Evans and his meeting with Ferrari?

Page 8 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 6, 2014
1,645
318
11,180
There's plenty of good - but speculative - reasoning against Cadel being clean here. The mere reality of the era is compelling in itself.

One speculative reason the other way has always bugged me a bit: when he was up for winning GT's in mid-naughties, neither Telekom nor Lotto ever fully committed to him. We could say 'ah, well he didn't have the right personality, etc etc' - but it could also be that they knew he didn't have the fuel to win in that climate. Add to that the fulfilling of his potential right in the midst of the blood passport epoch (i.e. when it was seemingly most efficacious), the consistency throughout and then getting blown out of the water when Sky starts marching in with Rogers et al on the train.....and there is a plausible narrative of cleanliness.

Not saying it's true, or that I necessarily believe it - but if we are involved in speculative reasoning, that narrative is worth contemplating.
 
Aug 6, 2009
2,111
7
11,495
Re: Re:

Wallace said:
goggalor said:
The Clinic reaches a new high.

I couldn't agree more. This has to be the stupidest and most venomous discussion I've ever seen in these forums.

And it stops NOW. Back on topic. Any more such posts in the direction it's been going will be deleted.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
Rominger. why dont people point to Rominger. I think Ferrari had a share in his management company. ofcourse, he sold to IMG about a decade back. But it was Tony that got Cuddles tested with the good doctor, his C-Dale mtb team arranged (p'raps with TR) the hookup with Saeco Cannondale, in about 2001 when he wins Wiesbauer Tour (Tour of Austria) as a stagiare on Saeco. need to start with Rominger and mtb for the chronology
 
Sep 7, 2014
1,134
0
10,480
Re:

The Hegelian said:
There's plenty of good - but speculative - reasoning against Cadel being clean here. The mere reality of the era is compelling in itself.

One speculative reason the other way has always bugged me a bit: when he was up for winning GT's in mid-naughties, neither Telekom nor Lotto ever fully committed to him. We could say 'ah, well he didn't have the right personality, etc etc' - but it could also be that they knew he didn't have the fuel to win in that climate. Add to that the fulfilling of his potential right in the midst of the blood passport epoch (i.e. when it was seemingly most efficacious), the consistency throughout and then getting blown out of the water when Sky starts marching in with Rogers et al on the train.....and there is a plausible narrative of cleanliness.

Not saying it's true, or that I necessarily believe it - but if we are involved in speculative reasoning, that narrative is worth contemplating.

The performance in 2007 tour makes this line of plausibility rather implausible
 
Jul 6, 2014
1,645
318
11,180
Re: Re:

TheGreenMonkey said:
The Hegelian said:
There's plenty of good - but speculative - reasoning against Cadel being clean here. The mere reality of the era is compelling in itself.

One speculative reason the other way has always bugged me a bit: when he was up for winning GT's in mid-naughties, neither Telekom nor Lotto ever fully committed to him. We could say 'ah, well he didn't have the right personality, etc etc' - but it could also be that they knew he didn't have the fuel to win in that climate. Add to that the fulfilling of his potential right in the midst of the blood passport epoch (i.e. when it was seemingly most efficacious), the consistency throughout and then getting blown out of the water when Sky starts marching in with Rogers et al on the train.....and there is a plausible narrative of cleanliness.

Not saying it's true, or that I necessarily believe it - but if we are involved in speculative reasoning, that narrative is worth contemplating.

The performance in 2007 tour makes this line of plausibility rather implausible

Indeed. We'd need a good story to get us past that one. Any takers?
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
Re: Re:

The Hegelian said:
Indeed. We'd need a good story to get us past that one. Any takers?

if i can patronise you, there were a few posts by Dear Wiggo and blackcat(thirdperson) where the for and against were listed. I do find it amusing that in the year of Bernie Kohl, Hog said he could not win the night before the tt. And Ferrari saying he was an idiot.

it depends how you define "clean". I think he took things, but under the radar. Is never tested positive clean? then he was clean, never breached any threshold.
 
Jul 6, 2014
1,645
318
11,180
Re: Re:

blackcat said:
The Hegelian said:
Indeed. We'd need a good story to get us past that one. Any takers?

if i can patronise you, there were a few posts by Dear Wiggo and blackcat(thirdperson) where the for and against were listed. I do find it amusing that in the year of Bernie Kohl, Hog said he could not win the night before the tt. And Ferrari saying he was an idiot.

it depends how you define "clean". I think he took things, but under the radar. Is never tested positive clean? then he was clean, never breached any threshold.

Like most in these parts, I think that definition of clean is beyond idiocy. I suppose the issue for me, in assuming dirtiness, is that the assumption basically rests on the universality of the dirty peloton - the era itself.

It's a compelling assumption, and one we have to take as axiomatic, but it's probably still a bit overdetermined. I'm not sure how well this counts as evidence, but reading Millar's famed confession-autobiography of those times, the picture that emerges is one in which doping is far more sporadic, unsystematic, contextual and particular: sometimes he doped up, sometimes he didn't; some of his peers were clearly doped to the gills, some weren't. i.e. it was not quite as universal as we treat it here.

With Cadel, the Ferrari meeting is definitely a red flag. But then, there's nothing else really to hang our hats on, other than this universal axiom. I can't remember him ever doing anything ridiculous/mutant on a bike.
 
Jul 6, 2014
1,645
318
11,180
Re:

Lyon said:
What if barely hanging on was him being mutant?

Well, indeed, it may have been.

But it's also a 'what if'.

Being mutant gains all of its semantic traction by being completely unambiguous. We look and we just know, automatically. i.e. Riis in the big ring, Froome in one of his seated frenzies etc. I don't think we can seriously argue that Evans hanging on on a big col, looking bloody dreadful, exemplified that mutantcy.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
Re:

Lyon said:
What if barely hanging on was him being mutant?

that's the thing that is lost on most contributors.

the necessity to baseline the potential and talent.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
Re: Re:

The Hegelian said:
Being mutant gains all of its semantic traction by being completely unambiguous. We look and we just know, automatically. i.e. Riis in the big ring, Froome in one of his seated frenzies etc. I don't think we can seriously argue that Evans hanging on on a big col, looking bloody dreadful, exemplified that mutantcy.

is not it relative tho? we have significant evidence the pointy end is charged. I am not arguing Leipheimer following wheels looks mutant, but p'raps, he was only a domestic parking-lot crits rider.

Evans did indeed test at what I thought was the highest VO2max besides a rower at the Canberra Australian Institute of Sport. I thought it was about 92, but I heard Brett Aitken the Sydney madison gold medalist was higher, OGrady about the same, and Will Walker about where Brett Aitken was. And the most recent I hear was Cuddles was 88.

but I thought the most recent sports science looked to a ramp test as a better indicator.

Dear Wiggo and blackcat(third person) had compiled the for and against elements. I reckon he was a ridiculously naturally talented athlete, like his coach Aldo Sassi said, he would be the greatest of his generation if he won the tour. I think he was amongst the best, but I think like his contemporaries who were his rivals for the best, he probably did the recovery therapy at a minimum. the fact that bruyneel and ferrari spoke about him scornfully, is a significant factor in his favour.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
Re: Re:

The Hegelian said:
But it's also a 'what if'.

Being mutant gains all of its semantic traction by being completely unambiguous. We look and we just know, automatically. i.e. Riis in the big ring, Froome in one of his seated frenzies etc. I don't think we can seriously argue that Evans hanging on on a big col, looking bloody dreadful, exemplified that mutantcy.

second point, second reply.

how about if concerns were baselined, from previous form that we understood as norms. Riis was a solid domestique. Wiggins and Froome were solid pros like all of the peloton, and indeed, I was was of the promoters of Froome, on the back of Siutsou and his first Tdf, their debut with Barloworld and John Robertson's team around 2008. I have no doubt they were doping then, unlike other cases, I do have a backstory there, but they were phenomenally talented riders who demonstrated significant talent.

But Froome and Wiggins dropping about 7-8% bodyweight? this was absolute bullsh!t. We saw them when they weighed 72kg, and 74kg, and Froome was in the front group, but Wiggins was in the gruppetto.

Evans was always just hanging on to the front group in the final 7kms. He could never attack. p'raps indeed that was mutant for his talent. just not extra mutant like Armstrong and Contador and Rasmussen
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
Re: Re:

The Hegelian said:
Like most in these parts, I think that definition of clean is beyond idiocy. I suppose the issue for me, in assuming dirtiness, is that the assumption basically rests on the universality of the dirty peloton - the era itself.

It's a compelling assumption, and one we have to take as axiomatic, but it's probably still a bit overdetermined. I'm not sure how well this counts as evidence, but reading Millar's famed confession-autobiography of those times, the picture that emerges is one in which doping is far more sporadic, unsystematic, contextual and particular: sometimes he doped up, sometimes he didn't; some of his peers were clearly doped to the gills, some weren't. i.e. it was not quite as universal as we treat it here.

With Cadel, the Ferrari meeting is definitely a red flag. But then, there's nothing else really to hang our hats on, other than this universal axiom. I can't remember him ever doing anything ridiculous/mutant on a bike.
I think it is relative like you imply. And I don't buy Millar's diffused individual doping. I think that it is individual, but under Game Theory principles, they are compelled to maintain a plausible deniability for their teams. There cannot be official networks, and team networks. But how is everyone using Fuentes in 2006, how is a dozen or more still using Ferrari. They pursue, what they can pursue, what is not denied to them.

If Cancellara did indeed use a motor, which I am not sure, I have doubts, then I would be sure the peloton knows he used the motor. I am sure that people in the peloton know what Sky and Froome/Wiggins are using.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
and Floyd might have been the most talented of his generation, but just got a poor rub of the green. '

idiom for treatment that was not helpful for a premier rider.
 
Aug 5, 2009
15,733
8,159
28,180
Re: Re:

blackcat said:
The Hegelian said:
But it's also a 'what if'.

Being mutant gains all of its semantic traction by being completely unambiguous. We look and we just know, automatically. i.e. Riis in the big ring, Froome in one of his seated frenzies etc. I don't think we can seriously argue that Evans hanging on on a big col, looking bloody dreadful, exemplified that mutantcy.

second point, second reply.

how about if concerns were baselined, from previous form that we understood as norms. Riis was a solid domestique. Wiggins and Froome were solid pros like all of the peloton, and indeed, I was was of the promoters of Froome, on the back of Siutsou and his first Tdf, their debut with Barloworld and John Robertson's team around 2008. I have no doubt they were doping then, unlike other cases, I do have a backstory there, but they were phenomenally talented riders who demonstrated significant talent.

But Froome and Wiggins dropping about 7-8% bodyweight? this was absolute bullsh!t. We saw them when they weighed 72kg, and 74kg, and Froome was in the front group, but Wiggins was in the gruppetto.

Evans was always just hanging on to the front group in the final 7kms. He could never attack. p'raps indeed that was mutant for his talent. just not extra mutant like Armstrong and Contador and Rasmussen

That was the thing that got me about Evans' critics. He never attacked in the mountains but the fact is he was never the best in the mountains, not even second best. The year he won the Tour he was not the best and he was trying to control the attacks of others apart from two small attacks he made on the Alpe which were quickly countered. Most of his critics assumed he never attacked because he was a wheelsucker but often it appeared to me that he was already on the limit responding to the attacks of others. Does this mean he did not dope ? No it doesn't.

Many people refer to the 2007 Tour pointing out that to go so close and to be able to ride with Rasmussen and Contador he must have been doping. At that stage of his career Evans had already been around for a while, Contador was pretty much a new pro and very young, Rasmussen was doping but was he as talented as Evans ? I think there is enough circumstantial evidence regarding Evans to create doubt on both sides of the argument but the Rominger/Ferrari connection plus his performances comparative to other riders seems to be enough evidence for some. He finished eighth in his first Tour won by Armstrong and his progression was not sudden. Fifth a year later then two seconds, after a late start to GTs after being sidelined at Telekom. He never had the early success that many other riders had at a younger age in GTs which I think is in his favour although not proof one way or the other. It was interesting that Sastre and Evans both broke though for their GT wins late in their careers although looking at their respective records Evans was the bigger talent.
 
Feb 16, 2011
1,456
5
0
You see, UCI, this is what happens when no one tests positive in ages - people in the clinic start showing how unmarriageable they are. Just give them somebody not retired to spew about. Please.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
Stingray34 said:
You see, UCI, this is what happens when no one tests positive in ages - people in the clinic start showing how unmarriageable they are. Just give them somebody not retired to spew about. Please.
no, we ain't nubile (thats not a double negative its a pleonasm), but Cuddles aint still a pro
 
Aug 5, 2009
15,733
8,159
28,180
Re:

Gung Ho Gun said:
He did have early success in GTs though, wearing the pink jersey in the 2002 Giro's final mountain stage (but he lost 20 minutes in that one stage)
Who else in this TT would anyone consider clean?
http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=8929

To me that is not a success. Anyone can bonk but it also could have been fatigue as well. Even without bonking he still may have lost some time. Cunego won a Giro when he was what, 21 ? Andy Schleck was on the podium at a young age and many people predicted Schleck to be a superstar and he never won a GT on the road.