ranking the big 4 by cleanliness!

[Escarabajo]

Re:

This isn't very interesting since all these riders are very close to 0% probability of being clean.

More fun would be to gauge more controversial riders.

Lemond: 80%
Pinot: 60%
Dan Martin: 40%
Evans: 10%
Sastre: 5%

probability of being cleans, imo.

What have Sastre or Evans done different to Quintana?

 

[Escarabajo]

1. Hushovd
2. TGAK
3. EBH
4. Ryder Hesjedal

Ok, obviously a slight national bias here, but there's never been an iota of evidence, and bloodpass-figures are through-and through consistent. Actually, 3 of them are probably too dumb to want to delve in dubious substances.

The problem with EBH is that he sucks. Under those circunstances you can include a lot of more riders!!

 

[Escarabajo]

Re: Re:

This isn't very interesting since all these riders are very close to 0% probability of being clean.

More fun would be to gauge more controversial riders.

Lemond: 80%
Pinot: 60%
Dan Martin: 40%
Evans: 10%
Sastre: 5%

probability of being cleans, imo.

Why does a "sceptic" have such a high belief in pinot? There may not be much information to doubt him, but iirc the only argument that he is more likely to be clean than anyone else is the racist - French people don't dope.

He did release all his training files which to me is very significant. It obviously doesn't rule out doping, but at least it shows that his progression and power numbers are within the range of what can be done cleans. This is why I rate him much higher than people who spew the usual we are clean propaganda without backing it up with any data.

Quintana cannot release them because he doesn't have them!

 

[WildspokeJoe]

Could LeMond's 1990 win be the last time a rider won the Tour clean?
It appears so.

 

[Gung Ho Gun]

Re:

Re: Sastre - I can't even believe people even believe in that guy - but then again there are people who think froome is clean so nothing should surprise me

I don't believe he was clean obviously, but is there anything against him? Like, more than there is against Evans who was the first to be hailed as "clean tour winner"?

 

[hektoren]

The problem with EBH is that he sucks. Under those circunstances you can include a lot of more riders!![/quote]

The problem is that Sky made him what he is today. It's quite amazing how a supposedly amazing team with the best resources available can reduce a great talent to a mediocrity. Thank you, GB!

 

[hektoren]

Re:

You know Ryder admitted doping yeah?

Yeah, back in the stone age of 2003. Big effing deal! Last decade: None. And, he's believable.

 

[grizzlee]

Re: Re:

You know Ryder admitted doping yeah?

Yeah, back in the stone age of 2003. Big effing deal! Last decade: None. And, he's believable.

Eh hello, his blood values during his Giro win were well out of sorts, HGB and RETICS indicated a blood bag was used.

 

[vedrafjord]

Re: Re:

I don't believe he was clean obviously, but is there anything against him? Like, more than there is against Evans who was the first to be hailed as "clean tour winner"?

There's no proof - just the circumstantial evidence of being on a dirty team and podiuming GTs left right and centre during a dirty era, and specifically the way he soloed up Alpe d'Huez for the 2008 TdF win. If he was clean it was the fastest clean ascent of all time.

 

[nayr497]

1. Hushovd
2. TGAK
3. EBH
4. Ryder Hesjedal

Ok, obviously a slight national bias here, but there's never been an iota of evidence, and bloodpass-figures are through-and through consistent. Actually, 3 of them are probably too dumb to want to delve in dubious substances.

Who is Ta Gack?

 

[Bronstein]

Kristoff.

 

[LaFlorecita]

1. Hushovd
2. TGAK
3. EBH
4. Ryder Hesjedal

Ok, obviously a slight national bias here, but there's never been an iota of evidence, and bloodpass-figures are through-and through consistent. Actually, 3 of them are probably too dumb to want to delve in dubious substances.

Who is Ta Gack?

The Great Alexander Kristoff

 

[Gung Ho Gun]

Re: Re:

I don't believe he was clean obviously, but is there anything against him? Like, more than there is against Evans who was the first to be hailed as "clean tour winner"?

There's no proof - just the circumstantial evidence of being on a dirty team and podiuming GTs left right and centre during a dirty era, and specifically the way he soloed up Alpe d'Huez for the 2008 TdF win. If he was clean it was the fastest clean ascent of all time.

Well yeah, I agree - but that's exactly the same as Evans imo

 

[D-Queued]

Re:

Could LeMond's 1990 win be the last time a rider won the Tour clean?
It appears so.

Heck, his 1986 win could have been the first time.

But, I encourage you to be careful with references to LeMond on a thread like this. Could be misconstrued as trolling.

Dave.

 

[skippythepinhead]

Quintana--I'd be most inclined to believe he's capable of his performances without dopesterizing. Would I be surprised to find out he boosts during training, or has taken a bag? No. Do I think some people find his results suspicious because of either racism or ignorance of Quintana's talent trajectory? Yes. Open mind on Nairo....51% cleans
Contador--the argument that he's cleans-ER because he got caught once can be countered by "maybe he's become better at not getting caught." In the more modern parlance of dopesterization I would say he's 15% cleans. I foresee feeling 0% bitterness should he win a GT.
Nibali--dirty as, well, dirt. Guilts by association and implication. 5% cleans, but still entertaining. Seeing him win another GT will provoke derisive, knowing laughter.
Froome--so doped. So, so doped. So obviously and blatantly and officially uncleans. A Calcutta cheeseburger, a Kosher pork chop. He makes me nauseous.