Evans and his meeting with Ferrari?

[Granville57]

Continuing with the 2005 TdF theme...

Stage 10
1. Alejandro Valverde (Illes Balears)
2. Lance Armstrong (Discovery) s.t.
3. Michael Rasmussen (Rabobank) @ 9sec
4. Francisco Mancebo (Illes Balears) s.t.
5. Ivan Basso (CSC) @ 1min 2sec
6. Levi Leipheimer (Gerolsteiner) @ 1min 15sec
7. Eddy Mazzoleni (Lampre) @ 2min 14saec
8. Cadel Evans (Davitamon-Lotto) @ 2min 14sec
9. Andreas Kloden (T-Mobile) s.t.
10. Andrey Kashechkin (Credit Agricole) s.t.
11. Floyd Landis (Phonak) s.t.
12. Leonardo Piepoli (Saunier Duval) s.t.
13. Jan Ullrich (T-Mobile) s.t.
14. Jorg Jaksche (Liberty Seguros) @ 2min 19sec
15. Santiago Botero (Phonak) @ 2min 50sec
16. Christophe Moreau (Credit Agricole) @ 2min 58sec
17. Stefano Garzelli (Liquigas) @ 3min 44sec
18. Kim Kirchen (Fassa Bortolo) @ 3min 59sec
19. Yaroslav Popovych (Discovery) s.t.
20. Chris Horner (Saunier Duval) s.t.

Stage 11
1. Alexandre Vinokourov (T-Mobile)
2. Santiago Botero (Phonak) s.t.
3. Christophe Moreau (Credit Agricole) @ 1min 15sec
4. Bobby Julich (CSC) s.t.
5. Eddy Mazzoleni (Lampre) s.t.
6. Lance Armstrong (Discovery) s.t.
7. Cadel Evans (Davitamon-Lotto) s.t.
8. Levi Leipheimer (Gerolsteiner) s.t.
9. Michael Rasmussen (Rabobank) s.t.
10. Georg Totschnig (Gerolsteiner) s.t.
11. Alejandro Valverde (Illes Balears) s.t.
12. Yarosalv Popovych (Discovery) s.t.
13. Ivan Basso (CSC) s.t.
14. Michael Rogers (Quick Step) s.t.
15. Jan Ullrich (T-Mobile) s.t.
16. Francisco Mancebo (Illes Balears) s.t.
17. Jorge Jaksche (Liberty sEguros) s.t.
18. Andrey Kashechkin (Credit Agricole) s.t.
19. Floyd Landis (Phonak) s.t.
20. Andreas Kloden (T-Mobile) s.t.

Stage 14
1. George Totschnig (Gerolsteiner) 5hr 43min 43sec. 38.491 km/hr average speed.
2. Lance Armstrong (Discovery) @ 56sec
3. Ivan Basso (CSC) @ 58sec
4. Jan Ullrich (T-Mobile) @ 1min 16sec
5. Levi Leipheimer (Gerolsteiner) @ 1min 31sec
6. Floyd Landis (Phonak) s.t.
7. Francisco Mancebo (Illes Balears) @ 1min 47sec
8. Michael Rasmussen (Rabobank) s.t.
9. Andreas Kloden (T-Mobile) @ 2min 6sec
10. Haimar Zubeldia (Euskaltel) @ 2min 20sec
11. Alexandre Vinokourov (T-Mobile) @ 3min 6sec
12. Stefano Garzelli (Liquigas) @ 3min 35sec
13. Jorg Jaksche (Liberty Seguros) @ 4min 3sec
14. Cadel Evans (Davitamon-Lotto) s.t.
15. Walter Beneteau (Bouygues Telecom) @ 4min 16sec
16. Yarosalv Popovych (Discovery) @ 4min 18sec
17. Bobby Julich )CSC) @ 6min 1sec
18. Eddy Mazzoleni (Lampre) @ 6min 4sec
19. Leonardo Piepoli (Saunier Duval) s.t.
20. Laurent Brochard (Bouygues Telecom) @ 6min 6sec

Stage 15
1. George Hincapie (Discovery) 6hr 6min 38sec. 33.63 km/hr
2. Oscar Pereiro (Phonak) @ 6sec
3. Pietro Caucchioli (Credit Agricole) @ 38sec
4. Michael Boogerd (Rabobank) @ 57sec
5. Laurent Brochard (Bouygues Telecom) @ 2min 19sec
6. Ivan Basso (CSC) 5min 4sec
7. Lance Armstrong (Discovery) s.t.
8. Oscar Sevilla (T-Mobile) @ 6min 28sec
9. Jan Ullrich (T-Mobile) s.t.
10. Michael Rasmussen (Rabobank) @ 6min 32sec
11. Francisco Mancebo (Illes Balears) s.t.
12. Alexandre Vinokourov (T-Mobile) @ 7min 33sec
13.Levi Leipheimer (Gerolsteiner) @ 7min 54sec
14. Christophe Moreau (Credit Agricole) @ 8min 14sec
15. Haimar Zubeldia (Eukaltel) @ 8min 47sec
16. Cadel Evans (Davitamon-Lotto) s.t.
17. Eddy Mazzoleni (Lampre) @ 8min 54sec
18. Yaroslav Popovych (Discovery) @ 9min 32sec
19. Floyd Landis (Phonak) @ 9min 34sec
20. Allan Davis (Liberty Seguros) @ 10min 37sec

Stage 16
1. Oscar Pereiro (Phonak) 4hr 38min 40sec. 38.863 km/hr
2. Xabier Zandio (Illes Balears) s.t.
3. Eddy Mazzoleni (Lampre) s.t.
4. Cadel Evans (Davitamon-Lotto). s.t.
5. Philippe Gilbert (FDJ) @ 2min 25sec
6. Anthony Geslin (Bouygues Telecom) s.t.
7. Jorg Ludewig (Domina Vacanze) s.t.
8. Juan Antonio Flecha (Fassa Bortolo) s.t.
9. Ludovic Turpin (Ag2R) s.t.
10. Cedric Vasseur (Cofidis) s.t.
11. Marcos Serrano (Liberty Seguros) @ 2min 28sec
12. Jerome Pineau (Bouygues Telecom) @ 2min 32sec
13. Franco Pellizotti (Liquigas) @ 3min 24sec
14. Laurent Brochard (Bouygues Telecom) s.t.
15. Pierrick Fedrigo (Bouygues Telecom) s.t.
16. Sylvain chavanel (Cofidis) s.t.
17. Fabian Wegmann (Gerolsteiner) s.t.
18. Lorenzo Bernucci (Fassa Bortolo) s.t.
19. Salvatore Commesso (Lampre) s.t.
20. Maxim Iglinskiy (Domina Vacanze) s.t.

Stage 18
1. Marcos Serrano (Liberty Seguros) 4hr 37min 36sec. 40.85 km/hr average speed.
2. Cedric Vasseur (Cofidis) @ 27sec
3. Axel Merckx (Davitamon-Lotto) s.t.
4. Xabier Zandio (Illes Balears) @ 1min 8sec
5. Franco Pellizotti (Liquigas) s.t.
6. Thomas Voeckler (Bouygues Telecom) @ 1min 28sec
7. Luke Roberts (CSC) s.t.
8. Matthias Kessler (T-Mobile) @ 1min 44sec
9. Egoi Martinez (Euskaltel) @ 2min 3sec
10. Carlos Da Cruz (FDJ) @ 2min 38sec
11. Cadel Evans (Davitamon-Lotto) @ 11min 18sec
12. Lance Armstrong (Discovery) s.t.
13. Ivan Basso (CSC) s.t.
14. Jan Ullrich (T-Mobile) s.t.
15. Alexandre Vinokourov (T-Mobile) @ 11min 55sec
16. Michael Rasmussen (Rabobank) s.t.
17. Levi Leipheimer (Gerolsteiner) s.t.
18. Francisco Mancebo (Illes Balears) s.t.
19. Leonardo Piepoli (Saunier Duval) @ 12min 1sec
20. Floyd Landis (Phonak) 12min 7sec

Stage 20 iTT
1. Lance Armstrong (Discovery)
2. Jan Ullrich (T-Mobile) @ 23sec
3. Alexandre Vinokourov (T-Mobile) @ 1min 16sec
4. Bobby Julich (CSC) @ 1min 33sec
5. Ivan Basso (CSC) @ 1min 54sec
6. Floyd Landis (Phonak) @ 2min 2sec
7. Cadel Evans (Davitamon-Lotto) @ 2min 6sec
8. George Hincapie (Discovery) @ 2min 25sec
9. Francisco Macebo (Illes Balears) @ 2min 51sec
10. Vladimir Karpets (Illes Balears) @ 3min 5sec
11. Yaroslav Popvych (Discovery) @ 3min 9sec
12. Carlos Sastre (CSC) @ 3min 10sec
13. Christophe Moreau (Credit Agricole) @ 3min 11sec
14. Levi Leipheimer (Gerolsteiner) @ 3min 13sec
15. Oscar Pereiro (Phonak) @ 3min 25sec
16. Sebastian Lang (Gerolsteiner) @ 3min 26sec
17. Luke Roberts (CSC) @ 3min 47sec
18. Dario Cioni (Liquigas) @ 3min 51sec
19. Jorg Jaksche (Liberty Seguros) @ 3min 51sec
20. Fabian Cancellara (Fassa Bortolo) @ 4min 3sec

Final Tour de France General Classification after stage 21
1. Lance Armstrong (Discovery) 88hr 15min 2sec. 41.654 km/hr average speed over the total 3,608 kilomters of the 2005 Tour
2. Ivan Basso (CSC) @ 4min 40sec
3. Jan Ullrich (T-Mobile) @ 6min 21sec
4. Francisco Mancebo (Illes Balears) @ 9min 59sec
5. Alexandre Vinokourov (T-Mobile) @ 11min 1sec
6. Levi Leipheimer (Gerolsteiner) @ 11min 21sec
7. Michael Rasmussen (Rabobank) @ 11min 33sec
8. Cadel Evans (Davitamon-Lotto) @ 11min 55sec
9. Floyd Landis (Phonak) @ 12min 44sec
10. Oscar Pereiro (Phonak) @ 16min 4sec
11. Christophe Moreau (Credit Agricole) @ 16min 26sec
12. Yaroslav Popovych (Discovery) @ 19min 2sec
13. Eddy Mazzoleni (Lampre) @ 21min 6sec
14. George Hincapie (Discovery) @ 23min40sec
15. Haimar Zubeldia (Euskaltel) @ 23min 43sec
16. Jorg Jaksche (Liberty Seguros) @ 24min 7sec
17. Bobby Julich (CSC) @ 24min 8sec
18. Oscar Sevilla (T-Mobile) @ 27min 45sec
19. Andriy Kashechkin (Credit Agricole) @ 28min 4sec
20. Giuseppe Guerini (T-Mobile) @ 33min 2sec


Seems that the 2005 Tour de France should belong to Evans as well, no?

I don't think I'm in a good position to comment on that. Sorry.

-Cadel Evans

 

[JackRabbitSlims]

And by "the Armstrong group" it means Lance, Jan and Ivan.

I just re-watched that race recently. With Cadel in mind, some entertaining MTF's, to be sure.


OT:
Hey look! It's Clean Jens!

GC after stage 8.
46.22 km/hr average speed over the 1,493.5 km covered so far

1. Jens Voigt (CSC) 32hr 18min 23sec.
2. Christophe Moreau (Credit Agricole) @ 1min 50sec
3. Lance Armstrong (Discovery) @ 2min 18sec
4. Michael Rasmussen (Rabobank) @ 2min 43sec
5. Alexandre Vinokourov (T-Mobile) @ 3min 20sec
6. Bobby Julich (CSC) @ 3min 25sec
7. Ivan Basso (CSC) @ 3min 44sec
8. Jan Ullrich (T-Mobile) @ 3min 54sec
9. Carlos Sastre (CSC) @ 3min 54sec
10. George Hincapie (Discovery) @ 4min 5sec
12. Andreas Kloden (T-Mobile) @ 4min 8sec
12. Floyd Landis (Phonak) s.t.
13. Vladimir Karpets (Illes Balears) @ 4min 31sec
14. Yaroslav Popovych (Discovery) @ 4min 32sec
15. Santiago Botero (Phonak) @ 4min 36sec
16. Levi Leipheimer (GErolsteiner) @ 4min 49sec
17. Jose Azevedo (Discovery) @ 4min 53sec
18. Joseba Beloki (Liberty sEguros) @ 5min 1sec
19. Oscar Pereiro (Phonak) @ 5min 12sec
20. Jose Enrique Gutierrez (Phonak) @ 5min 16sec
21. Roberto Heras (Liberty Seguros) s.t.

Wow. What a rogues gallery!

More like a "Shooting Gallery" -

 

[the sceptic]

Seems that the 2005 Tour de France should belong to Evans as well, no?

Looks like he won it by over 20 minutes.

 

[D-Queued]

...


I'm going to invoke the "LeMond Rule" here and just ask you: Do you have the info stating that Cadel doped too? Not hearsay, or innuendo, factual proof he did? If not, how can anyone(including yourself) be 100% certain either way, because I'm sure many here would like to see it.

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.

First, LeMond rules are broken when you consult with the most notorious doping doc that ever walked the planet.

As LeMond pointed out with Lance, there is *no* rational explanation to see Ferrari other than for charging purposes. Thus, there is no greater fail on the LeMond rules.

Second, LeMond rules are broken when you win the Tour against known dopers. LeMond couldn't do that with an mVO2 of 92. What is Cadel's MVO2? Cadel placed ahead of Schlecks, Cunego, and Sammy "Armstrong is innocent" Sanchez, etc. Cadel even placed ahead of Frank "the doper" Scheck in the polka dot competition.

Third, LeMond rules are broken when you repeatedly exhibit roid rage.

That's three strikes. And, if that weren't enough, LeMond rules can be broken by the company you keep.

Dave.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I'm not going to defend the cleanliness of the Evans career, but the 'roid rage is a media beat up, no question.

 

[TailWindHome]

What is Cadel's MVO2?

http://www.ridemedia.com.au/past-issue/lance-vs-cadel-a-study-of-two-22-year-olds/

Overall, Cadel’s cycling physiology as assessed as a developing young rider is most impressive. He boasts one of the highest VO2max values ever recorded at the AIS and displays a phenomenal power to mass ratio at both VO2max and threshold intensity. Although Lance is the man when it comes to winning the Tour, Cadel’s physiology reigns supreme based on traditional measurements of aerobic capacity.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

PS. LeMond's high VO2max is only one piece of the puzzle - some of the others being efficiency and %VO2max sustainable for FTP.

It's like arguing you have bigger legs than someone else, and therefore should go faster.

 

[D-Queued]

http://www.ridemedia.com.au/past-issue/lance-vs-cadel-a-study-of-two-22-year-olds/

While it was really hard, I did look past the favorable discussion of Ed Coyle.

This source advises that:

"...Cadel’s highest VO2max of 87 ml.kg-1.min-1 ..."

Which falls at least five percent short of LeMond and doesn't pass the 'clean cycling' smell test.

Dave.

 

[Granville57]

I dug this up from 2007
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/enoughrope/transcripts/s1998054.htm

Audio @ 9:15
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/enoughrope/audio/ep142/CADELEVANS.mp3

ANDREW DENTON: The thing about this Tour, unfortunately of course, is that there was the spectre of drugs over the race again. You’ve said in the past that you know you’ve been beaten by riders who cheat. Why doesn’t that make you just want to hang the helmet up, and walk away?


CADEL EVANS: It does in some ways, but that’d be giving up. I don’t want to do that. I think it’s just human nature, and it’s not just the Tour de France, it’s not just sport, it’s the world as a whole. People will always look for an easier way, or a way to gain more, or profit more from any situation and so I can’t change the world as a whole, but I can do my best in what I believe is right and I’ll continue doing that.


ANDREW DENTON: You’ve been fairly outspoken about those that have marred a sport that you love. Have you in your career ever been offered drugs?


CADEL EVANS: Not offered drugs, no. [That's his answer?] The teams, and especially now with the way the cycling is, and the controls that are so strong, it’s in the interests of everyone in the team, even if there’s possibility to gain more results, the risks are so high, that it’s not in any one’s interest any more, because of the controls. And we’re also very controlled by the police at borders and things and that’s been a really good step in the fight against drugs, is controlling the trafficking of it. That’s what’s really moved in big steps, the last few years in cycling.


ANDREW DENTON: The winner of the Tour this year, the Spaniard Contador, has come under speculation that he’s been a drug cheat in the past. A leading German investigator has referred to his victory in this tour as one of the great swindles in sporting history. A week later, are you satisfied that he won it fair and square?


CADEL EVANS: I think like everyone, there’s a bit of a shadow over his win and his reputation. For me, I’m always innocent till proven guilty is always my attitude, because just because you win the Tour de France doesn’t mean you’re a cheat. And I think people always need to remember that. If something comes out solid evidence, yes but until now, nothing really, no solid proof has come out. I’ll leave him innocent till proven guilty.


ANDREW DENTON: Helen, Cadel is widely acknowledged by other riders as, if there’s going to be one rider that’s clean in the game it’s him. I imagine you would be astonished if any allegations were ever laid against your boy knowing him as you do.


HELEN EVANS: It’s just a non-sense, I couldn’t imagine anyone doing such a thing.

 

[Archibald]

... Evans could just be an expert in self-prep in which case very few people would know details.

I lean towards this - he's always been intensely private over the years, meticulous prep, never really been 'in' with his team mates, etc...

That, and the 2011 final ITT - rode like a man possessed, and nearly took the stage. Just looked too good that day after the previous mountain chases - always made me wonder

 

[The Hitch]

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.

 

[Cookster15]

top 100 are usually within 1-2% of each other.

Common sense.

And you come to this conclusion how? Please link to a scientific paper supporting your notion that the top 100 are within 1 to 2%? Maybe on time but not on physiological difference which is what we are talking about here in relation to possible doping gains.

Furthermore did you watch in 2007? Evans lost 2 minutes to Rassmussen and Contador in the space of 5Km on one mountain. Just what I'd expect if he were clean up against dopers (and don't forget AC was only 24 then). Leipheimer was never half the rider Evans was so to beat him means nothing. Likewise in 2005 TdF whenever things got serious in the mountains Evans lost ground to the likes of Lance, Floyd or Basso. In that race he admitted on multiple occasions he was not at the level of those guys - I wonder why?

I'd reckon Physiological differences between the top pros are more than 1 to 2%. Winning is not just physiological prowess but other factors such as tactics, courage. Did not Evans become a better rider after 2009 when he learned to attack and not just follow wheels? I am no pro, but even at my lowly level the spread of "talent" I raced against was much wider than 1 or 2%. In lower grade racing the talent spread is less because once you win 3 times you go up. For pros you go nowhere so the spread of talent should be more and riders will look for results based upon their tactics, courage and relative strengths (like sprinting).

Again, none of this means Evans was clean but a case can be made he was from evidence and results. And I reckon my case is more logical than the alternative theories still being put forth, especially when someone resurrects the Ferrari link from 14 years ago.

 

[The Hitch]

I dug this up from 2007
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/enoughrope/transcripts/s1998054.htm

Audio @ 9:15
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/enoughrope/audio/ep142/CADELEVANS.mp3

Well his moms says he is cleans. When the rider's family come in and say they are clean, that's when you know it's legit.

 

[The Hitch]

And you come to this conclusion how? Please link to a scientific paper supporting your notion that the top 100 are within 1 to 2%? Maybe on time but not on physiological difference which is what we are talking about here in relation to possible doping gains.

Furthermore did you watch in 2007? Evans lost 2 minutes to Rassmussen and Contador in the space of 5Km on one mountain. Just what I'd expect if he were clean up against dopers (and don't forget AC was only 24 then). Leipheimer was never half the rider Evans was so to beat him means nothing. Likewise in 2005 TdF whenever things got serious in the mountains Evans lost ground to the likes of Lance, Floyd or Basso. In that race he admitted on multiple occasions he was not at the level of those guys - I wonder why?

I'd reckon Physiological differences between the top pros are more than 1 to 2%. Winning is not just physiological prowess but other factors such as tactics, courage. Did not Evans become a better rider after 2009 when he learned to attack and not just follow wheels? I am no pro, but even at my lowly level the spread of "talent" I raced against was much wider than 1 or 2%. In lower grade racing the talent spread is less because once you win 3 times you go up. For pros you go nowhere so the spread of talent should be more and riders will look for results based upon their tactics, courage and relative strengths (like sprinting).

Again, none of this means Evans was clean but a case can be made he was from evidence and results. And I reckon my case is more logical than the alternative theories still being put forth, especially when someone resurrects the Ferrari link from 14 years ago.

So every doper Evans beat was just less talented than him?

Landis must have been clean btw. He lost like 10 minutes on one stage. Which is way more than the 2 Evans lost that proves he is clean.

And the tts where Evans took time in the evil dopers contador and Rasmussen. Oh that's right, the brailsford rule. Tts are immune from doping. It's where the clean riders like Indurain and Tyler Hamilton and botero shine through.

 

[Cookster15]

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

Rolling your eyes does not make you right Hitch. Just maybe when your whole living is from professional cycling you don't pee in the pool you are swimming in? How would Evans benefit from spilling the beans on his fellow competitors?

Of course you and I both know that would be a bad move for him. If you cared to notice you would know he has made some references to riders he thought were suspect either when interviewed or on his website - like skinny climbers who can TT (Froome , Wiggins) or even something about Valverde a few years back. Defend dopers? I'd say he was just trying to be politically correct.

I come here enough to respect your knowledge of cycling but on this subject your arguments have more leaks than a sieve.

 

[Cookster15]

So every doper Evans beat was just less talented than him?

Landis must have been clean btw. He lost like 10 minutes on one stage. Which is way more than the 2 Evans lost that proves he is clean.

And the tts where Evans took time in the evil dopers contador and Rasmussen. Oh that's right, the brailsford rule. Tts are immune from doping. It's where the clean riders like Indurain and Tyler Hamilton and botero shine through.

Evans took TT time on a 24 year old Contador and a skinnier than Froome Rasmussen who never could TT before 2007. Dope just made Rasmussen's TT respectable - but hs climbing became other worldly. Evans lost 2 mins because he simply didn't have the sustained power to match those guys. Floyd lost 10 minutes because he was dehydrated or had a hunger flat. Big difference. Apples and Pears.

 

[TailWindHome]

notion that the top 100 are within 1 to 2%?.

I don't get this either.
It seems to imply that a 2% improvement will boost a rider from #100 to #1

Maybe the Digger will explain when he returns.

 

[Brooks Fahey Baldwin]

Evans took TT time on a 24 year old Contador and a skinnier than Froome Rasmussen who never could TT before 2007. Dope just made Rasmussen's TT respectable - but hs climbing became other worldly. Evans lost 2 mins because he simply didn't have the sustained power to match those guys. Floyd lost 10 minutes because he was dehydrated or had a hunger flat. Big difference. Apples and Pears.

It wasnt so much the sustained power that he missed there. It was more the 600W odd efforts for 40 seconds that made him loose time so quickly.

I have always beleived Cadel is clean. But only just. There are a lot of factors that would lead one to believe he is on the sauce ie:
- Pretty much every other top GT contender for the last decade has been
- He has a massive jaw looking like he abused HGH for years
- He looks like he has roid rage
- That TT at the end of the 2011 tour
- That meeting with Ferrari
- Tony Rominger as his former manager
- Having riden for dirty teams such as Mapei or T-Mobile
- Come on, as if a GT contender could be clean

On the other hand:
- He had that HGH face when he was a teenager
- Thats not roid rage. The guy is just a bit weird. For one anecdote, I saw him with his swanny after national champs last year and he almost lost his **** because the swanny gave him a drink before putting clean runners on.
My guess would be along the lines of obsessive compulsive disorder or a similar sort of anxiety related disorder. That can certainly make people lash out.
- It was only one meeting with Ferrari, and he didnt suddenly improve after that meeting. I've said hello to James Hird before, it didnt mean much.
- Rominger as manager.... yep that one isnt great.
- Re: 2011 TT, If you have ever raced stage races, you would know that sometimes you just have an inexplicably fast day. Just as you sometimes have inexplicably slow days. I still dont know why and I have kept detailed diaries trying to figure out what brings on good days and bad.
- Cadel has been consistent for most of his career. The years he has been called a wheelsucker are the years where climbing was off richter crazy fast.
The years he has won, he has climbed at consistent speeds to previous years. (Ok feel free to attack this point to pieces as I am really not going to spend the hours required to thoroughly reference it).
- Given the quantified benefits of doping (yes I can reference this and provide original papers if you really really want), it is feasible that he could be beating dopers. Its a long and convoluted explanation, but it is entirely possible.

The one nugget of information that tips me towards thinking he is clean comes from the 2004 Vuelta however. Evans was sitting 5th on GC at stage 5 and one night the whole team got sick except for Cadel. Even though Vinokourov went on to loose half an hour on one stage the team still didnt give Evans the team leadership.
Anyhow, the official explanation for the sickness was a dodgy fish salad causing an acute bout of gastro. But the word on the grapevine was a dodgy transfusion.

Its not really much to go on. But considering the evidence against Evans is purely speculation, I do like my little piece of counter-speculation about the dodgy transfusion. I trust the people I heard it from at least.

BTW I have no problem with speculating on a riders guilt without any proper evidence.

 

[Spencer the Half Wit]

It wasnt so much the sustained power that he missed there. It was more the 600W odd efforts for 40 seconds that made him loose time so quickly.

I have always beleived Cadel is clean. But only just. There are a lot of factors that would lead one to believe he is on the sauce ie:
- Pretty much every other top GT contender for the last decade has been
- He has a massive jaw looking like he abused HGH for years
- He looks like he has roid rage
- That TT at the end of the 2011 tour
- That meeting with Ferrari
- Tony Rominger as his former manager
- Having riden for dirty teams such as Mapei or T-Mobile
- Come on, as if a GT contender could be clean

On the other hand:
- He had that HGH face when he was a teenager
- Thats not roid rage. The guy is just a bit weird. For one anecdote, I saw him with his swanny after national champs last year and he almost lost his **** because the swanny gave him a drink before putting clean runners on.
My guess would be along the lines of obsessive compulsive disorder or a similar sort of anxiety related disorder. That can certainly make people lash out.
- It was only one meeting with Ferrari, and he didnt suddenly improve after that meeting. I've said hello to James Hird before, it didnt mean much.
- Rominger as manager.... yep that one isnt great.
- Re: 2011 TT, If you have ever raced stage races, you would know that sometimes you just have an inexplicably fast day. Just as you sometimes have inexplicably slow days. I still dont know why and I have kept detailed diaries trying to figure out what brings on good days and bad.
- Cadel has been consistent for most of his career. The years he has been called a wheelsucker are the years where climbing was off richter crazy fast.
The years he has won, he has climbed at consistent speeds to previous years. (Ok feel free to attack this point to pieces as I am really not going to spend the hours required to thoroughly reference it).
- Given the quantified benefits of doping (yes I can reference this and provide original papers if you really really want), it is feasible that he could be beating dopers. Its a long and convoluted explanation, but it is entirely possible.

The one nugget of information that tips me towards thinking he is clean comes from the 2004 Vuelta however. Evans was sitting 5th on GC at stage 5 and one night the whole team got sick except for Cadel. Even though Vinokourov went on to loose half an hour on one stage the team still didnt give Evans the team leadership.
Anyhow, the official explanation for the sickness was a dodgy fish salad causing an acute bout of gastro. But the word on the grapevine was a dodgy transfusion.

Its not really much to go on. But considering the evidence against Evans is purely speculation, I do like my little piece of counter-speculation about the dodgy transfusion. I trust the people I heard it from at least.

BTW I have no problem with speculating on a riders guilt without any proper evidence.

You do realize that such an intelligent well reasoned post like that has no place in the Clinic?

 

[blackcat]

It wasnt so much the sustained power that he missed there. It was more the 600W odd efforts for 40 seconds that made him loose time so quickly.

I have always beleived Cadel is clean. But only just. There are a lot of factors that would lead one to believe he is on the sauce ie:
- Pretty much every other top GT contender for the last decade has been
- He has a massive jaw looking like he abused HGH for years
- He looks like he has roid rage
- That TT at the end of the 2011 tour
- That meeting with Ferrari
- Tony Rominger as his former manager
- Having riden for dirty teams such as Mapei or T-Mobile
- Come on, as if a GT contender could be clean

On the other hand:
- He had that HGH face when he was a teenager
- Thats not roid rage. The guy is just a bit weird. For one anecdote, I saw him with his swanny after national champs last year and he almost lost his **** because the swanny gave him a drink before putting clean runners on.
My guess would be along the lines of obsessive compulsive disorder or a similar sort of anxiety related disorder. That can certainly make people lash out.
- It was only one meeting with Ferrari, and he didnt suddenly improve after that meeting. I've said hello to James Hird before, it didnt mean much.
- Rominger as manager.... yep that one isnt great.
- Re: 2011 TT, If you have ever raced stage races, you would know that sometimes you just have an inexplicably fast day. Just as you sometimes have inexplicably slow days. I still dont know why and I have kept detailed diaries trying to figure out what brings on good days and bad.
- Cadel has been consistent for most of his career. The years he has been called a wheelsucker are the years where climbing was off richter crazy fast.
The years he has won, he has climbed at consistent speeds to previous years. (Ok feel free to attack this point to pieces as I am really not going to spend the hours required to thoroughly reference it).
- Given the quantified benefits of doping (yes I can reference this and provide original papers if you really really want), it is feasible that he could be beating dopers. Its a long and convoluted explanation, but it is entirely possible.

The one nugget of information that tips me towards thinking he is clean comes from the 2004 Vuelta however. Evans was sitting 5th on GC at stage 5 and one night the whole team got sick except for Cadel. Even though Vinokourov went on to loose half an hour on one stage the team still didnt give Evans the team leadership.
Anyhow, the official explanation for the sickness was a dodgy fish salad causing an acute bout of gastro. But the word on the grapevine was a dodgy transfusion.

Its not really much to go on. But considering the evidence against Evans is purely speculation, I do like my little piece of counter-speculation about the dodgy transfusion. I trust the people I heard it from at least.

BTW I have no problem with speculating on a riders guilt without any proper evidence.

yeah good post. less steroid rage, more that anxiety/autism spectrum thing, not autistm per se. this is why cycling suited, but more mtb. not when Evans needs to be within a team and have a team ride for him, and be politically aware. if he had the team behind him, he could have been more successful, and it took the decade of his best years before BMC backed him to the hilt.

i think i may have mentioned the transfusion in the last thread on Evans from a few years back. but on the reverse, he got sick at pais vasco in about 2006 at lotto and was diagnosed with some esoteric illness which could have killed his career. if its cycling, its suss, if its not cycling, its none of my business, but cyclingnews news wire, did have a blurb

NB Brooks:
a bigger one supporting was the anecdote by Mapei staff, that in 2002 they were rapped after Garzelli had dropped and cuddles got the maglia rosa saving their Giro, they said "we dont even have him on anything". And also, John Bruyneel was bearish in the final week regarding Evans in the years he contended, thinking he could not go from the top two and win GC those years, he always thought the final tt was gonna be disappointing.

So these guys should know, they are the ultimate insider. the Ultimate insider. my own opinion, it was just managing the levels with recovery stuff like testo and hgh. Maybe he did some more preparation for Mondrisio.

But Mondrisio, the MVP for that race was Spartacus, by a far way, then Kolobnev was damn strong, and even the Slipstream rider Steve the mustache Cozza was lighting up the field. And the other doper, Ballan. Cant remember if there were anyother Spaniards there, but i always feel sorry for Spartacus when he lights up the race, and he does not get the chocolates.

But Steve Cozza for chrissakes. Like Michael Barry in Hamilton over the final laps. Those guys just dont have the rainbow pedigree.

 

[blackcat]

You do realize that such an intelligent well reasoned post like that has no place in the Clinic?

there was a previous thread that DearWiggo made on Evans about 24 months back

 

[blackcat]

- Re: 2011 TT, If you have ever raced stage races, you would know that sometimes you just have an inexplicably fast day. Just as you sometimes have inexplicably slow days. I still dont know why and I have kept detailed diaries trying to figure out what brings on good days and bad.

i talked to martin vinnicombe about this, and when his gold and silver and podiums at worlds and olympics were decided by 0.001 seconds. I said to him, this is a differentiation, which could be technique or position, but it is more likely to just be a circadian rhythm aka, which side of the bed did you get out of today. ok, so i am using a little licence. But elite sport has some premise that it can get to a position and with brailsford science dial in every variable to the enth of its life.

but you cannot manage some physiological function beyond that random variable inherent in the circadian rhythm.

 

[Brooks Fahey Baldwin]

i talked to martin vinnicombe about this, and when his gold and silver and podiums at worlds and olympics were decided by 0.001 seconds. I said to him, this is a differentiation, which could be technique or position, but it is more likely to just be a circadian rhythm aka, which side of the bed did you get out of today. ok, so i am using a little licence. But elite sport has some premise that it can get to a position and with brailsford science dial in every variable to the enth of its life.

but you cannot manage some physiological function beyond that random variable inherent in the circadian rhythm.

Well the problem with using science in cycling (ie the Brailsford approach) is that it just doesnt give the qualitative data you need.
Ronald McNair (of shuttle Challenger fame) said that science is like trying to learn how the game of chess is played by only ever watching one square at a time. Epistomologically it has its limits.

Thats the part I hate about coaching really. If you look at any scientific paper on any training regime; be it strength, tabata intervals, doing mega kms or even just doping; there are responders and there are non-responders. So seing that Tabata intervals boost VO2 max for the X group really doesnt help much, because not all of your athletes will respond well to it.

Track is nice to work with in that most variables can be controlled and/or quantified. When you can quantify something, you can figure out how to improve it. Road however...... Hence I laugh at the claims that aerodyanmic road frame manufacturers make. Sure 2% faster in a wind tunnel might be true, but thats not what decides races on the road. Hence the world tour isnt dominated by aero road frames or silly looking helmets.

Anyway, I got off on a tangent. But my diaries recorded min/max temperatures, UV index, all the regular training details like HR/power/kms etc, everything I ate, what I drank, how I felt, resting HR, when I got sick, the occasional blood test results, sleep quantity/quality, motivation levels, hours spent at work. For about a year I took my blood pressure before and after a ride. I really wanted to measure insulin levels too.

Despite all that data there were still strange good days and bad days for no apparent reason.
Maybe I should follow Brailsfords example and record the colour of the lights in my car to get those important details down pat.

Still, THERE WILL BE A REASON for such a variation. I just dont know what it is yet.

 

[blackcat]

Well the problem with using science in cycling (ie the Brailsford approach) is that it just doesnt give the qualitative data you need.
Ronald McNair (of shuttle Challenger fame) said that science is like trying to learn how the game of chess is played by only ever watching one square at a time. Epistomologically it has its limits.

Thats the part I hate about coaching really. If you look at any scientific paper on any training regime; be it strength, tabata intervals, doing mega kms or even just doping; there are responders and there are non-responders. So seing that Tabata intervals boost VO2 max for the X group really doesnt help much, because not all of your athletes will respond well to it.

Track is nice to work with in that most variables can be controlled and/or quantified. When you can quantify something, you can figure out how to improve it. Road however...... Hence I laugh at the claims that aerodyanmic road frame manufacturers make. Sure 2% faster in a wind tunnel might be true, but thats not what decides races on the road. Hence the world tour isnt dominated by aero road frames or silly looking helmets.

yaw angle

and no one can adequately model the peloton, and at such intangible, would not a pro roadie prefer a custom geometry from a master builder from the 80s on a columbus or reynolds steel, so their body is at its most relaxed when the heat goes on in the stage or day race

 

[Brooks Fahey Baldwin]

yaw angle

and no one can adequately model the peloton, and at such intangible, would not a pro roadie prefer a custom geometry from a master builder from the 80s on a columbus or reynolds steel, so their body is at its most relaxed when the heat goes on in the stage or day race

All I can say is "horses for courses". Roadies, even pros, are victims of marketing though. But fit is very important. My eyes bleed when I see some pros.
Anyway, I'll leave that there. This is a Cadel thread.