Ryder's blood

[thehog]

Surely JV's ability to make up excuses on the fly is an example of crazy adaptive parapsychology?

Agreed! You'd be patent that term as he might steal it!

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Agreed! You'd be patent that term as he might steal it!

I have prior art claims now that it's in the public domain ;-)

 

[sniper]

Generally in science it is encouraged that questions are asked. In cycling you get blocked.

good point.
Questions and answers are crucial when you want to get to the bottom of things, as in science.

So how did a 'clean' Hesjedal beat dopers like Kreuziger, Jrod, Horner, Sanchez, Leipheimer?

vaughters' excuse would be that they dope so little that the advantage becomes irrelevant. But that excuse can be discarded not only on the basis of common sense but also when taking into account guys such as Roman 'very serious anomalies' Kreuziger.

Sorry yes. His Hgb pattern basically increased for the entire year, including all throughout that GT. The graph is burnt into my brain for all eternity.

JV called it decompensation (?) or basically said Millar was not a good GT rider and did not recover during them. When I pointed out Millar was not only winning or podiuming GT final stage TTs but also riding and finishing all three in the same year, JV blocked me from Twitter. Something about having already made my mind up.

It's the old school omerta line. As theHog said, this attitude is the complete opposite of how you'd normally behave if you have nothing to hide and want to get to the bottom of an issue.
A guy like Walsh started spouting similar oneliners once he was on the bandwagon. Such a give away.

 

[thehog]

good point.
Questions and answers are crucial when you want to get to the bottom of things, as in science.

vaughters' excuse would be that they dope so little that the advantage becomes irrelevant. But that excuse can be discarded not only on the basis of common sense but also when taking into account guys such as Roman 'very serious anomalies' Kreuziger.

It's the old school omerta line. As theHog said, this attitude is the complete opposite of how you'd normally behave if you have nothing to hide and want to get to the bottom of an issue.

A guy like Walsh started spouting similar oneliners once he was on the bandwagon. Such a give away.

Truth be told, reading blood profiles is fairly straight. There’s no great mystery. Context is important but the pretence that they’re only for scientist or doctors is overkill. The more the data gets out into the public the more its understood. Crowd sourcing can’t be a bad thing, now can it?

 

[Master50]

So how did a 'clean' Hesjedal beat dopers like Kreuziger, Jrod, Horner, Sanchez, Leipheimer?

That is your burden to prove. No one is obliged to prove a negative. We all go to jail under that burden of proof. Small changes in luck could have changed that GC quite a lot. Far from a dominant win. the product of good preparation, solid ability, good luck and the right mindset all the race.

 

[IzzyStradlin]

No one is obliged to prove a negative.

Why not? Seems at this point that the athletes need to prove they're clean.

 

[Ferminal]

Given that the vast majority of GT winners are dopers that is a reasonable position if people are talking for the sake of it and equity, justice etc are not considerations.

 

[Benotti69]

That is your burden to prove. No one is obliged to prove a negative. We all go to jail under that burden of proof. Small changes in luck could have changed that GC quite a lot. Far from a dominant win. the product of good preparation, solid ability, good luck and the right mindset all the race.

In case you haven't noticed I am not an ADA. I d not need burden of proof to give my opinion.

Hesjedal doped and never got caught till Rasmussen opened his mouth. He didn't even sit out a ban. Why believe he stopped doping when the team he rides for has an internal testing system?

I suppose some people need to believe in Santa, Easter Bunnies and pro cyclists racing clean.

 

[sniper]

In case you haven't noticed I am not an ADA. I d not need burden of proof to give my opinion.

succinctly put.

 

[Master50]

In case you haven't noticed I am not an ADA. I d not need burden of proof to give my opinion.

Hesjedal doped and never got caught till Rasmussen opened his mouth. He didn't even sit out a ban. Why believe he stopped doping when the team he rides for has an internal testing system?

I suppose some people need to believe in Santa, Easter Bunnies and pro cyclists racing clean.

Yes he was protected by a statute of limitations, so "officially", he did not commit an offense. No real help here. An opinion is often prefaced with IMO rather than Ryder is a doper without an IMO.
To just think that the job required cheating and that everyone who plays will cheat is lacking any understanding of humanity. Regardless of what is done in the past many will stop as soon as they can and many just will not cross the line. Some 0f those people are also outstanding cyclists.
IMO Ryder was beating world class mountain bikers as a junior so he has more than proven he has the talent. Sorry you missed the fact that most pros are already talented beyond anything you could do doped does not automatically make them dopers too. I smoked cigarettes once. Have not crossed that line for 40 years but hey I am a smoker Not.

 

[IzzyStradlin]

But we are not here to abide by your personal concept of justice. We are here to discuss if a pro cyclist used PEDs.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Sorry you missed the fact that most pros are already talented beyond anything you could do doped does not automatically make them dopers too. .

You can do better than a thinly disguised "another jealous, bitter loser."

You believe, and that's fine. But, don't attack participants for not fitting into your world view.

 

[Benotti69]

Yes he was protected by a statute of limitations, so "officially", he did not commit an offense.

SOL is 8 years. He rode for Phonak in 2006. You believe he didn't dope on Phonak? Please!

No real help here. An opinion is often prefaced with IMO rather than Ryder is a doper without an IMO.

It is a forum and not a court of law. Ryder admitted to doping, fact. He also stated that doping didn't work for him

To just think that the job required cheating and that everyone who plays will cheat is lacking any understanding of humanity.

These are elite athletes. You dont get to be an elite athlete because you are a normal person, ie part of humanity. I dont see all of humanity racing GTs.

Regardless of what is done in the past many will stop as soon as they can and many just will not cross the line. Some 0f those people are also outstanding cyclists.

THose who wish to be viewed as clean will do their utmost to show that. Ryder hid for 8 months after Rasmussen outed him. That is the actions of a guy with nothing to hide.

IMO Ryder was beating world class mountain bikers as a junior so he has more than proven he has the talent.

Ryder doped in MTB. Wake up and smell the sh!t.

Sorry you missed the fact that most pros are already talented beyond anything you could do doped does not automatically make them dopers too.

That most of them are cheaters also doesn't make them better than your average Joe. It does show where you are coming from when you hold these guys up as something special and that the average Joe with dope wouldn't be able to do anything against them. Big deal. Athletic prowess is low on my list of things that one should praise. You are born with it, genetics, old boy. I can accept that.

I smoked cigarettes once. Have not crossed that line for 40 years but hey I am a smoker Not.

Stupid analogy. It has been proven that doping provides benefits for those who have stopped doping long after the dope wears off.

Personal attacks lessens yours argument.

 

[Benotti69]

But we are not here to abide by your personal concept of justice. We are here to discuss if a pro cyclist used PEDs.

I dont lay down any justice in here. I post my opinion.

If these guys want to be seen as clean they need to do a truck load of transparency backed by effective anti doping. Till then I will criticise them in any way i see fit. These guys doped and were caught. They have not paid back any money from they earned from cheating.

JV states he has dedicated his life to anti doping......apart from when he was doping. What was the last thing JV did for anti doping that had any effect?

 

[D-Queued]

...



It is a forum and not a court of law. Ryder admitted to doping, fact. He also stated that doping didn't work for him

...

He did admit that it worked and did something, just that it didn't produce a positive benefit.

To quote, it made him go "backward".

I think this is a demonstration of what he was talking about:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5J-8KN1ge2o

Dave.

 

[Parker]

If these guys want to be seen as clean they need to do a truck load of transparency backed by effective anti doping. Till then I will criticise them in any way i see fit.

The problem is that there is absolutely nothing they could do that would make you think they were clean. You will always find a way to dismiss anything and continue criticising. So why bother.

If you were presented with a magic button which, if you pressed it, would reveal with 100% certainty who doped and who didn't I don't think you would press it. You would lose the two things that you hold dear - the fact that you can't prove a negative (your guarantee against being shown to be wrong) and your 'knowing' cynicism. The ultimate transparency would be at the cost of everything you have.

 

[pmcg76]

The problem is that there is absolutely nothing they could do that would make you think they were clean. You will always find a way to dismiss anything and continue criticising. So why bother.

If you were presented with a magic button which, if you pressed it, would reveal with 100% certainty who doped and who didn't I don't think you would press it. You would lose the two things that you hold dear - the fact that you can't prove a negative (your guarantee against being shown to be wrong) and your 'knowing' cynicism. The ultimate transparency would be at the cost of everything you have.

This thread was dormant for ages as no new 'evidence' has surfaced since the last round of hand wringing so Benotti went back to the tried and tested method of proving doping, comparing climbing times for different years and the inevitable 'went faster than dopers=doping'.

I then posted how pre-EPO Luis Herrera has climbed faster on Alpe d'Huez than mega doper Contador and how an off-form LeMond has a time within 30 seconds of Contador on the same climb. The response? ignored followed by more of the usual ranting.

Present facts to these guys and they always retreat to the 'they beat dopers' or 'doping history' line. Anything that shows them to be wrong is just ignored.

 

[Benotti69]

This thread was dormant for ages as no new 'evidence' has surfaced since the last round of hand wringing so Benotti went back to the tried and tested method of proving doping, comparing climbing times for different years and the inevitable 'went faster than dopers=doping'.

I dont have to prove doping. Ryder admitted he doped. Now how about he does everything in his power to show he is riding clean.

I dont think that is too much to ask. But some like to think when someone says they are clean, they are telling the truth.

I dont rant.

Make it personal again.

You obviously dont think they ride clean otherswise the clinic wouldn't be on your radar.

I then posted how pre-EPO Luis Herrera has climbed faster on Alpe d'Huez than mega doper Contador and how an off-form LeMond has a time within 30 seconds of Contador on the same climb. The response? ignored followed by more of the usual ranting.

Was Herrera clean? I dont know.

Present facts to these guys and they always retreat to the 'they beat dopers' or 'doping history' line. Anything that shows them to be wrong is just ignored.

Facts? What facts? Plenty dont believe LeMond was clean.

When presented with a dirty sport you become an ostrich.

 

[Benotti69]

The problem is that there is absolutely nothing they could do that would make you think they were clean. You will always find a way to dismiss anything and continue criticising. So why bother.

Ah yes the old nothing they could do would prove they are clean. Why bother Vo2max testing, why bother releasing data.....is that you Oli?

If you were presented with a magic button which, if you pressed it, would reveal with 100% certainty who doped and who didn't I don't think you would press it. You would lose the two things that you hold dear - the fact that you can't prove a negative (your guarantee against being shown to be wrong) and your 'knowing' cynicism. The ultimate transparency would be at the cost of everything you have.

Your personal attack on me is sad.

There is a whole plethora of ways to show cleanliness in this sport. I have posted plenty of times.

 

[westerner]

Don't see why there needs to be new evidence to rekindle discussion when a case like that of Ryders just seems to have so many lingering issues.

Anyway I think there were also some new climbing times posted on the net which were not singling out Ryder, but seem more to debunk the use of speeds having decreased as proof that we are in the clean(er) era.

I think that Ryder having chosen to seek out doping expertise, pay for a personal program and dope as a mountain biker - not as a result of pressures from a director or bully teammates speaks a lot to his character. An ambitious young man with no ethics when it came to cheating others in his sport to get himself more money and opportunity.

As a Jr. he was a teammate of Rasmussen on the Fischer/SAAB team and we know that other Canadian MTB teammates of his also have admitted to doping or been caught (Sheppard in 2005). Certainly not an ideal environment to be developing any antidoping ethos.

He based himself from 2004 on in Girona around USPS english speakers and a fellow Canadian Michael Barry who all were doping.

He left UPSP/Discovery and followed Floyd to Phonak, hardly a great environment for an athlete who believed in dope free sport. If the experience on USPS/Discovery as a clean athlete had been so disheartening why did he not move to say a French team with a strong anti doping stance?

Details around his outing and testimony in front of USADA and CCES are foggy at best. Discussions behind closed doors and only once signing confidentiality contracts have left it up to Ryder alone to disclose any details he would like out in the public domain.

When outed by Chicken he refused to speak to the media (no matter how you slice it that's a big red flag), instead hid behind a press release put out by his Garmin team management.

9 months later there is a story in his local news paper, in which he finally gave his public version of his doping. His statement that he stopped doping in spring 2004 because it did not work makes no sense at all. Just look at his results as a member of USPS spring 2004. He was in the winning break at Klasica Primavera with Valverdere....that's hardly going backwards. This reason to stop doping needs more information to be credible to anyone paying attention to the goings ons in pro cycling in the past couple decades. In such an environment, a young very ambitious man who admired Lance, dreamed to be a wealthy pro athlete, living alone in europe, surrounded by successful dopers chose on his own to just stop?

If Ryders name was exposed during the USADA investigations sometime in 2010-2012 why did USADA and CCES wait until 2013 to question him? Its not like CCES was busy producing a reasoned decision against Lance. This to me is one of the very curious elements of the whole story with Ryder. It leads me to wonder about what went on behind the scenes. Were there some efforts to shield a GT winner from the clean team being touted as the reason to believe that pro cycling was on the right path? If so who was involved.

As the public is not able to get transcripts or even any information at all from the USADA/CCES interviews with Ryder how can anyone be confident with what dates were even ever discussed. Did the interviewers even ask about what happened on Phonak?

So many questions, and as the slipstream policy is that the public and the media don't have a right to know all the details we are just left to wonder and for a few to discuss at random intervals this case with many elements that don't pass the smell test in an online forum.

Don't believe at all Ryder was clean at Phonak. But I see some reasons to believe he may have matured and changed his habits while at SS. Clean, hmmmmm, cleanish, more likely.

 

[sniper]

Hawaii, home of William Pettis.

Working in conjunction with USPS Team doctors and Johan Bruyneel, the team’s Director Sportif, the collection of experts - consisting of a group that included a macrobiotic chef to prepare meals, hematologist, pathologist, cardiologist and was headed by William B. Pettis, worked diligently to identify and rid Hincapie of this intrusive ailment.

http://www.dailypeloton.com/displayarticle.asp?pk=3578

 

[pmcg76]

I dont have to prove doping. Ryder admitted he doped. Now how about he does everything in his power to show he is riding clean.

I dont think that is too much to ask. But some like to think when someone says they are clean, they are telling the truth.

I dont rant.

Make it personal again.

You obviously dont think they ride clean otherswise the clinic wouldn't be on your radar.



Was Herrera clean? I dont know.



Facts? What facts? Plenty dont believe LeMond was clean.

When presented with a dirty sport you become an ostrich.

This is not about who is clean. It is about what you put forward as evidence of doping and you know that, but keep ignoring it.

This is real simple. Do you think it is possible for a rider from almost 30 years ago with no EPO to ride faster up Alpe d'Huez than a rider considered one of the major modern climbers with all the modern doping techniques available to them.

If not, then how did he do it?

If yes, then surely modern doping techniques like EPO/blood doping cannot give that much of an advantage?

It is truly laughable to now hear you say plenty consider LeMond dirty when you have defended LeMond as being clean many times over. A bit like the wind on Mont Ventoux, must be changing again.

I am no Ostrich, I just don't have a fixated position that I am imcapable of moving from.

Care to explain how Mr Clean Christophe Bassons finished 5th in a TT at Dunkirk at the height of the EPO era in 1997. I guess the other 100 or so riders in the race must not have been on EPO or something, as you claim it is impossible for a clean rider to beat a doped rider.

How about your claim that as EPO gives an advantage of 10% and that a rider finishing within 10% of that rider must also be doping?

 

[pmcg76]

Don't see why there needs to be new evidence to rekindle discussion when a case like that of Ryders just seems to have so many lingering issues.

Anyway I think there were also some new climbing times posted on the net which were not singling out Ryder, but seem more to debunk the use of speeds having decreased as proof that we are in the clean(er) era.

I think that Ryder having chosen to seek out doping expertise, pay for a personal program and dope as a mountain biker - not as a result of pressures from a director or bully teammates speaks a lot to his character. An ambitious young man with no ethics when it came to cheating others in his sport to get himself more money and opportunity.

As a Jr. he was a teammate of Rasmussen on the Fischer/SAAB team and we know that other Canadian MTB teammates of his also have admitted to doping or been caught (Sheppard in 2005). Certainly not an ideal environment to be developing any antidoping ethos.

He based himself from 2004 on in Girona around USPS english speakers and a fellow Canadian Michael Barry who all were doping.

He left UPSP/Discovery and followed Floyd to Phonak, hardly a great environment for an athlete who believed in dope free sport. If the experience on USPS/Discovery as a clean athlete had been so disheartening why did he not move to say a French team with a strong anti doping stance?

Details around his outing and testimony in front of USADA and CCES are foggy at best. Discussions behind closed doors and only once signing confidentiality contracts have left it up to Ryder alone to disclose any details he would like out in the public domain.

When outed by Chicken he refused to speak to the media (no matter how you slice it that's a big red flag), instead hid behind a press release put out by his Garmin team management.

So many questions, and as the slipstream policy is that the public and the media don't have a right to know all the details we are just left to wonder and for a few to discuss at random intervals this case with many elements that don't pass the smell test in an online forum.

Don't believe at all Ryder was clean at Phonak. But I see some reasons to believe he may have matured and changed his habits while at SS. Clean, hmmmmm, cleanish, more likely.

Where are these climbing times posted on the Net. As I said numerous times, taking individual years and comparing them is useless as there are too many varying factors year to year.

However in the Power estimates thread, I did some research over periods of time for the Alpe d'Huez average times. Yes it is one climb, but it is the most frequently used climb in the history of the Tour, therefore a good example with the most amount of available data. Sub-divided into 90s/00s/Bio-passport era.

What the analysis showed is that the average mean times have dropped in the Bio-Passport era compared to previous eras even though there have still been some super fast ascents. Unsurprisingly very few people wanted to engage on the matter as it didn't show what they wanted it to show.

No I don't get why people are fixated on whether Ryder doped at Phonak or not. It seems that people are desperate for him to have doped there just so he will fall inside the Statue of Limitations. Don't get this obsession with scapegoating individual riders, even Bassons or Kimmage never took that approach.

Why the obsession with Hesjedal and not say Carlos Sastre for example. Any ideas as to why Hesjedal left Europe after Phonak and headed back Stateside?

 

[DirtyWorks]

What the analysis showed is that the average mean times have dropped in the Bio-Passport era compared to previous eras even though there have still been some super fast ascents. Unsurprisingly very few people wanted to engage on the matter as it didn't show what they wanted it to show.

#1 The number of KM's has dropped over time. If the grand tour KM's were unchanged, IMO, we should have seen some slowing. How much? No idea.

#2 Suddenly, in 2014, with Froome and Contador out, it was only Basso putting up extraordinary times.

#3 There was plenty of discussion. It is very difficult to discuss something with so little inconsistent data to work with. Especially with some polluting threads with all kinds of weak arguments. (That's not directed at you. Just a general observation)

 

[Master50]

SOL is 8 years. He rode for Phonak in 2006. You believe he didn't dope on Phonak? Please!

Even Lance said not all on postal or motorola or discovery were on the program. So the most notorious team had clean riders or of they were doping they did so on their own. Why would you think that his team affiliation makes him one of the chosen. Further where was Phonak implicated in an organized doping scheme?

It is a forum and not a court of law. Ryder admitted to doping, fact. He also stated that doping didn't work for him

Of course he only tells the truth about the doping not the truth about it not working?



These are elite athletes. You dont get to be an elite athlete because you are a normal person, ie part of humanity. I dont see all of humanity racing GTs.

No this is true and that is really the point isn't it. Very few athletes are at a level to ride the tour with or without assistance. Currently about 1000 athletes out of 7 billion. Yes that makes them pretty special



THose who wish to be viewed as clean will do their utmost to show that. Ryder hid for 8 months after Rasmussen outed him. That is the actions of a guy with nothing to hide.

There is the official story that USADA asked him to not comment.


Ryder doped in MTB. Wake up and smell the sh!t.
yes he did by then we already had a measure of his talent. I suppose you would have us believe he took EPO at 16 when he was beating elite riders all over the continent. regardless of his It did not help statement Ryder was top 20 and the doping might have made the top 2 so I do appreciate the cheating had some positive effect on his career development.



That most of them are cheaters also doesn't make them better than your average Joe. It does show where you are coming from when you hold these guys up as something special and that the average Joe with dope wouldn't be able to do anything against them. Big deal. Athletic prowess is low on my list of things that one should praise. You are born with it, genetics, old boy. I can accept that.

No they are better than your average Joe by a lot. This is by far the most telling point about the forum. It seems many here seem to think the dope made them world class. It might have made them works class winners rather than words class pack fill. but pack fill at the pro tour level is at least as good as the masses of doped masters.




Stupid analogy. It has been proven that doping provides benefits for those who have stopped doping long after the dope wears off.

It has been show that for steroid abuse. Maybe you can help me with a link that restricts the question to blood doping.

Personal attacks lessens yours argument.

Sorry but you are making personal attacks. I thought I could just do the same about your constantly irritating truisms. I have managed a few time to get you to actually form a complete sentence or to expand on your little glib comments. A little like this.

It has been rough on me as I try to stay out of the clinic except on Chris Horner and Ryder threads.

Why do you follow cycling anyway?