Its possible we will have 35 degrees C in Europe tomorrow, or that you guys in Australia will experience a snow blizzard that covers the entire continent white. Its possible that a footballer tests positive for drugs this year and Fifa somehow fails to sweep it under the carpet. Everything is always possible. Its the degree of possibility that is important.

 

[sniper]

Enjoyed reading that and it's bang on the buck top to bottom.
When hitch takes his time for a post, usually small jewels come out.

 

[Cookster15]

Re:

Enjoyed reading that and it's bang on the buck top to bottom.
When hitch takes his time for a post, usually small jewels come out.

Spot on. A few more Hitch's in the clinic would make for a far better experience. The Eyerolls and derision more typical here might make the poster feel superior but it ain't going to sway opinion like a well thought out response. This site would be better if it had "like" buttons.

 

[Neworld]

Re: Re:

Enjoyed reading that and it's bang on the buck top to bottom.
When hitch takes his time for a post, usually small jewels come out.

Spot on. A few more Hitch's in the clinic would make for a far better experience. The Eyerolls and derision more typical here might make the poster feel superior but it ain't going to sway opinion like a well thought out response. This site would be better if it had "like" buttons.

Agreed!. Some posters slag the regular clinic posters as 'living in an echo chamber', and, current and former riders laugh at them...but they are just trying to deflect and derail the clinic. Their actions are transparent.

What you don't see the naysayers do is provide facts like their whereabouts, testing results (ergonomics or blood values) and open training session results. They just dismiss the clinic like a child that just stole a cookie and lied about it.

 

[Mr.38%]

Bromance

 

[Neworld]

Re:

Bromance

yup, spat coffee on keyboard. Two very clean riders sharing notes over a Regal game of tennis.

Cuddles: "Mate, you don't look so skinny right now, how do you do it? I mean really?"
Chris: "You know how Cadel...I walk dogs...like you and Tyler Hamilton."

Great pic Mr.38%. Priceless.

 

[sniper]

Wonder if they exchange stories about the kind of motors they used in 2011 (a landmark year for both).

CF: "Dude, were you still hiding your battery in a bidon? whuahahaha. I was already rimming it in '11"

 

[yaco]

The organisers of Cadel Evan's RR got riders tickets for the Australian Open on Tuesday evening.

 

[sniper]

Cadel Evans 2009 Giro.
Neutral service car and a motor are unable to change his wheel.

The story: http://www.velonews.com/2009/09/news/evans-puncture-probably-cost-me-the-win-of-the-vuelta_97851

The footage from different angles:

1. "this is a real slow wheel change, one of the slowest i've ever seen"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl_eqDVRnJc

2. some not so convincing commentary from evans himself post-race:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIvaNrQpCKw

3. cyclocosmos commentray --> 2m40sec: "one of the most shambolic wheel changes ever"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl1l5zmp6B8

Any thoughts?

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

Anyway, he never really climbed with the best. He hung on in the mountains for dear life,

Not true at all. Look at the results. He climbed with the best consistently for years.

heh, I've always found this line amusing, as though being dropped by Contador makes you a mediocre climber.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzeS8JUPh2w

Finished behind a bunch of jet fuel monsters and ahead of another bunch in one of the more packed top30s you will see. One of Evans' top 5 climbing performances (this version easily beats the field in 2008 and 2010).

That was right up there! People easily forget that even Ferrari thought that Lance was best in 04/05 and Valverde was probably the best hilly one day rider in the world at that time. If Evans climbed like that in 07/08 he'd have beaten Contador and Sastre. I have no doubt.

Then there's his TTing at the 2007 tour... It took a fully topped up Vino and a ridiculously full *** Leipheimer just to beat him. Cancellara, Millar, Kloden, Kasch, Chavanel, Popovych, Astarloza - all totally blown away. Evans destroyed them all.

 

[GuyIncognito]

Re: Re:

Anyway, he never really climbed with the best. He hung on in the mountains for dear life,

Not true at all. Look at the results. He climbed with the best consistently for years.

heh, I've always found this line amusing, as though being dropped by Contador makes you a mediocre climber.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzeS8JUPh2w

Finished behind a bunch of jet fuel monsters and ahead of another bunch in one of the more packed top30s you will see. One of Evans' top 5 climbing performances (this version easily beats the field in 2008 and 2010).

That was right up there! People easily forget that even Ferrari thought that Lance was best in 04/05 and Valverde was probably the best hilly one day rider in the world at that time. If Evans climbed like that in 07/08 he'd have beaten Contador and Sastre. I have no doubt.

Then there's his TTing at the 2007 tour... It took a fully topped up Vino and a ridiculously full *** Leipheimer just to beat him. Cancellara, Millar, Kloden, Kasch, Chavanel, Popovych, Astarloza - all totally blown away. Evans destroyed them all.

There's an interview with Lance where he's asked what his peak form was and he says the 2005 Tour was the only one he went into knowing that barring a crash he would win without even trying hard because his numbers from training were considerably better than ever.

And that's exactly what he did

 

[Valv.Piti]

I would have thought it would have been 2001. I've heard that mentioned somewhere, I think by him, but you are probably right!
I don't really think there is too much difference between the different editions of Lance. In 2005, you are right, he was in very much cruise control. As was he in basically every TdF apart from 2003.

 

[kingjr]

In 2001 he said he had reached his peak, but in 2009 after the Prologue he said he would have smashed the field on that course in 2005 or something along those lines. so yeah, apparently he reached new levels in 2005.

 

[42x16ss]

Re:

In 2001 he said he had reached his peak, but in 2009 after the Prologue he said he would have smashed the field on that course in 2005 or something along those lines. so yeah, apparently he reached new levels in 2005.

I think I saw the same article. Lance also said at one point that Contador's form in 2009 was probably good enough to have beaten him around 2-3 times during his run, probably in 1999, and somewhere about 2001-03.

From the way Lance dealt with Pantani I doubt that Contador could have beaten 2000 Lance and 04/05 was a farce. Armstrong was tag teamed by a full *** Basso and a firing Sastre, yet still controlled both with ease.

 

[kingjr]

Re: Re:

In 2001 he said he had reached his peak, but in 2009 after the Prologue he said he would have smashed the field on that course in 2005 or something along those lines. so yeah, apparently he reached new levels in 2005.

I think I saw the same article. Lance also said at one point that Contador's form in 2009 was probably good enough to have beaten him around 2-3 times during his run, probably in 1999, and somewhere about 2001-03.

From the way Lance dealt with Pantani I doubt that Contador could have beaten 2000 Lance and 04/05 was a farce. Armstrong was tag teamed by a full *** Basso and a firing Sastre, yet still controlled both with ease.

I think Lance would have had his hands full with Pantani 2000 if he had ever reached his pre-ban level. He still was the only one who simply outclimbed Lance on a TdF mountain stage (before his 1st retirement). I don't count the handful of seconds from Zülle and Virenque in '99 or Ullrich in '03.

I have no clue what Contador could have done But I rate Pantani higher as a climber. Contador would have probably been stronger in the TT, although Pantani showed that he could do that too if he really had to.

 

[GuyIncognito]

Didn't find it, but found an interview with Dr. Ferrari from one of Alex Gibney's films

Ferrari says Lance's best 1k test was over 7w/kg and then goes on: "The best Lance was the year of the last Tour win. He won the Tour like this [pretends to smoke a cigar], Lance took it easy because if you win by too much then everybody....[imitates people complaining]"

 

[Benotti69]

Vaughters dumping on Evans

Jonathan Vaughters‏ @Vaughters

@IlCobra21 @ulif As he used to brag about "I'm an Aussie with a Ferrari motor!"

 

[86TDFWinner]

Re:

I disagree with Cadel there,

But ce's continued defense of dopers has, of course, absolutely nothing to do with the question of whether he would dope himself. How convenient

As I've stated a few times, if it's found out that Cadel is guilty, then I won't be a fan of his anymore. Just show us the proof he did, so we can end this discussion.

How convenient. You will treat Cadel as if he were clean until an investigation that you know very well will never take place because there is no motivation in Australia to bring down their only tdf hero, brings him down.

Until such time you will cling to this highly illogical notion that it might hypothetically, with like a 0.001% chance, be possible for a peloton in which every single other major contender is heavily charged and even those who pass every single test are admitting years later to being on insane amounts of drugs, for a clean rider to rise above all of them and beat the power of epo and blood transfusions and all those dopers who with drugs are able to train far harder than he ever would through, umm, personal talent and will power

And if that isn't enough this Hercules character never actually did anything actually anti doping or made any attempt to clean the sport up and never gave a **** about whether it was clean or not. He befriended and behaved just like all the dopers, defended them when they fell and the whole ridiculous notion that he was different came from the now disproved racist idea that English speakers don't dope.

Even the people who argue that cycling is clean NOW, essentially throw Evans mid 2000s strength to the wolves by saying it was impossible to compete with dopers until the sport cleaned itself up.

But you continue to delude yourself that because, like the majority of dopers, Evans never failed a test, the chances of his being clean are 50 50 or whatever arbitrary figure you want to put on it.

In other words behave exactly as the Armstrong groupies did. that no matter how much evidence there is against a rider being clean, none of it matters as long as the authorities don't provide a smoking gun. Any evidence or argument that isn't a smoking gun that will get the rider his results stripped is considered conveniently meaningless, as it allows the fan to maintain his delusion. Doesn't matter if everyone involved in the sport is saying it was impossible to finish t10 in tdfs without major charging. Evans who finished 2nd, flew away from dopers like they were wearing bags of bricks on their backs and finished as the world number 1 has a 50% chance of having miraculously been able to do all that without so much as a cough sweet

exactly like the Armstrong fans. Only it's ok because it's not Armstrong.

Good post, was guilty at the time.