Teams & Riders He's coming home!!!! Alejandro Valverde comeback thread.

[The Hitch]

Are you seriously rolling out the 'never tested positive' line? I know you're not that naive.

No im not. A year ago you kept telling me that I allegedly believe every single human being to touch a bike was a Ferrari client. Now you are accusing me of claiming Valverde is clean.

If I was rolling out the "never tested positive line", I would not have offered option 2 in my post

2 He was doping but had a good way to avoid testing positive in which case that method should work as much now as it did 1 and a half years ago, especially since the existing order is pretty much the same as it was then.

Once upon a time Di Luca was the World no. 1 who had never tested positive as well.

Yes.

And then.

He tested positive. So he couldnt go back to his 09 programme because it failed.

Alejandro Valverde did not test positive on his 09 programme (be it significant substance abuse, training harder than everyone else or simply praying harder than everyone else) so he can go back to it.

Why, because, unlike Di Luca, it never failed.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Valverde tried to say good bye to doping before 2007 season. As far as its possible, of course. I don't think GT's are overcome without a pharma nutrition. He decided to ride in peace with no bluff. Its rather obvious based on his perfomances. I don't like him either honestly particularly after his unattractive behavior on Operacion Puerto. Perhaps he's the most contradictory figure (besides Contador) among the current riders. I'm really surprised with the fact he's got so much support in this forum.

He was a pariah for a long time, and the hypocritical cheering that went on when he was finally banned, often from those who supported Vino and Riccò's comebacks, was deafening.

But absence makes the heart grow fonder, and people have realised that actually, they kind of miss what he brought to races. Many places trying to suggest that this season just gone is one of the greatest ever, but if I'm honest I can't remember a more boring year for cycling. Plus a lot of it is wishful thinking, because we really want somebody to be able to challenge Gilbert and make hilly classics less boring, and Valverde is somebody with high pedigree in those races who was not there last year.

 

[airstream]

It's pretty obvious is not about the dope. The guy is no better than Armstrong clinic wise but still has a lot of fans and while Armstrong only have WonderLance and Polish...

Sure. But it seems to me he's probably the most boring GT rider among those who was always considered to be a favourite for the last 4-5 years. Valverde is so-so TT, suffering in the mountains and sprint, his main weapon without which he couldn't have won the Vuelta. Yeah, he has ocean of merits on classics and Dauhine, but..

 

[auscyclefan94]

I haven't thought of one yet but I think we should start a little bet with myself and the Valverde fans. Any suggestions?

 

[Mellow Velo]

It's pretty obvious is not about the dope. The guy is no better than Armstrong clinic wise but still has a lot of fans and while Armstrong only have WonderLance and Polish...

Two differences: Time served and tarnished reputation.

Odd to me is the fact that those who continue to deny the probability that Armstrong cheated, are usually the toughest critics of returning transgressors.

Although, in Valverde's case, given no contrition, it is understandable.

 

[The Hitch]

Without the dope he'll probably be as good as Di Luca is now.

Also, and Im willing to take this to the clinic if there is a thread for it, but it was you who brought the clinic into this thread.

How do you know Valverde was doping in 08, 09 and 2010.

I mean you are after-all the great anti defamation crusader, who suggests to riders (in the hope that they read the forum) to sue cycling news every-time a speculative thread about a rider is opened in the clinic.

You defend many riders of the charge of doping and attack their accusers, placing a lot of stock in the fact that (like Valverde) they passed tests.

So how do you know Valverde was doping in these years after OP. And if he was (and clearly managing to get away with it) would you not then concede that some of the riders you defend so vigorously, could have been getting away with it, just like him?

 

[Michielveedeebee]

I haven't thought of one yet but I think we should start a little bet with myself and the Valverde fans. Any suggestions?

He'll win a classic

 

[auscyclefan94]

It needs to be a competition between Valverde and Evans imo. But thanks for the suggestion.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

It needs to be a competition between Valverde and Evans imo. But thanks for the suggestion.

Who will finish higher on CQRanking in the 2012 season?

Even though it's more than a year out in the future, I'll take the bet fwiw!

 

[The Hitch]

Valverde tried to say good bye to doping before 2007 season. As far as its possible, of course. I don't think GT's are overcome without a pharma nutrition. He decided to ride in peace with no bluff. Its rather obvious based on his perfomances. I don't like him either honestly particularly after his unattractive behavior on Operacion Puerto. Perhaps he's the most contradictory figure (besides Contador) among the current riders. .

Umm, so you say you don't think GTS are overcome without some "pharma nutrition" but hate Valverde because he takes "some pharma nutrition".

So why don't you feel the same towards all the other riders then?

I'm really surprised with the fact he's got so much support in this forum

Valverde has a lot of support because like Contador and like Evans, (in fact probably more than those 2) he goes 100% for every race he enters.

No training for Valverde on camera. He does his training behind the scenes, and when the lights are on bright, he races, classic, stage race or GT, doesnt matter he is there to win.

If he doesn't feel he can win a race (or at least stages in a race), he doesn't enter.

For me there is something really admirable in such an attitude.

Of course considering your fierce hatred of Scarponi and Contador (2 riders who live by this method) and presumed liking of Andy Schleck, I'm guessing you don't quite understand the appeal of such a quality.

 

[Walkman]

Also, and Im willing to take this to the clinic if there is a thread for it, but it was you who brought the clinic into this thread.

How do you know Valverde was doping in 08, 09 and 2010.

I mean you are after-all the great anti defamation crusader, who suggests to riders (in the hope that they read the forum) to sue cycling news every-time a speculative thread about a rider is opened in the clinic.

You defend many riders of the charge of doping and attack their accusers, placing a lot of stock in the fact that (like Valverde) they passed tests.

So how do you know Valverde was doping in these years after OP. And if he was (and clearly managing to get away with it) would you not then concede that some of the riders you defend so vigorously, could have been getting away with it, just like him?

Don't wanna drag it to the clinic but how do everybody "know" that LA cheated in 2002-2005? Once you pop, you won't stop...

There is a difference between rider heavily linked with a lot of clinic related stuffs and other rider such as Chavanel just because you never hear anything about them. But of course there is a chance everyone is popping like crazy.

 

[The Hitch]

Don't wanna drag it to the clinic but how do everybody "know" that LA cheated in 2002-2005? Once you pop, you won't stop...

There is a difference between rider heavily linked with a lot of clinic related stuffs and other rider such as Chavanel just because you never hear anything about them. But of course there is a chance everyone is popping like crazy.

The question was directed specifically at Mambo based on his posting history.

Im not asking why someone in general would think that Valverde is doping, but rather specifically asking him, how he consoles his posts in this thread with opinions he has fiercely put forward in the clinic over the last few years.

 

[Zoncolan]

Don't wanna drag it to the clinic but how do everybody "know" that LA cheated in 2002-2005? Once you pop, you won't stop...

Before it gets moved - because his W/kg went up.

 

[airstream]

Umm, so you say you don't think GTS are overcome without some "pharma nutrition" but hate Valverde because he takes "some pharma nutrition".

So why don't you feel the same towards all the other riders then?

Its ok. There're so many attempts to divide between "to be a fan" and "to hate"...I'm not that emotional to hate. I just don't like his racing style. Pharma can be very different, as you certainly know, including a legal one. Sure, living on porridge and water, nobody can ride GT.

 

[roundabout]

Let's face it, Valverde didn't fail any tests and was caught somewhat, err, indirectly.

http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/4238/5048/0/Award20Valverdi20139620&201402.pdf

Given this and the support he received over in the Iberian peninsula from the authorities would it be much of a stretch to presume that: 1) he should still have full confidence in his preparation and 2) there's no reason for him to change anything drastically

So yeah, I'd make an educated guess that he will come out flying and make Rebellin 2011 look like Di Luca.

 

[El Pistolero]

I don't get this comment.

He was rolling world number 1 for over 100 straight weeks on the cq rankings right up to his suspension.

He did not test positive once during that time.

Which leads to 2 options.

1 he was not doping, in which case he has already shown he can be one of the absolute best in the world without dope.

2 He was doping but had a good way to avoid testing positive in which case that method should work as much now as it did 1 and a half years ago, especially since the existing order is pretty much the same as it was then.

He was blood doping, there's no tests that can detect that. Sure, you have the biological passport, but anyone can beat that with the right doctor. Valverde's recuperation skills are his main weakness, so to see him win a Grand Tour is very suspicious to say the least.

 

[El Pistolero]

if the rumours that he has been training like a mad man over the last 2 years are true i can see him returning to his former self by the ardennes (if he races a heavy early season schedule to get some racing k in his legs) and really shale things up

him and costa will show gilbert and the schlecks how a real 1-2 tactic is done

Rui Costa and Valverde versus GVA, PG and CE



Valvede, even if he gets in shape at the right time, will get murdered at LBL. Cadel Evans will constantly attack and Valverde will be forced to chase with Gilbert sitting on his wheel. The moment Valverde gets close to Cadel, Gilbert will jump away and leave him for death.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

He was blood doping, there's no tests that can detect that. Sure, you have the biological passport, but anyone can beat that with the right doctor. Valverde's recuperation skills are his main weakness, so to see him win a Grand Tour is very suspicious to say the least.

To be fair, the GT he won packed all of its relevant stages into the first two weeks, and in week 3 his team just let the break go over and over again. And on the first mountain stage nobody of any consequence attacked until the last kilometre (and Cunego had already lost plenty of time in the ITT and of course didn't have much intention of finishing anyway), then when they got to the three in a row, he cracked on the last of them only to come back anyway.

I didn't find Valverde winning that Vuelta suspicious. If they'd had a properly difficult stage instead of the La Granja finish when Cobo won, and a TT that was maybe 10-15km longer at the end, then maybe, but as it was, it was a frontloaded parcours that gave him a good chance at the victory regardless.

Not to mention that unlike 2008 he hadn't done the Tour first and unlike 2006 he hadn't been injured and was able to approach it fresh with ideal preparation (winning Burgos too). The only others that could say that were Samuel Sánchez, who came 2nd and lost out a bit thanks to being involved in the Liège crash, and Ezequiel Mosquera, and it's not a massive stretch to state that Valverde is a better GT rider than Ezequiel.

 

[roundabout]

Funnily enough when he rode the Vuelta in 03 he was one of the best if not better than Heras after the Pyrenees.

 

[Andrichuk]

"Movistar team doctor says Valverde rode 48,000km this year, weighs less than after 2008 TdF + does "3000 sit ups a day". On average that works out at more than 150km a day. And 3,000 sit ups works out at one every 29 seconds, even during the night. via @thomas_lequipe"

Got that from @inrng's twitter account.

 

[scullster46]

"Movistar team doctor says Valverde rode 48,000km this year, weighs less than after 2008 TdF + does "3000 sit ups a day". On average that works out at more than 150km a day. And 3,000 sit ups works out at one every 29 seconds, even during the night. via @thomas_lequipe"

Got that from @inrng's twitter account.

This excites me very much

 

[gregrowlerson]

Valverde will be wise to ride only the Vuelta and concentrate on the classics and one-week races the rest of the year.

I second this.

 

[greenedge]

I won't mind him but i wonder how much he will win. He has a strong team but he won't be able to go better than a top 5 at the Vuelta in my view. He could win a monument. I hope he goes head to head against Gilbert in stage 1 of the TDF and will go stage hunting at other times. WC could be a good goal as well.

 

[greenedge]

Rui Costa and Valverde versus GVA, PG and CE



Valvede, even if he gets in shape at the right time, will get murdered at LBL. Cadel Evans will constantly attack and Valverde will be forced to chase with Gilbert sitting on his wheel. The moment Valverde gets close to Cadel, Gilbert will jump away and leave him for death.

GV, RC and AV Versus GVA, PG, AB, MF and CE.

 

[ramjambunath]

As much as many dislike them, the Schlecks are always good bets for second place. Put them in the mix as well.