Odd remark by McQuaid re: Worlds/Alberto?

[Polish]

Did McQuaid know Alberto was suspended when he made these comments reported a couple days ago?

If he did, why try to "blame" Alberto's no-show on Greg and Lance?

“Greg LeMond started that trend and then Lance Armstrong, Alberto Contador followed up,” International Cycling Union (UCI) president Pat McQuaid told Reuters.

Three-times Tour champion Contador, who signed a contract worth around five million euros ($6.67 million) a year to join Saxo Bank, should ride a “full season”, Irishman McQuaid said.

The Spaniard effectively ended his season after the Tour de France

http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news?slug=reu-worldschedule
.
.
.

 

[DAOTEC]

That McQuaid is lying about everything:

Just published: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5...ays-rider-may-have-received-transfusions.aspx

Must have know it al already for weeks with A and B already performed.


German journalist claims UCI denied Alberto Contador positive test, says rider may have received transfusions

 

[DirtyWorks]

“Greg LeMond started that trend and then Lance Armstrong, Alberto Contador followed up,” International Cycling Union (UCI) president Pat McQuaid told Reuters.

You must be young or very, very new to the sport of cycling. Your posts now make sense.

LeMond started the trend of the TdF winner consistently not attending World's. LeMond was considered the first rider to focus on preparing exclusively on the TdF later in his career and then not really worrying about results for the rest of the year. There have always been sprinter, classics, climber specialists. This was different. LeMond made himself a TdF specialist and generated huge amounts of interest and (at that time) money. This was new at the time.

A common criticism was LeMond was a champion, but no Merckx. You should incorporate that into your Armstrong man-crush somehow.

BTW, there's no doubt Pat knew plenty about the positive as somewhere it's published the positive finding was sent to Pharmador in August. The bigger question is how many positives weren't ajudicated(sp) by Pat this year or the last 10 years.

 

[Tibber]

Seeing as how LeMond won worlds in '89 and '83, maybe moving worlds from august to september had more to do with Greg and other tour champs skipping worlds....

 

[djconnel]

Dingdingdingdingding....

Look in the mirror Pat... there's your problem!

 

[Mambo95]

Did McQuaid know Alberto was suspended when he made these comments reported a couple days ago?

If he did, why try to "blame" Alberto's no-show on Greg and Lance?

“Greg LeMond started that trend and then Lance Armstrong, Alberto Contador followed up,” International Cycling Union (UCI) president Pat McQuaid told Reuters.

Three-times Tour champion Contador, who signed a contract worth around five million euros ($6.67 million) a year to join Saxo Bank, should ride a “full season”, Irishman McQuaid said.

The Spaniard effectively ended his season after the Tour de France

http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news?slug=reu-worldschedule
.
.
.

Contador didn't do the Worlds in 2007 or 2009 and showed no inclination of doing them in 2010. (He's only ever done them in 2008 - DNF). So McQuaid is right.

It's the UCI's own fault, the Worlds should be in August as they used to be.

 

[djconnel]

Comparisons with Merckx are unfair anyway. A better comparison to Merckx would be women's racing today. The women can't afford to focus on one race, unless you're Jeannie Longo, so as a result they don't have to compete against riders focusing on one race (except Jeannie Longo). Once enough money comes into the sport that specialization becomes possible, it almost becomes necessary.

 

[tempo e tempi]

Contador didn't do the Worlds in 2007 or 2009 and showed no inclination of doing them in 2010. (He's only ever done them in 2008 - DNF). So McQuaid is right.

It's the UCI's own fault, the Worlds should be in August as they used to be.

Agreed. Then we'd have a truly competitive Vuelta through to the last day, instead of everyone with an eye on the Worlds missing the 3rd week.

 

[NashbarShorts]

You must be young or very, very new to the sport of cycling. Your posts now make sense.

LeMond started the trend of the TdF winner consistently not attending World's...

As fun as it seems to be to beatup on Polish, I think he was merely quoting McQuaid.

Also, you might be "very new to the sport" if you don't remember that World's used to be run in August when all the top riders were still in form. The UCI destroyed the road Worlds by moving it to October. It really has NOTHING to do w/ Lemond.

Also I'm old enough to know that Lemond has ridden Paris-Roubaix several times. I think he even finished 4th once. Can you let me know how Lance has fared at Roubaix?

And it hasn't helped that now the UCI sees fit to run it on a sprinter's course every few years now, so that guys like Cipo can be World Champ. That is a joke. Of course a Contador is not even going to take part in that kind of parcours. Why would he??

 

[Polish]

Guys, I found the comments from McQuaid odd because he did not acknowledge that Alberto was suspended as the reason he was not at Worlds.

Granted, Alberto would not have raced Worlds anyway, and McQuaid's reason was probably correct - but he did sidestep the real issue for 2010....

 

[Master50]

Until all the checks are done the UCI may not even hint at the reason if the rider is non-negative. So if Pat is actually keeping a secret I think that is exactly what he is required to do.

 

[Polish]

Until all the checks are done the UCI may not even hint at the reason if the rider is non-negative. So if Pat is actually keeping a secret I think that is exactly what he is required to do.

I understand that. Wait until after the B sample fails etc.

But why the lame explanation that Alberto was like Greg and Lance.
I just think that was a bit odd. He was critsizing Alberto for NOT being there.
Seems a bit unfair.

 

[skidmark]

Having not been a cycling fan until about 6 years ago, I'm unclear as to how LeMond would get the reputation of focusing solely on the Tour and skipping the worlds, as at least on the surface this doesn't seem to be the case. He won the worlds twice, and once in the same year he won the tour. Could anyone clarify how this perception came to be?

 

[Vonn Brinkman]

Having not been a cycling fan until about 6 years ago, I'm unclear as to how LeMond would get the reputation of focusing solely on the Tour and skipping the worlds, as at least on the surface this doesn't seem to be the case. He won the worlds twice, and once in the same year he won the tour. Could anyone clarify how this perception came to be?

McQuaid is just stressing. As always.

 

[NashbarShorts]

Having not been a cycling fan until about 6 years ago, I'm unclear as to how LeMond would get the reputation of focusing solely on the Tour and skipping the worlds, as at least on the surface this doesn't seem to be the case. He won the worlds twice, and once in the same year he won the tour. Could anyone clarify how this perception came to be?

Umm, there are a lot of misperceptions about Lemond...most of them batted about by the Lance-lovers.

When Lemond rode, teams often had clauses in place that the rider was obligated to race a certain # of days/year. Thus, the "specialization" you see today did not really exist. Also, Lemond rode for European/French teams, and they expected him to race the whole season.

Did he key on the TdF?, of course. But not to the extent of later riders. Nowadays, it is not uncommon for GC riders (even jokers who barely crack the top 15) to go on 4-month vacation after the Tour ends. At some point in the 90's, also the UCI made the disastrous decision to push Worlds to season's end. The result was many top riders just blew it off.

Anyways, Lemond was a decent guy, friendly personality, gracious champion, and was sure money at the Worlds when he was healthy. He aint half the bad person that many of "newer" cycling fans will purport him to be. And he rode Roubaix as late as '92, only a few years before his career ended. He finished Top 10 that year and was animated at the front, blocking for his teammate (who won). Not bad for a "July specialist"...

 

[AngusW]

Umm, there are a lot of misperceptions about Lemond...most of them batted about by the Lance-lovers.

When Lemond rode, teams often had clauses in place that the rider was obligated to race a certain # of days/year. Thus, the "specialization" you see today did not really exist. Also, Lemond rode for European/French teams, and they expected him to race the whole season.

Did he key on the TdF?, of course. But not to the extent of later riders. Nowadays, it is not uncommon for GC riders (even jokers who barely crack the top 15) to go on 4-month vacation after the Tour ends. At some point in the 90's, also the UCI made the disastrous decision to push Worlds to season's end. The result was many top riders just blew it off.

Anyways, Lemond was a decent guy, friendly personality, gracious champion, and was sure money at the Worlds when he was healthy. He aint half the bad person that many of "newer" cycling fans will purport him to be. And he rode Roubaix as late as '92, only a few years before his career ended. He finished Top 10 that year and was animated at the front, blocking for his teammate (who won). Not bad for a "July specialist"...

+ 1

I agree that McQuaid is way off the mark saying that Lemond started the trend of Tour winners avoiding the world champs. Lemond rode every world champs from 82 - 90 (except 87 - 88 when injured) and was in the top 4 five times. The years he won the Tour, his WC performance was 14th(?), 1st and 4th. He even attended the 1988 WC as a spectator. I don't know if he rode at the WC from 91 - 94; perhaps someone can enlighten us on that.

As to who started the trend of Tour winners avoiding the world champs; discount that other oft-maligned "specialist" Indurain - he was on the podium at the WC in '91, '93, '95 (this is for your benefit, Pat, I am ashamed that the head of the UCI knows so little about cycling history!). Riis apparently did the WC in '96, so maybe Ullrich started the trend?

The only thing worse than the head of the UCI being so ignorant about certain Tour winners' racing history is that the writer of the article did not even point out how wrong McQuaid was. I'm no cycling historian so my apologies for any inaccuracies in what I've posted, but journalists should be able to check a few facts, assuming that they don't know this stuff off the top of their heads.

 

[Race Radio]

Until all the checks are done the UCI may not even hint at the reason if the rider is non-negative. So if Pat is actually keeping a secret I think that is exactly what he is required to do.

The B sample had already been tested. As it came back positive the result should have already been in the public domain

 

[Master50]

The B sample had already been tested. As it came back positive the result should have already been in the public domain

It was still reported that Contador reported the positive because German TV was about to report it (leak it) Due process still had not run it's course.