Digger said:
I don't understand how seventh and tenth in World TT furthers your point. Those are small fields to begin with.
But aside from that, let's talk about me cherry picking...I included the Dauphine stage he won, yet you didn't include the Giro TT stage from 2008 where he came 157th.
I have no problem with that - that 157th is so anomalous it's hard not to come to the conclusion something happened - it's not only much much worse than most of his other GT TT's, it's much worse than most of his TT's period, even the one's you cited. AS such, I'm not sure what it could possibly be indicitive of except injury or illness, or some strange form of matchfixing
And even if we concede all this, that he was as good a TT rider as you say, how did he improve his climbing so suddenly, that he's able to ride with the best climbers, and most notorious dopers? All whilst actually improving his power.
That's more like it, Digger. THAT's a good point. I don't know the answer. Obviously pretty sharp weight loss is some part of it - while his TT'ing was pretty good-very good even before he left track, his mountaineering specifically seems to start after he left track. But the thing is, asking the question is the start of the analysis, not the end of it. Jumping straight from the question - How? to an accusation - Doping? without any evidence in between only serves to fill up these forums - it doesn't solve anything.
Look, if you dare, at Armstrong. For years people said, where's the evidence, and of course Lance-ites said - no positives, no evidence at all. Except, that was a lie. A complete lie. There
WAS evidence.
Plenty of it, even before decent drug testing or a blood passport. And LA and Bruyneel successfully, for a long time, hid it in plain sight, with help from UCI. Not just questions, not just 'look at him climb' (although he was hammering completely doped pure climbers like pantani) - but actual evidence - multiple testimony, a couple of positives. Lance wasn't nailed by questions. he was nailed by answers, specifically, evidence. As was Landis. As was Pantani. Indeed, for me one of the interesting things is we keep hearing how all these dopers got away with it, and to an extent, perhaps - but actually, so many of them, eventually, slip up and evidence is uncovered - Valverde, Vinikourov, Pantani, Ullrich, Basso, Arsmtrong, Landis, Hamilton, Indurain, Kelly, Merkxc, Roche, Delgado, Rominger, Zulle, even Contador - evidence turned up for every last one of them - eventually. Let's see what the commission uncovers
Maybe with Wiggins, Horner, Froome at al only time will tell. Maybe we'll have a better idea in a decade whether the sport genuinely calmed down or not, and how these riders do/did what they do/did. For now, sure, examine, investigate, look for the smoking gun - interview freaking De jongh about why he recommended Leinders, somebody!! - but the jump from mere question to full accusation is too far.
And sometimes, I wonder if the waves of unevidenced accusations and innuendo against Armstrong actually helped him avoid the actually evidnced ones for year - because even the good points, the real evidence, just got swept up into the general noise, which he then just dismissed casually as 'hating'.
Sean Kelly. When he was going for GC success he tried to improve his climbing. He did to a certain degree but admits himself that he lost his speed.
Kelly was 31, 32 when he was contesting the Vuelta - the finishing speed may have been going anyway, to be honest as his career entered it's final phase. But I do note some really very notable top 10's GC in the tour when he was still pretty darn fast (winning intermediate sprint classes, for example). Indeed, his best Tour GC results, and his Paris-nice wins co-incide with his peek as a Green Jersey contender!
Of course, Kelly shows part of the problem with 'comparisons' - it is impossible to imagine a rider today with his breadth of ability or achievement - Green Jersey and intermediate sprints jerseys in 1989 TdF, having won GC at the previous Vuelta?? I know he doped, but all the same, that's barmy! The pro peloton has become a lot more specialised; Sagan is about as broad as it comes now, and while an amazing rider, and in a sense the heir to Kelly, he shows nothing like the variety of abilities - if Sagan top 5'd a GT while competing for Green, this forum would crash like it was Black Wednesday.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram