Quintana??

[Saint Unix]

Considering how easy it is to get away with micro-dosing EPO, I would be shocked if he isn't doing a bit of that too. A poster earlier said something about Quintana being a 2nd rest day blood bag kind of guy, which I'd agree with. Just enough to send him flying when the mountain stages get packed together. He's always the strongest guy of all at the end of the races.

He's also very quiet in the beginning. We hardly saw him until we were half-way through the Tour. He conserves energy very well, unlike Froome who was closing gaps, pulling the entire team through the TTT and doing full *** attacks from the get go. If I'm not mistaken, natural talent also helps with recuperation.

 

[gazr99]

If 1 minute is shock and awe whats is 1 minute and 20?

 

[zigmeister]

Re:

Considering how easy it is to get away with micro-dosing EPO, I would be shocked if he isn't doing a bit of that too. A poster earlier said something about Quintana being a 2nd rest day blood bag kind of guy, which I'd agree with. Just enough to send him flying when the mountain stages get packed together. He's always the strongest guy of all at the end of the races.

He's also very quiet in the beginning. We hardly saw him until we were half-way through the Tour. He conserves energy very well, unlike Froome who was closing gaps, pulling the entire team through the TTT and doing full *** attacks from the get go. If I'm not mistaken, natural talent also helps with recuperation.

Froome only really went full *** the second week on the one big mountain stage where he took all the time from his competitors. After that, he was just riding and once in awhile attacking. Most of the last week, Froome was just in survival mode with a very few exceptions.

What was impressive in Quintana's ascent yesterday...Headwind/tailwind whatever...some minor drafting...but he was up and out of the saddle a great deal and hammered the heck out of that ascent.

People need to stop questioning Froome, because the Quintana ascent was damn near epic of all time and one of the fastest of the "clean era."

 

[meat puppet]

Stop questioning froome? No. Stop questioning froome only? Well, yes, but then no one never questioned him only.

 

[gazr99]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-test-froome-contador-and-pinot-bikes-on-alpe-dhuez-for-mechanical-doping

But not Quintana and his performance that is better than shock and awe, taking more time out of Froome's lead than Froome had done in one stage the entire tour. Where are the conspiracy theorists when you need them

 

[mrhender]

Re: Re:

Considering how easy it is to get away with micro-dosing EPO, I would be shocked if he isn't doing a bit of that too. A poster earlier said something about Quintana being a 2nd rest day blood bag kind of guy, which I'd agree with. Just enough to send him flying when the mountain stages get packed together. He's always the strongest guy of all at the end of the races.

He's also very quiet in the beginning. We hardly saw him until we were half-way through the Tour. He conserves energy very well, unlike Froome who was closing gaps, pulling the entire team through the TTT and doing full *** attacks from the get go. If I'm not mistaken, natural talent also helps with recuperation.

Froome only really went full *** the second week on the one big mountain stage where he took all the time from his competitors. After that, he was just riding and once in awhile attacking. Most of the last week, Froome was just in survival mode with a very few exceptions.

What was impressive in Quintana's ascent yesterday...Headwind/tailwind whatever...some minor drafting...but he was up and out of the saddle a great deal and hammered the heck out of that ascent.

People need to stop questioning Froome, because the Quintana ascent was damn near epic of all time and one of the fastest of the "clean era."

That was a lot of Froome

Not sure if serious about the last part, but just in case:

I don't think posters are questioning Froome in this thread..

Mostly they do that in his own thread..

And they are perfectly right to do so, regardless of how Quintana performs...

 

[wendybnt]

At the end of the day, a cheat nearly cheated a cheat.

Probably.

 

[Saint Unix]

Re:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-test-froome-contador-and-pinot-bikes-on-alpe-dhuez-for-mechanical-doping

But not Quintana and his performance that is better than shock and awe, taking more time out of Froome's lead than Froome had done in one stage the entire tour. Where are the conspiracy theorists when you need them

Imagine the sh*tstorm that would follow if they found a motor in one of the bikes. For the time being, it's just a rumour. If it turned out to be real, the fallout would be huge.

I wouldn't put it past UCI to consciously avoid checking the bikes that are most likely to be fitted with motors.

 

[ebandit]

it's ***

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-test-froome-contador-and-pinot-bikes-on-alpe-dhuez-for-mechanical-doping

But not Quintana and his performance that is better than shock and awe, taking more time out of Froome's lead than Froome had done in one stage the entire tour. Where are the conspiracy theorists when you need them

Imagine the sh*tstorm that would follow if they found a motor in one of the bikes.

exactly! it's so unlikely to happen.......................how could a rider/team continue

after such a revelation.............?

Mark L

 

[Random Direction]

So now we are correcting all results from 2015 for headwinds, tailwinds and drafting. OK, let's correct all the the comparators too. Looks like doping, time is like doping, smells like doping. On

 

[FroomehasneverdopedX]

Re:

So now we are correcting all results from 2015 for headwinds, tailwinds and drafting. OK, let's correct all the the comparators too. Looks like doping, time is like doping, smells like doping. On

i've checked..


corrected for the winds etc
i corrected for weight, oval chainring and stuff
pantani @ 36:50 alpe d'huez 5.64 w/kg using DrScientist method

 

[SeriousSam]

I always suspected Pantani was cleans.

 

[Escarabajo]

Re:

So now we are correcting all results from 2015 for headwinds, tailwinds and drafting. OK, let's correct all the the comparators too. Looks like doping, time is like doping, smells like doping. On

LOL. I don't know why. The headwind never affects my rides!

 

[Random Direction]

Re: Re:

So now we are correcting all results from 2015 for headwinds, tailwinds and drafting. OK, let's correct all the the comparators too. Looks like doping, time is like doping, smells like doping. On

LOL. I don't why. The headwind never affects my rides!

Of course the tailwind will help my ride today, just as the best time up Alpe would have helped with drafting in the 1990s as was Quintana's

 

[42x16ss]

Re:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-test-froome-contador-and-pinot-bikes-on-alpe-dhuez-for-mechanical-doping

But not Quintana and his performance that is better than shock and awe, taking more time out of Froome's lead than Froome had done in one stage the entire tour. Where are the conspiracy theorists when you need them

1. Until the Alpe, Quintana hadn't torn the field asunder, putting over a minute into the next guy on the road.

2. Once Froome lost his last teammate he hit the afterburners, getting around 15 seconds back in the last 2-3 kms - controlled loss for PR reasons?

3. They should have checked Quintana's bike. Nobody here would have complained.

 

[Saint Unix]

It melts my brain that the rider with the most ridiculous performance of the day doesn't get his bike checked. Quintana on Toussuire and ADH, Froome on PSM and the TTT... If you're going to be looking for motors at any point during the Tour it's just common f*cking sense to look at those four bikes. As far as I know, none of them were checked.

I remain convinced that UCI doesn't want to find a motor in a bike. Cycling couldn't handle a scandal like that. What happens when the first motor gets found? The PR meltdown will be huge, funding will have to be increased to allow for more bike checks at every event and past performances will be scrutinized to death. I also think motors would be a deal-breaker even for those fans who accept the amount of doping in the sport. It would be a new, much deeper low than ever before.

 

[gazr99]

Re: Re:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-test-froome-contador-and-pinot-bikes-on-alpe-dhuez-for-mechanical-doping

But not Quintana and his performance that is better than shock and awe, taking more time out of Froome's lead than Froome had done in one stage the entire tour. Where are the conspiracy theorists when you need them

1. Until the Alpe, Quintana hadn't torn the field asunder, putting over a minute into the next guy on the road.

2. Once Froome lost his last teammate he hit the afterburners, getting around 15 seconds back in the last 2-3 kms - controlled loss for PR reasons?

3. They should have checked Quintana's bike. Nobody here would have complained.

Don't know what you're trying to argue on point 1. Is PR reasons the new reason/'evidence' to match doubters theories when a Sky rider loses time, same was said about Thomas the day before. I know no one would of complained, my tongue and cheek comment was just pointing out the lack of people being shocked that Quintana's bike wasn't checked.

 

[Vino's Mum]

Re: Re:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-test-froome-contador-and-pinot-bikes-on-alpe-dhuez-for-mechanical-doping

But not Quintana and his performance that is better than shock and awe, taking more time out of Froome's lead than Froome had done in one stage the entire tour. Where are the conspiracy theorists when you need them

1. Until the Alpe, Quintana hadn't torn the field asunder, putting over a minute into the next guy on the road.

2. Once Froome lost his last teammate he hit the afterburners, getting around 15 seconds back in the last 2-3 kms - controlled loss for PR reasons?

3. They should have checked Quintana's bike. Nobody here would have complained.

Don't know what you're trying to argue on point 1. Is PR reasons the new reason/'evidence' to match doubters theories when a Sky rider loses time, same was said about Thomas the day before. I know no one would of complained, my tongue and cheek comment was just pointing out the lack of people being shocked that Quintana's bike wasn't checked.

Second paragraph of your link:

In total five riders had their bikes checked atop the climb, including the stage winner, maillot jaune, Alberto Contador (Tinkoff Saxo), Nairo Quintana (Movistar), and Alejandro Valverde (Movistar).

yw

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-test-froome-contador-and-pinot-bikes-on-alpe-dhuez-for-mechanical-doping

But not Quintana and his performance that is better than shock and awe, taking more time out of Froome's lead than Froome had done in one stage the entire tour. Where are the conspiracy theorists when you need them

1. Until the Alpe, Quintana hadn't torn the field asunder, putting over a minute into the next guy on the road.

2. Once Froome lost his last teammate he hit the afterburners, getting around 15 seconds back in the last 2-3 kms - controlled loss for PR reasons?

3. They should have checked Quintana's bike. Nobody here would have complained.

Don't know what you're trying to argue on point 1. Is PR reasons the new reason/'evidence' to match doubters theories when a Sky rider loses time, same was said about Thomas the day before. I know no one would of complained, my tongue and cheek comment was just pointing out the lack of people being shocked that Quintana's bike wasn't checked.

Second paragraph of your link:

In total five riders had their bikes checked atop the climb, including the stage winner, maillot jaune, Alberto Contador (Tinkoff Saxo), Nairo Quintana (Movistar), and Alejandro Valverde (Movistar).

yw

Ooops. Not having a good run when it comes to facts there Gazr

 

[gazr99]

Re: Re:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-test-froome-contador-and-pinot-bikes-on-alpe-dhuez-for-mechanical-doping

But not Quintana and his performance that is better than shock and awe, taking more time out of Froome's lead than Froome had done in one stage the entire tour. Where are the conspiracy theorists when you need them

1. Until the Alpe, Quintana hadn't torn the field asunder, putting over a minute into the next guy on the road.

2. Once Froome lost his last teammate he hit the afterburners, getting around 15 seconds back in the last 2-3 kms - controlled loss for PR reasons?

3. They should have checked Quintana's bike. Nobody here would have complained.

Don't know what you're trying to argue on point 1. Is PR reasons the new reason/'evidence' to match doubters theories when a Sky rider loses time, same was said about Thomas the day before. I know no one would of complained, my tongue and cheek comment was just pointing out the lack of people being shocked that Quintana's bike wasn't checked.

Second paragraph of your link:

In total five riders had their bikes checked atop the climb, including the stage winner, maillot jaune, Alberto Contador (Tinkoff Saxo), Nairo Quintana (Movistar), and Alejandro Valverde (Movistar).

yw

Ooops. Not having a good run when it comes to facts there Gazr

Pot calling the kettle black there you seem to make the facts up in your head

 

[gazr99]

Re: Re:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-test-froome-contador-and-pinot-bikes-on-alpe-dhuez-for-mechanical-doping

But not Quintana and his performance that is better than shock and awe, taking more time out of Froome's lead than Froome had done in one stage the entire tour. Where are the conspiracy theorists when you need them

1. Until the Alpe, Quintana hadn't torn the field asunder, putting over a minute into the next guy on the road.

2. Once Froome lost his last teammate he hit the afterburners, getting around 15 seconds back in the last 2-3 kms - controlled loss for PR reasons?

3. They should have checked Quintana's bike. Nobody here would have complained.

Don't know what you're trying to argue on point 1. Is PR reasons the new reason/'evidence' to match doubters theories when a Sky rider loses time, same was said about Thomas the day before. I know no one would of complained, my tongue and cheek comment was just pointing out the lack of people being shocked that Quintana's bike wasn't checked.

Second paragraph of your link:

In total five riders had their bikes checked atop the climb, including the stage winner, maillot jaune, Alberto Contador (Tinkoff Saxo), Nairo Quintana (Movistar), and Alejandro Valverde (Movistar).

yw

Hmmmmm swear he wasn't there when I first read that article. Oh well happy he did get his bike check

 

[beowulf]

Re:

I remain convinced that UCI doesn't want to find a motor in a bike. Cycling couldn't handle a scandal like that. What happens when the first motor gets found? The PR meltdown will be huge, funding will have to be increased to allow for more bike checks at every event and past performances will be scrutinized to death. I also think motors would be a deal-breaker even for those fans who accept the amount of doping in the sport. It would be a new, much deeper low than ever before.

Imagining riders doping is not exactly a stretch, but motorized bikes? Even for cyclists who dope I think that is a bridge too far. Just from a moral standpoint I think it is too much even for cheats. It reminds me of Tyler and Floyd both being incredulous at Armstrong grousing on Tyler for doping, but you know he did it.

A cyclist can justify doping in their mind because everybody else does it and more importantly they are still training (training more to be honest) their guts out to win. They may be doping, but they still physically complete the race. Put a motor on your bike and what is the point to doing the event? It defeats the purpose of riding a bike in the first place.

Of course I am probably wrong, because humans are pretty fickle.

 

[Saint Unix]

Re: Re:

Imagining riders doping is not exactly a stretch, but motorized bikes? Even for cyclists who dope I think that is a bridge too far. Just from a moral standpoint I think it is too much even for cheats. It reminds me of Tyler and Floyd both being incredulous at Armstrong grousing on Tyler for doping, but you know he did it.

A cyclist can justify doping in their mind because everybody else does it and more importantly they are still training (training more to be honest) their guts out to win. They may be doping, but they still physically complete the race. Put a motor on your bike and what is the point to doing the event? It defeats the purpose of riding a bike in the first place.

Of course I am probably wrong, because humans are pretty fickle.

This post explains why motors would be such a scandal. Using a motor is ethically a level or two below using PEDs, no matter how potent the PEDs are.

But if you told riders they could win races if they used a motorized bike, I'm sure someone would eventually bite. Not that I think Quintana (or Froome) are necessarily doing it, but I wouldn't put it past some of the guys who are desperate to make a living in the sport.

If someone is eventually caught using a motor, I doubt it would be one of the big names, anyway. It would be some random rider below pro-conti level where there are no rules anyway, like someone from Tabriz or whatever. It's not like anyone cares that they're already going nuclear with EPO now, so it'd be easier to brush under the carpet that way.

 

[SkyTears]

Antoine VAYER ‏@festinaboy 16h16 hours ago
Antoine VAYER retweeted Soyunalavadora
Antoine VAYER added,
Yes

Soyunalavadora @Soyunalavadora
According to this (from 40:50) Quintana did 6,76W/Kg in Alpe D'Huez http://www.ivoox.com/21-etapa-el-tour-onda-cero-26-07-2015-audios-mp3_rf_5322835_1.html?autoplay=1 … @veloclinic @Scienceofsport @festinaboy

i think Quintana went to much extra plus full complete ***

6.76 W/Kg for 40+ minutes, wow

 

[Handy Bendy Ghandi]

I've just calculated that Quintana's doping programme is 0.02359% less successful than Froome's.......surely that difference can't be too hard to make up........an extra can of coke and a Greggs pasty should do it......£2.50 or so.......