Quintana??

[Ventoux Boar]

Correct. But I think it's equally important that even the most statistically uneducated people acknowledge that ceteris paribus performing better means the rider is more likely to dope and that the strength of association increases the better one performs relative to the competition.

Another important insight to be aware of is the difference between what a rational person who considers all the evidence and posts about it in a forum ought to believe, and what an official body such as a doping court, or a criminal court, ought to do.

In other words, most recent winners were dopers. But this says nothing about the limits of human performance. I'm no expert, but I don't think the ceiling has been estabished by those who are. Any rational performance analysis should acknowledge what we don't know in this regard.

 

[Netserk]

Good post. Interesting link. Thanks, bro!



No, just no? As in Vayer didn't say that? Or, is no, as in "I can't believe it, this contradicts what I think!" Then please tell us what he said.

Anybody else in this thread notice this tweet from Vayer?

BTW, for those of you who haven't read Vayer's tweet, or studied Portoleau's graphic, while Quintana won the Giro, apparently there were no superhuman performances.

No, as in he has said himself that it didn't mean what you think he did. He does not think he is clean.

 

[Netserk]

I think it's really important that even the most hardline doping accusers need to acknowledge that extraordinary performance can be achieved naturally. There isn't a threshold over which any performance is certainly unatural, hence the need for both the benefit of the doubt towards talented riders, and due process.

No threshold at all? You think any performance could be done clean?

 

[Dazed and Confused]

No threshold at all? You think any performance could be done clean?

 

[CycloAndy]

Maybe it does not seem like he is going "full genius" I would argue that his static position on the bike and his stone face makes the visual impression less significant, just compare to Froome or Contador who makes much more of a visual impression when they go full gas.
Also his humbleness and general tranquility (off and on the bike) adds to the impression of a guy which is easier to want to believe in? (Froome the arrogant opposite)
One could argue that maybe he does not look? like a obvious doper but his performances sure as hell are suspicious.
At this stage he is probably the best climber, or at least in top 3 in the world, furthermore he is up against people who are generally believed to be doped (in the Clinic) and some of them for so many years that their recipes are perfected (take chicken for example, took him 5-8 years to fully benefit)

So is his genes, growing up in the environment he has etc. really enough to weigh up the advantages others have/take?

I would say that if he is doping I would prefer him to get busted before he snaps 5-10 GT's and becomes every fan and young cyclist's idol.

What he said!

 

[JimmyFingers]

No threshold at all? You think any performance could be done clean?

Did you read the link I quoted? I suppose my thrust was that we haven't hit that threshold yet, that's nature's whim means we can't be certain yet what we are truly capable of. And I'm not talking ridiculous numbers, more fractions.

 

[sniper]

Also his humbleness and general tranquility (off and on the bike) adds to the impression of a guy which is easier to want to believe in? (Froome the arrogant opposite)

After last years tour de france some clinic regulars were giving quintana the benefit of the doubt because of this.
Some posters still need to see three or four alien percormances before they can finally admit the obvious.

 

[mrhender]

That last bit is interesting. Yeah - young Nairo Quintana really seems to have a solid and steady head on his shoulders. And Froome has turned into one of the most unlikeable characters I've seen in some time. Wiggo is no treasure, especially when he starts going on about ****ers and "fruit 'n" stuff. But at least Wiggo seems honest and to have a basic respect for others - mostly. Nairo Quintana's aplomb was enviable, whether he was being asked about the Stelvio stage, or the pink jersey and winning in general.

Maybe a politician in spe

 

[DirtyWorks]

After last years tour de france some clinic regulars were giving quintana the benefit of the doubt because of this.
Some posters still need to see three or four alien percormances before they can finally admit the obvious.

But, the problem is he's racing well with some variations in performances most of the year. Prior to riding elite international races, he did very well too. All consistent with a clean-ish athlete.

It doesn't eliminate the possibility of grand tour doping. Horner's passport scores clearly show the **incredibly** suspicious values the UCI ignores. Cycling can't be bothered to close the hole.

Maybe it can be summarized as lots of talent on "pan y agua" with a heap of "never tested positive" on top?

 

[sniper]

But, the problem is he's racing well most of the year. Prior to riding elite international races, he did very well too.

It doesn't eliminate the possibility of grand tour doping. Horner's passport scores clearly show the suspicious values the UCI ignores.

The regularity in his performances, at best, suggests that he,s a more genuine talent than say froome, but i don,t see how it has any implications on the general question whether quintana dopes or not. Lets not kid ourselves.

edit: just saw your edit. Agreed

 

[mrhender]

After last years tour de france some clinic regulars were giving quintana the benefit of the doubt because of this.
Some posters still need to see three or four alien percormances before they can finally admit the obvious.

Cycling followers are desperatly looking for true talent and performances to beleive in. A fact that is perfectly understandable and it is also heroic to take the stand of innocent until proven guilty..

In the case of Quintana (and other colombians) we have the problem of not beeing able to follow them as closely as we can with most riders in europe, hence the suspucions and blindfolds

 

[sniper]

Cycling followers are desperatly looking for true talent and performances to beleive in. A fact that is perfectly understandable and it is also heroic to take the stand of innocent until proven guilty..

In the case of Quintana (and other colombians) we have the problem of not beeing able to follow them as closely as we can with most riders in europe, hence the suspucions and blindfolds

Heroic? Perhaps you mean "foolish"

 

[mrhender]

Heroic? Perhaps you mean "foolish"

I feel both ways could be interpreted from the post

 

[ferryman]

Cycling followers are desperatly looking for true talent and performances to beleive in. A fact that is perfectly understandable and it is also heroic to take the stand of innocent until proven guilty..

In the case of Quintana (and other colombians) we have the problem of not beeing able to follow them as closely as we can with most riders in europe, hence the suspucions and blindfolds

Or indeed those riders who winter train in Africa.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

No threshold at all? You think any performance could be done clean?

To be fair, Andy Coggan has said pretty much the same thing, putting together the best efficiency, VO2max and what not to come up with some pretty ridiculous numbers of "what's possible".

 

[hfer07]

"When I saw riders with fat arses climbing cols like aeroplanes, I understood what was happening"

Luis "el Jardinerito" Herrera.

On Quintana:

We know he was born, raised, & developed physiologically at 2820 mts a.s.l.
We know when he was a child he used to go to school by bicycle climbing a cat 3 "every single day of his scholar calender.
We know his prior record before turning professional
We Know he was touted by many experts to become "the next big time"
We know his performances are "within human capacity"

those facts are "irrefutable" & proof of a "clean rider"

However......

The only aspect alone that I could have slight doubts on Quintana is that he rides for Unzue's team,- but then I ask- how come Valverde has not become a multiple GT winner under his guidance- if the dope was the answer??

bottom line- he could well be doping- as part of being Pro-cyclists. Does he rely on dope to succeed? don't think so. Perhaps the dope gets the very edge of his abilities, but never "transforms his skills" into an "alien"- per say....

having stated that-I will be the first one to call Quintana out on this thread if I ever watch him doing this sort of performance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52xv2Hg2fkI&sns=em

 

[senatorrick]

I guess someone better open Aru thread also

 

[Escarabajo]

What choice did he have if he wanted to ride in the Pro-Tour? which teams were the options that were not dodgy? hardly any team. That cannot be a good reason to single out a rider.

 

[The Hitch]

On Quintana:

We know he was born, raised, & developed physiologically at 2820 mts a.s.l.
We know when he was a child he used to go to school by bicycle climbing a cat 3 "every single day of his scholar calender.
We know his prior record before turning professional
We Know he was touted by many experts to become "the next big time"
We know his performances are "within human capacity"

those facts are "irrefutable" & proof of a "clean rider"

However......

The only aspect alone that I could have slight doubts on Quintana is that he rides for Unzue's team,- but then I ask- how come Valverde has not become a multiple GT winner under his guidance- if the dope was the answer??

bottom line- he could well be doping- as part of being Pro-cyclists. Does he rely on dope to succeed? don't think so. Perhaps the dope gets the very edge of his abilities, but never "transforms his skills" into an "alien"- per say....

having stated that-I will be the first one to call Quintana out on this thread if I ever watch him doing this sort of performance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52xv2Hg2fkI&sns=em

Actually most "experts" ignored Quintana and all the hype was on pinot. Quintanas odds at the beginning of last year for the tour were not even existent and even after Paris nice some of us were able to get him at 130-1. But yes they were idiots and many of us here had Quintana as the real deal.

It's a bizarre use of the word "proof" you use though. None of the things you mention are proof. Perhaps evidence is what you meant but even that'd a stretch. Being born at altitude riding as a kid are all suggestive of talent but they are not guarantees of it otherwise the entire giro top 10 would have been from the cordillera oriental.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Born, raised, developed etc has pretty much zero impact on your genetic makeup for one generation. Humans just don't evolve that quickly.

 

[hfer07]

Actually most "experts" ignored Quintana and all the hype was on pinot. Quintanas odds at the beginning of last year for the tour were not even existent and even after Paris nice some of us were able to get him at 130-1. But yes they were idiots and many of us here had Quintana as the real deal.

It's a bizarre use of the word "proof" you use though. None of the things you mention are proof. Perhaps evidence is what you meant but even that'd a stretch. Being born at altitude riding as a kid are all suggestive of talent but they are not guarantees of it otherwise the entire giro top 10 would have been from the cordillera oriental.

Yes- Pinot- perhaps in France alone, while the rest of the critics & specially team delegates looking for fresh talent knew right away he was the next big thing, after the incredible Tour de'lavenier victory. Unzue - having the Movistar America team in south america, literally hunted him down after that & locked him in to sign.

When I use the word proof is in a way to establish that Quintana's talent is not a "bi-product of Doping".

Born, raised, developed etc has pretty much zero impact on your genetic makeup for one generation. Humans just don't evolve that quickly.

but I'm not implying a rider born, raised developed in altitude equals a GT winner. There were many kids along with Quintana, from the same region, raised & developed under the same conditions who wanted to be pro-cyclists, and yet He alone stud above head and shoulders-why? he's unique

What makes sense to me, is that a "pure climber" like Quintana glows in that skill, since his body, physiology are the result of a natural adaptation to that environment, whereas What would be "suspicious" is to have someone born, raised & living at sea level suddenly out climbing people at 2000 + metres a.s.l. - or even worse- a rider climbing an uphill side to side-showing no skills at all in that area, and then a few years later he's dropping the best of the best

 

[observer]

How long do the effects of living at altitude last?

 

[sittingbison]

Born, raised, developed etc has pretty much zero impact on your genetic makeup for one generation. Humans just don't evolve that quickly.

hurrUUUmmmpphh cough cough
from this:

to this:

to this:

all in a single generation

 

[Krzysztof_O]

Agree with hfer07. Quintana's environment and early successes indicate that he is a natural talent and deserves some belief in his results (at least for now). But the question should be: is it possible to win a GT on paniagua? Maybe Quintana dopes less thanks to his natural abilities.

 

[ebandit]

3

How long do the effects of living at altitude last?

3 weeks!!!!!!

Mark L