2, 1...craig1985 said:
Richie's Italian amateur team Bedogni that Andrea Tafi leads, are reputed to be the dirtiest of a dirty espoir circuit in Italy. Nice try Richie.
Those Ozzies really can tell a few tall tales.
-
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Richie's Italian amateur team Bedogni that Andrea Tafi leads, are reputed to be the dirtiest of a dirty espoir circuit in Italy. Nice try Richie.
Those Ozzies really can tell a few tall tales.
Libertine Seguros said:
If Evans was doping on T-Mobile I think he was doing it on his own, and not on the team program, since he was an outsider or considered 'weird' by a lot of his teammates.
maltiv said:Of course he is clean, he has Norwegian origins!
That clinches it, then.
That, and the bike change in the middle of the TT.
Good job beating Olympic medallists Leipheimer and Larsson as well as Dave Z (and others with questionable pasts such as Millar, Honchar, Rogers, Gusev)
Dave.
D-Queued said:That clinches it, then.
That, and the bike change in the middle of the TT.
Good job beating Olympic medallists Leipheimer and Larsson as well as Dave Z (and others with questionable pasts such as Millar, Honchar, Rogers, Gusev)
Dave.
Has G. E. Larsson ever done anything dodgy (apart from riding for Riis and being a competitive TTer)? Because all those others have certainly doped at some stage in their career.
Ferminal said:
not agree - a neo pro could originate from any bike racing country.
The combination of the follow on effect of the bio passport with a new generation of younger riders, will lead to year 2011 being the cleanest year ever in the pro peloton. This does not necesarily equate to less positives, just a smaller pool to nab the positives from. Proud to be a cyclist. At least Cycling is proactive and actually catching the cheats! Compare that to some other professional sports. They remind me of an emu with head buried in the sand. Poor old emu with head down 1 meter
Richie states "Sport is undoubtedly cleaner than ever". this is a very broad statement to which i disagree. to me, professional sports in general are probably at their dirtiest period in history. Is it plausible, from a doping perspective, that Richie is naive?
btw richie porte is 100% clean. at any time in his career he tests positive, i will donate all my savings to a charity apart from live$trong.
cheers
Dallas_ said:
There's a brave man...or a poor one. I would not bet a bent nickle on any Pro Tour rider being clean.
I want to know if every Pro Tour team has some kind of internal public relations program that instructs all the riders and staff on what to say about any dope related questions. Does the UCI send out a talking points memo. Or do all the riders absorb the standard spiel by osmosis?
Hmmm, that is not great company... When I would TT I was always surprised how consistent guys would be in the finishing order, the same faces in the same places plus or minus a place or two. David Z is like 2 minutes ahead which is an eternity!
Svein can't be slowing down yet (TT is the one thing you seem to keep as you age) so he may have been under the weather for the event.
What a tangled web cycling has become, indeed all sports, with the use of PEDs. Everybody is under suspicion. I assume Svein is clean, but an argument can be made his 2008 result was tainted and he was clean on Vaughters team - hence the poor result in 2010.
Svein can't be slowing down yet (TT is the one thing you seem to keep as you age) so he may have been under the weather for the event.
What a tangled web cycling has become, indeed all sports, with the use of PEDs. Everybody is under suspicion. I assume Svein is clean, but an argument can be made his 2008 result was tainted and he was clean on Vaughters team - hence the poor result in 2010.
BroDeal said:
Bro, I will lend you 5000 bent nickles to put on Richie. will PM them to you pronto
Actually, answers to your question on team dope answer protocols would be interesting. eg compare Garmin to Radioshack - could be entertaining
cheers
cathulu said:
I have ridden a lot tt events as a clubrider and the results are just as predictable.The strongest guy nearly always wins.
cathulu said:
If you look at the 2007 results, they are strikingly similar to the 2010 results and also very different from 2008.
It's just a tad curious.
Dave.
This discussion seems to assume doping is an either/or proposition. In fact, evidence suggests that anti-doping efforts in the past few years, while certainly not eradicating the practice, have forced riders to do it more carefully. It's well known that after the EPO test was developed, riders continued to use the drug, but generally by carefully timed microdosing. This presumably does not result in as much performance enhancement as using all you want, whenever you want. I have also heard on the grapevine that blood transfusions are made in smaller volumes now, to reduce passport fluctuations.
Riders may not be too concerned about having to reduce their doping, since they figure everyone is in the same boat. If, hypothetically, Tuft finished 5th among a certain group of TTers, all of whom were doping at a maximal level, his finish might not be expected to change much if all these competitors were forced to reduce their doping to the same, lower level. But--beyond the old debate about high and low responders--you could argue that the presence of doping controls is more likely to shake up the rankings, because some riders may be more knowledgeable than others about the new limits--or more willing to test them.
The bottom line, as I see it, is that every time there is an advance in anti-doping testing, it spurs innovative ways to beat the tests. Even experienced dopers may not have equal access to these innovations. Some are more likely to get busted than others, while others may, out of fear of getting caught, reduce their doping to levels below what their more knowledgeable rivals are getting away with. Even undoped athletes see variations in their performance from event. The flux occurring in doping protocols insures another source of variation.
Riders may not be too concerned about having to reduce their doping, since they figure everyone is in the same boat. If, hypothetically, Tuft finished 5th among a certain group of TTers, all of whom were doping at a maximal level, his finish might not be expected to change much if all these competitors were forced to reduce their doping to the same, lower level. But--beyond the old debate about high and low responders--you could argue that the presence of doping controls is more likely to shake up the rankings, because some riders may be more knowledgeable than others about the new limits--or more willing to test them.
The bottom line, as I see it, is that every time there is an advance in anti-doping testing, it spurs innovative ways to beat the tests. Even experienced dopers may not have equal access to these innovations. Some are more likely to get busted than others, while others may, out of fear of getting caught, reduce their doping to levels below what their more knowledgeable rivals are getting away with. Even undoped athletes see variations in their performance from event. The flux occurring in doping protocols insures another source of variation.
I quite enjoyed reading the above post. It was clear, coherent and concise.
Related to the article, I can't say if I think Richie Porte is doping or not, but he comes across as an arrogant, self important, foul mouthed person. Can't he express himself without using the word "****"?
Related to the article, I can't say if I think Richie Porte is doping or not, but he comes across as an arrogant, self important, foul mouthed person. Can't he express himself without using the word "****"?
python said:
If it is power at lactate threshold then anything above 7/kg normally indicates GT contender. 7.6/kg would be a GT contender in the EPO era!
Barrus said:
Come again? My viewpoint is biased as opposed to people who argue that Danish riders are not cleaner now based on what happened in the 1990's?
And as for Spaniards doing more about doping, for all the talk of police actions how many riders were actually suspended as the result?
Dr. Maserati said:
Are numbers really required? Because apparently "history" of doping is enough.
The Hitch said:
How so.
The poster claims without evidence he knows for certain Cuddles and Hushovd are clean (considering Cuddles history, a pretty big assumption) then goes completely off base saying that in fact he knows the whole peloton is cleaner (just how he knows this is beyond me) and whats more, that this is a good thing.
To illustrate how wild and silly this post is i will change the subject with a few words
He reveals a very low understanding of doping and all but admits that he doesnt understand the belief many in the clinic hold that someone who doesnt test positive isnt neccesarily clean.
Even by clinic standards its one of the poorer posts
Your example is just stupid. I personally think that 7.6 watts figure is incorrect.
Barrus
BANNED
This part: The information that is available solely is enough to prove or disprove such blanket statements and not to substantiate an argument that people from certain states dope more than people from other states. To suggest otherwise is a completely biased and frankly quite naive viewpoint.roundabout said:
Is meant to state that as we can see in many cases doping cannot be found out by positive tests in most cases. Only in particular cases it can be seen if a test comes back positive or if someone acknowledge to have doped. Otherwise we have no way of knowing whether someone has doped (unless there are other clear indicators, such as known relations between riders and particular teams/doctors). I also state that it is a naive and biased position to put forth that riders from certain states dope more than riders from other states. This is becuase you have no substantiation for it. Unless you can clearly put forth reliable numbers, which are not available, you cannot infer that a rider from a certain state is less likely to dope, perhaps less likely to get caught, but to say riders from certain states do not dope is absolutely ludicrous and completely based on biases. Your original statement seemed to implicitly state that riders from Australia, Britian and Denmark were less likely to dope, to state something like that without any way to corraborate your argument is biased and naive. Especially when you solely look at those that are currently banned
I never said that was the case, I said it could be said, especially concerning the Italians. However how often do you hear something similar to what happens in Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Germany etc. take place in Denmark, Britain or Australia?
python said:
Yea I thought the same thing Myself. Yea 7.6 w/kg is extreme in the sense of plausibility. I wonder what the test involved exactly, to produce such a figure.
python said:
Yea I thought the same thing Myself. Yea 7.6 w/kg is extreme in the sense of plausibility. I wonder what the test involved exactly, to produce such a figure. It certainly does not represent an accurate indication of watts per Kilo. Like nobody can produce that sort of wattage over long distances and climbing Alpine Cols for example.
Richie Porte's weight is 63 Kgs x 7.6 w/kg = 478.80 Watts. Sustained over what length of time ? And what specifically does this particular testing method involve ?
It certainly does not represent any indication of Doping. To suggest otherwise is just mere speculation.
The Hitch said:
How so.
The poster claims without evidence he knows for certain Cuddles and Hushovd are clean (considering Cuddles history, a pretty big assumption) then goes completely off base saying that in fact he knows the whole peloton is cleaner (just how he knows this is beyond me) and whats more, that this is a good thing.
To illustrate how wild and silly this post is i will change the subject with a few words
He reveals a very low understanding of doping and all but admits that he doesnt understand the belief many in the clinic hold that someone who doesnt test positive isnt neccesarily clean.
Even by clinic standards its one of the poorer posts
I'm sorry Sir. You obviously haven't got the strength to lift the big brush. Maybe you should resort to watercolors?
Evans' poster-child status as a drugfree athlete is second to none. He has always had his big-block engine, right from his U23 MTB-days on the team of the (probably suspicious in your eyes) Australian Institute of Sport up to this very minute. I defy you to cite a result of any of his blood-tests raising the very least bit of concern. If you're to infer that he's dirty, only citing association with teams with a dirty past, you might as well advocate shutting down the sport for good. Or shut up.
Doping can be done on an individual basis, among small groups within a team, among riders on different teams sharing the same "doc", or as a regular part of a team's modus operandi.
Upping the ante beyond the purported scale of conspiracy on previous doping teams just isn't likely anymore. The level of transparency has increased tenfold in the later years. There's a lot of antidoping work you don't see that is more on an institutional level. On this level one is more aware of the dangerous symptoms, and one is currently looking at them both on an individual basis (think:blood-passport and individually targeted tests), on the work of certain "docs" and "medical centres", on the finance side of things in teams etc. etc.
Now, you may take the defaitist approach of yours, and fail to recognize any glimmer of success. You'll never be disappointed as there's bound to be new dopers along the line.
Or, you might realize that fresh and clean riders like Sagan and EBH and Porte are able to attain top-echelon status in no time at all, and correctly infer that there's a cleaner peloton today. That way you're bound to be disappointed with every new dopehead getting caught.
So, how is it? Is the glass half-full or half-empty?
Ángel Vicioso has never tested positive or been banned.
He has raced for Kelme, ONCE, Liberty Seguros, Astana, Relax-GAM, LA-MSS, Andalucía-Caja Sur and now Androni Giocattoli.
Is Ángel Vicioso 'second to none' as an anti-doping ambassador considering he's been in so many doping environments but not turned back a positive?
Oh, I forgot, Ángel Vicioso is SPANISH, so it must be that he's a doper. If you come from a country with a Southern Cross on the flag, you tend to get by on the sheer doping power of Australian awesomeness, while the evil, nasty Spaniards resort to chemicals.
He has raced for Kelme, ONCE, Liberty Seguros, Astana, Relax-GAM, LA-MSS, Andalucía-Caja Sur and now Androni Giocattoli.
Is Ángel Vicioso 'second to none' as an anti-doping ambassador considering he's been in so many doping environments but not turned back a positive?
Oh, I forgot, Ángel Vicioso is SPANISH, so it must be that he's a doper. If you come from a country with a Southern Cross on the flag, you tend to get by on the sheer doping power of Australian awesomeness, while the evil, nasty Spaniards resort to chemicals.
and that makes him clean.hektoren said:
lol lol lol.Is this guy a wonderlance type poster or is he for real.
So not only does he know for sure that hushovd is clean (how?) and Evans is clean ( because hes the poster child for anti doping, apparently
) but he also knows for sure that Eddy Boss, Richie Porte and Peter Sagan are clean. Wow we are covering a lot of ground here. If only Wada or the UCI had you around they wouldnt need to spend any money on tests, because you could just tell them whose clean. But perhaps not wisest to claim you know the sport is way cleaner, mere months after the biggest name in the sport and one of the top 10 names in the sport tested positive.
And you clearly dont understand doping or the fact that half the big names to get caught doping never failed a test, and the other half only failed one test out of hundreds through a mistake, often as with contador, with only a very small almost insignificant trace of the drug remaining.
Oh and i shouldnt have to waste space pointing out that unlike you i never said i know for certain whther Cuddles or anyone else who hasnt been caught dopes ( though im prettty sure about Andy). I merely suspect Cuddles dopes, i have my reasons, i think i can make a good case for it, and am clearly not the only one here ready to absolve cuddles of any chance that he dopes. You on the other hand claim to know for certain that Cuddles and a bunch of others dont dope, which is ludicrous.
This exact same form of trolling keeps coming up now and again. If you dont think the whole peloton is clean then a "why do you watch cycling", b "you shouldnt watch cycling", or in this case c "you might as well advocate shutting down the sport".
No I like the sport, and i wont shut up.
simo1733 said:
+1
and the pointing out of Dan Staite as a doper is clutching at straws as the guy is a club rider, and Rob Hayles hasnt ridden for a long while anyway.
So because of this Britain are as bad as Spain, USA, Italy.
Did I ever say they were as bad as Spain, the USA or Italy? No. But it is proof that it's a fallacy that Britain is a clean nation. As I said before, fully 1/6 of Britain's representatives in the 2009 ProTour had confessed to taking EPO. To achieve the same ratio you'd need about a dozen Spanish or Italians. This doesn't mean you couldn't find a dozen of them, but just pulling up the numbers is as misleading as that 1/6 stat, because there are so many more pro riders from Spain and Italy.
And of course, the whole thing comes down to who actually gets caught. What justification is there for Rob Hayles' high hct there? Was he so dehydrated he was virtually collapsing? There's no altitude or genetics to point at in his case.
And of course, the whole thing comes down to who actually gets caught. What justification is there for Rob Hayles' high hct there? Was he so dehydrated he was virtually collapsing? There's no altitude or genetics to point at in his case.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Liege Bastogne Liege-7 hour monument, Sunday, April 21, 2024- Started by topcat
- Replies: 985
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
-
-
77th Tour de Romandie (2.UWT) // 23rd - 28th of April 2024- Started by Logic-is-your-friend
- Replies: 497
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 24K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram