FoxxyBrown1111 said:I think more of Pantani (= AC, doped up since youth) vs. Ullrich (Froome the Diesel).
I side with Froome of course.
I am inclined to think Alberto could not afford dope back then.
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
FoxxyBrown1111 said:I think more of Pantani (= AC, doped up since youth) vs. Ullrich (Froome the Diesel).
I side with Froome of course.
LaFlorecita said:I am inclined to think Alberto could not afford dope back then.
the big ring said:Do you know who was he riding with?
Promising US & German juniors were doped by coaches and set a precedent for not needing to pay for it themselves.
LaFlorecita said:He was racing for small regional teams. I don't know anything about coaches, but I can't imagine why coaches would invest money in doping up someone who's just been racing for a year.
When Contador was 15, he began to compete in races at the amateur level in Spain, joining the Real Velo Club Portillo from Madrid. Although he got no victories that year or the next, he demonstrated great qualities and was soon nicknamed Pantani (after Marco Pantani, regarded as one of the best climbers of all time) for his climbing skills.[17] In 2000, he experienced his first victories, winning several mountains classification prizes from prominent events on the Spanish amateur cycling calendar.[16]
He dropped out of school at the age of 16 (1998) without having finished his Bachillerato and signed with Iberdrola-Loinaz, a youth team run by Manolo Saiz, manager of the professional ONCE cycling team. In 2001, he won the under-23 Spanish time trial championship.[18]
the big ring said:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Contador
I can.
ETA: You realise Manolo was involved in both the Festina affair (1998) AND Puerto, right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manolo_Saiz
the big ring said:
LaFlorecita said:That is false.
Check the palmares section of his website.
http://albertocontador.org/palmares/
He only started racing with Iberdrola in 2001 when he was 18 years old.
the big ring said:Apologies. There were footnotes but none of them support the team name in question. It's unfortunate we cannot read about those races from so long ago - it sounds like he was an outstanding junior.
LaFlorecita said:There are numerous stories about those races, you just need to take some time to explore google.es
FoxxyBrown1111 said:Fuentes, and the good ol 2 in 1 (Steak w/plasticzisers & clen).
You recall wrong. The plasticizer test wasn't used not because it was unreliable, but because it wasn't validated yet. The science behind it is sound.Runitout said:Funny, I seem to recall him being cleared by the prosecutors for Puerto, and the plasticisers test dismissed for being unreliable.
Do you have plasticizers in your urine?Runitout said:Funny, I seem to recall him being cleared by the prosecutors for Puerto, and the plasticisers test dismissed for being unreliable.
I doubt that Contador is a doper and used plasticisers, but bolstering your opinion with bogus bulldust does you no credit. He was not 'caught' either regarding Puerto or plasticisers. It's simply untrue.
Pity, but we've only caught him once.
Franklin said:I'm sure AC is a charger, but your bias that Froome is clean since his arrival at the pro's is amusing (based in what exactly?), besides Froome's teams are hardly better
And the proof of Marco doping as a juvenile?
Franklin said:I assume your claim of AC doping as a junior or amateur is more than bias? Odd because I can't find a link.
Then the evidence:
- Fuentes: No conclusive evidence without DNA
- Clen: Almost every expert concludes it's contaminated food/supplements
- plasticizers: unaccepted test so no admissable evidence.
Runitout said:Funny, I seem to recall him being cleared by the prosecutors for Puerto, and the plasticisers test dismissed for being unreliable.
I doubt that Contador is a doper and used plasticisers, but bolstering your opinion with bogus bulldust does you no credit. He was not 'caught' either regarding Puerto or plasticisers. It's simply untrue.
Pity, but we've only caught him once.
sittingbison said:This surprises me Franklin, because the very first time this argument was brought forth was after the CAS hearing, in explaining the presence of clen given the steak story was discredited. AC never suggested it, his lawyers never suggested it, Spanish authorities never suggested it, UCI never suggested it and Ashenden never suggested it. Ever.
As to the plasticizers, I think a certain obfuscation went on there, Ashenden was primed to give evidence, and a screaming match resulted during CAS. The inadmissibility was entirely debatable.
hrotha said:You recall wrong. The plasticizer test wasn't used not because it was unreliable, but because it wasn't validated yet. The science behind it is sound.
The Puerto case is full of shadows and pages in the police report mysteriously missing.
No_Balls said:Foxxys method in doping issues is "stick with the supposed good guys as long as possible". He have worked with lies and misinformation in debate before so nothing new there.
Time to clean up in the clinic. There are self proclaimed doping hunters in here who dont even put their noses in threads concerning Sky.
Cycle Chic said:that just seals Froome being a compulsive liar.
sittingbison said:This surprises me Franklin, because the very first time this argument was brought forth was after the CAS hearing, in explaining the presence of clen given the steak story was discredited. AC never suggested it, his lawyers never suggested it, Spanish authorities never suggested it, UCI never suggested it and Ashenden never suggested it. Ever.
As to the plasticizers, I think a certain obfuscation went on there, Ashenden was primed to give evidence, and a screaming match resulted during CAS. The inadmissibility was entirely debatable.
Fearless Greg Lemond said:Do you have plasticizers in your urine?
That whole CAS ruling was a joke. They searched and searched for a reason that Clen was in his body because they couldn't 100% prove he had a transfusion. Then they came up with a innocent but guilty verdict; a supplement that somehow got contamenated. Prove it CAS! They can't.Franklin said:Actually, I distinctly remembering this being tossed in the first time. The whole reason neither AC, the Lawyers, Ashenden (AC witness) and the Spanish union never put it forward is easy:
it's still a bannable offense.
The idea that AC would bring forward something that would cost him he TdF is insane, especially since he already got his defense past the Spanish union.
Explain.A lot of us do, especially after a warm day
the big ring said:via google translate.
FWIW - I appreciate your honesty here and can understand your position, to an extent.
It would be nice if there was a reliable method of determining someone's true athletic potential regardless of previous / current doping, etc. Where you could step into a machine and it would spit out some numbers. Those numbers do not speak to all factors that go into winning a race (luck, courage, dedication, etc), by any means, but it'd be nice for riders claiming to be clean to do a quick n easy test to "prove" themselves for the unwashed masses.
Fearless Greg Lemond said:That whole CAS ruling was a joke. They searched and searched for a reason that Clen was in his body because they couldn't 100% prove he had a transfusion. Then they came up with a innocent but guilty verdict; a supplement that somehow got contamenated. Prove it CAS! They can't.
Why hasn't Contador sued the 'supllement delivery boy' hence he had to pay millions of his salary to the UCI?
Explain.
Fearless Greg Lemond said:Why hasn't Contador sued the 'supllement delivery boy' hence he had to pay millions of his salary to the UCI?
Franklin said:Also, is the 'salary punishment' enforcable? Didn't MR win that one easily?
Did AC really pay his salary back?
And yes, he will have had a few million in damages either way due to lost price money and bonusses. Just not so sure if you can dock someone so easily here in Europe.
Franklin said:This is why I have to protest at claiming for a fact that either Marco or Alberto was a youth doper. We don't know and it's futile to try to get that history straight after all those years (at junior level data will be scarce, especially after ten years or longer).
What we know is enough, we don't have to make up our own reality.
Btw, Foxxy, Kenyans don't dope due to fear of HIV? HUH?
1. Epo and HIV have....mmmm zero connection?
2. Kenyan runners are absolutely above suspicion due to fears for HIV?
3. The stories of epo being available at low levels through running "doctors" is somehow impossible for Froome to obtain?
4. Blood doping your own blood is somehow connected with HIV?
I'm not going to claim Froome charged as a youth, but epo and blooddoping certainly are known in Kenya. The "HIV" argument is completely bogus. As if Kenyan athletes are dying left and right due to blood doping induced HIV...
FoxxyBrown1111 said:You wanna tell me when having no state sponsored program & no money like rich runners, you try your luck by risking blood doping in africa? WTF, try it out and show me your results after one year.