Sagan Clean?

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

Obviously one of the more naturally talented riders in the peloton, dope or not. Looks on another level this season, though. Looks like he's doing what it takes to scrape up the cobblestone races this season and I wouldn't be surprised to see him win next Sunday.

His team only adds to the suspicion.

Not possible to deduce someones natural talent vs the rest if dope is involved. Only way to do that is to have a clean sport.
Just out of interest if dope is involved how do you deduce he is a natural talent in the peleton ?
Finally with dope in the peleton how do you know anyone is naturally talented ?

Not saying he's clean, because who the hell knows, but the way he descended when he won the Worlds'--not to mention the way he bunny-hopped over Cancellara (with only one foot clipped in!) at Paris Roubaix--and about a hundred other examples show that the guy has insane natural bike-handling skills. They haven't invented a drug for that yet.

My guess is natural talent + good response to the high octane stuff =

Surely you can't turn a donkey into a race horse that young. Sagan only spent one year as an U23 FFS. Unlike a certain other rider he actually did race in running shoes - and won.

 

[samerics]

Re:

Sagan is of course an absolute (doping) monster, but it's also no surprise that he has so few posts about him here in the clinic, since he has practically everything (other than being strong as a bull) going for him: he hit the ground running, impressing everyone in Down Under as a teenager; he doesn't have any missed tests or TUEs *that we know of*; he is both versatile and has a very high level of technical skill; he isn't a climber, so we can't really compare his performances as well with dopers as we can with GT-contenders; he races attractively and is popular; we also often see him lose, so most people are not that annoyed to see him win; he isn't a native English speaker nor is he a Southern European, but comes from a small cycling nation with no bad clinic past (at least in cycling); and he doesn't fit (or perhaps because of the other reasons mentioned here, there's no focus on wether he does fit or not) the "clinic-hypocrite-criteria" like Sky or Garmin.

I love the certainty in this! He is OF COURSE a doping monster. You obviously have an inside line on this so you must have proof, right?

 

[glassmoon]

dope+talent=winner

 

[Kokoso]

Re:

dope+talent=winner

Says nothing. Dope + not much of talent = winner. Go figure.

Of course Sagan must be the most talented because he has been winning since young age - that proves he's exceptional talent, right? Yeah.
Another possible mystification people use to think. Or maybe they think exceptionally talented in doping

When doping is involved, there is big chance that you will never know how much talented this or that guy was.

 

[glassmoon]

Re: Re:

dope+talent=winner

Says nothing. Dope + not much of talent = winner. Go figure.

not when you're against dope+talent. in case you have more or less the same "dope" part
other factors matter too of course but dope+talent>dope-talent imho.

 

[Kokoso]

Re: Re:

dope+talent=winner

Says nothing. Dope + not much of talent = winner. Go figure.

not when you're against dope+talent. in case you have more or less the same "dope" part
other factors matter too of course but dope+talent>dope-talent imho.

You are contradicting yourself. On one hand you've said dope + talent > dope + not so much talent, on the other hand you (correctly IMHO) say more doping > less doping and may change result substantially. Another important thing is that different people have different response to doping, as a result you have less talented athlete performing better than more talented with same doping.

So, really, once doping is in game, you may have no way to tell who was more talented than who. Doping can do monster from less than average talented guy, that may be Sagan's case, who knows. I am not saying he is doping, but he sure is suspicious.

Thing is he choosed "disciplines" where I think there is harder to compare because it's harder to have objective informations about performance and thus make conlusions - cobbled classics or one day races generally. Most suspicious are those going big mountains fast (mainly GC contenders) but I fear that is not fair because I fear doping is usefull on cobbled as well as in the mouintains. Wise choice you could say, if not for them being generally valued less than GTs or stage races (and rightly so IMHO). Moreover there is really only few guys really aspiring for top result in cobbled classics, so again - wise choice.

Edit: plus cobbled classics tend to make bigger spectacle and so contenders tend to be popular there IMHO. And the more popular cyclist is the less are people willing to forgive him him are there, make excuses, not suspect or at least not speak about that. (Bigger spectacle becuase domestiques are not as strong there as anywhere else (some of them take cobbled classics as a punishment), concurence is smaller, people are falling, dirty from mud and so on...epic is the word

 

[Nomad]

Re:

Sagan is of course an absolute (doping) monster, but it's also no surprise that he has so few posts about him here in the clinic, since he has practically everything (other than being strong as a bull) going for him: he hit the ground running, impressing everyone in Down Under as a teenager; he doesn't have any missed tests or TUEs *that we know of*; he is both versatile and has a very high level of technical skill; he isn't a climber, so we can't really compare his performances as well with dopers as we can with GT-contenders; he races attractively and is popular; we also often see him lose, so most people are not that annoyed to see him win; he isn't a native English speaker nor is he a Southern European, but comes from a small cycling nation with no bad clinic past (at least in cycling); and he doesn't fit (or perhaps because of the other reasons mentioned here, there's no focus on wether he does fit or not) the "clinic-hypocrite-criteria" like Sky or Garmin.

"doping monster???" Sagan? That's a term in WWE to describe Brock Lesnar. Lol. Seriously though, what kind of PEDs do you think Sagan is using or do you think he's playing it safe with TUEs? I would imagine if he tested postive or had a BP sanction, it would not only be catastrophic for cycling, but he'd break the hearts of millions of young girls throughout the world

 

[Kokoso]

Re: Re:

I would imagine if he tested postive or had a BP sanction, it would not only be catastrophic for cycling, but he'd break the hearts of millions of young girls throughout the world

No catastroph for cycling, cycling would go on. Everybody is replaceable. No millions of broken hearts for girls...gee... :razz: It wasn't really meant seriously, was it?

 

[Nomad]

Re: Re:

I would imagine if he tested postive or had a BP sanction, it would not only be catastrophic for cycling, but he'd break the hearts of millions of young girls throughout the world

No catastroph for cycling, cycling would go on. Everybody is replaceable. No millions of broken hearts for girls...gee... :razz: It wasn't really meant seriously, was it?

It would be a catastrophe for cycling. This is the "new, clean era" of cycling...right? If Sagan was ever popped; he'd be exiled from Slovakia, his loyal fans would want to lynch him, Ligget would fall out of his chair, Roll would give his booth at NBC in disgust, and Lance would get a big laugh. That's why I think he's playing it safe and using TUEs...way too much at stake

 

[mike75]

Re: Re:

I would imagine if he tested postive or had a BP sanction, it would not only be catastrophic for cycling, but he'd break the hearts of millions of young girls throughout the world

No catastroph for cycling, cycling would go on. Everybody is replaceable. No millions of broken hearts for girls...gee... :razz: It wasn't really meant seriously, was it?

It would be catastrophe for cycling. This is the "new, clean era" of cycling...right? If Sagan was ever popped; he'd be exiled from Slovakia, his loyal fans would want to lynch him, Ligget would fall out of his chair, Roll would give his booth at NBC in disgust, and Lance would get a big laugh. That's why I think he's playing it safe and using TUEs...way too much at stake

And how is this any different from Froome, if he is ever caught? The newest multi-time TdF winner gets popped again, in the "new era of clean cycling"...yeah I don't think that would go over well. Not that Froome has the popularity of Sagan, quite the contrary tbh, but the very next dominant multiple TdF winner after Armstrong getting popped would probably be pretty bad for the sport...if there is any reputation left to sully!

 

[Nomad]

Re: Re:

I would imagine if he tested postive or had a BP sanction, it would not only be catastrophic for cycling, but he'd break the hearts of millions of young girls throughout the world

No catastroph for cycling, cycling would go on. Everybody is replaceable. No millions of broken hearts for girls...gee... :razz: It wasn't really meant seriously, was it?

It would be catastrophe for cycling. This is the "new, clean era" of cycling...right? If Sagan was ever popped; he'd be exiled from Slovakia, his loyal fans would want to lynch him, Ligget would fall out of his chair, Roll would give his booth at NBC in disgust, and Lance would get a big laugh. That's why I think he's playing it safe and using TUEs...way too much at stake

And how is this any different from Froome, if he is ever caught? The newest multi-time TdF winner gets popped again, in the "new era of clean cycling"...yeah I don't think that would go over well. Not that Froome has the popularity of Sagan, quite the contrary tbh, but the very next dominant multiple TdF winner after Armstrong getting popped would probably be pretty bad for the sport...if there is any reputation left to sully!

It would be a lot different, IMO. Any true cycling fan with half a brain expects Tour champions to be doped, given the history & culture of doping with the Yellow jersey. And you have Froome's ludicrous transformation in 2011 that makes LA's transformation look like he actually had to train hard and put forth the effort to make the jump to a GT contender. If Froome was popped, Cookson might get a migraine or two. Braislford would simply address the media with "didn't see this coming" and it would be the next man up for Sky (G.Thomas?). Roll & Vandervelt would just laugh probably saying "I'm sure glad it wasn't an American this time!" Lol. No doubt, loyal Froome fans would give him the finger, burn his book and throw away their Froome stuff, but they would quickly find a another Sky GT contender to root for (next man up). Business as usual in Skyland.

With Sagan; viewership would go down, ratings would drop, and youngsters who aspire to be a Green jersey & classics winners would throw in the towel and pursue another sport. Sagan is kind of the "Russell Wilson" of the NFL; a very marketable and an admired athlete by all. Sagan has a lot at stake and he enjoys the limelight of his popularity too much. That's why I feel he's playing it very safe and going only with TUEs. Maybe also some creatine, ZMA, BCAAs...these have some science behind it supporting increase lean muscle mass & strenghth/recovery. Why some here insist he's using anabolic steriods/testesterone is beyond me...just because he's muscular? So are many other cyclists. There's also a steriodial module that was added to the ABP in 2014 that makes it more difficult to conceal the use of androgens (think Danielson). And I think any O2-vector doping is out of the question...he's not a GT contender who needs to push high-tempo in the mountains (and did anyone see how he was in respiratory distress & tachy at the summit of Mt. Baldy a few years at the TOC...not a sign of O2-vector doping).

 

[hrotha]

The problem with your reasoning is that you think deterrence is provided by the punishment (according to the the rules, or popular punishment of the kind a more famous or rock-star-like rider might suffer). In reality, deterrence is provided mostly by the likelihood of being caught, which we have no reason to believe would be higher in the case of Sagan compared to Froome.

Nobody goes into this kind of shady business thinking "meh, I accept the price if I get caught". They go into it thinking "I hope I don't get caught at all".

 

[carolina]

Re: Re:

That's why I feel he's playing it very safe and going only with TUEs. Maybe some creatine, ZMA, BCAAs...these have some science behind it supporting increase lean muscle mass & strenghth/recovery.

Creatine has plenty of evidence supporting its benefits, but they are extremelly small.
BCAAs are useless has a supplement.
ZMA is also useless unless you have a zinc and/or magnesium deficiency.

I remember reading somewhere that he gained 4 kilos of muscle mass during the off-season when he moved to tinkoff. That increase in muscle in so few months is impossible without steroids. I can't find the article, though.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re: Re:

With Sagan; viewership would go down, ratings would drop, and youngsters who aspire to be a Green jersey & classics winners would throw in the towel and pursue another sport. Sagan is kind of the "Russell Wilson" of the NFL; a very marketable and an admired athlete by all. Sagan has a lot at stake and he enjoys the limelight of his popularity too much. That's why I feel he's playing it very safe and going only with TUEs. Maybe also some creatine, ZMA, BCAAs...these have some science behind it supporting increase lean muscle mass & strenghth/recovery. Why some here insist he's using anabolic steriods/testesterone is beyond me...just because he's muscular? So are many other cyclists. There's also a steriodial module that was added to the ABP in 2014 that makes it more difficult to conceal the use of androgens (think Danielson). And I think any O2-vector doping is out of the question...he's not a GT contender who needs to push high-tempo in the mountains (and did anyone see how he was in respiratory distress & tachy at the summit of Mt. Baldy a few years at the TOC...not a sign of O2-vector doping).

Sagan is one of those guys like Valverde whose junior and cadet records show an incredible talent. Somewhere along the line the line becomes blurred as to what is natural and what isn't, but we don't know where.

However, please don't speak for everybody. If there are people who will switch off the sport and never return if he gets banned, then you know, good riddance, because those that would be switching off because they only care about the personalities involved and not the sport are only fairweather fans, and if they're fans of Sagan because of his personality then I wouldn't have wanted to talk to them while they were "fans" of the sport anyway. Those who actually love the sport, but are fans of Sagan who would be disappointed if he were absent, would still watch the most important races anyhow.

 

[Nomad]

Re: Re:

That's why I feel he's playing it very safe and going only with TUEs. Maybe some creatine, ZMA, BCAAs...these have some science behind it supporting increase lean muscle mass & strenghth/recovery.

Creatine has plenty of evidence supporting its benefits, but they are extremelly small.
BCAAs are useless has a supplement.
ZMA is also useless unless you have a zinc and/or magnesium deficiency.

I remember reading somewhere that he gained 4 kilos of muscle mass during the off-season when he moved to tinkoff. That increase in muscle in so few months is impossible without steroids. I can't find the article, though.

I disagree...I have links to RCTs that prove otherwise on creatine & BCAAs, though ZMA studies aren't that promising. Also, CyclingTips recently had a good analysis on creatine. Creatine is regularly used by D-1 football players as part of their strength & conditioning program. I don’t want to go off topic (another place...another time?), so let's talk Sagan:

Do you have any verifiable info that he gained 8.8 lbs of lean muscle mass and not just total body weight increase? When he went to Tinkoff, that was after the implementation of the steriodal module of the ABP, so if he was using steriods how did he not trip the BP and be subjected to target testing? Even relatively modest use of androgens are going to create noticable fluctuations on the module, and larger amounts needed to gain 8+ lbs of lean muscle mass would be a dead give away for immediate target testing (Danielson was target tested due to fluctuations on his module).

Other than maybe, a very small, "microdosing" amount of T, how can any athlete using androgens avert the detection of the steriodal module? Kudos to WADA...I think they've got the advantage on this one...finally. And just because an athlete looks like he's gained lean muscle mass doesn't imply androgen use.

 

[carolina]

I never stated creatine doesn't work, I actually said otherwise. I have been using creatine for over a year now, its effects aren't that noticeable. Most people use it because it's really cheap. In practical terms, if you're on creatine you can get one more rep or you're able to add one or two extra pounds to the bar when your lifting. This means your trainning volume increases a little bit and you'll be able to gain more muscle. But like I said, it's a really tiny advantage.

BCAAs, as a supplement, are useless if you already consume enough protein. Sagan has a team doctor and nutritionist, so this is of no use for him. There are 1 or 2 studies that say it may help recovery in endurance exercises, but from personal experience, it's also not very noticeable. (http://examine.com/supplements/Branched+Chain+Amino+Acids/)

I've tried to look for the article, but I can't seem to find it. He clearly gained some muscle in these past couple years, but without knowing the exact amount of muscle and time period it's difficult to conclude anything.

 

[King Boonen]

What's the evidence against Sagan? I'll read the thread but if someone could summarise that would be great.

 

[Netserk]

-He's strong as a bull
-Did worse after Slogno left Cannondale
-That's it.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

-He's strong as a bull
-Did worse after Slogno left Cannondale
-That's it.

So basically nothing then? That's good to know.

 

[sniper]

- rumor about him using a motor (see upthread).
but yes, basically nothing.

 

[Netserk]

I'd argue that his performances are fair evidence of him being dirty/very improbable that he is clean. YMMV

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

I'd argue that his performances are fair evidence of him being dirty/very improbable that he is clean. YMMV

I suppose that depends on what you think the base level of doping is in the peloton. He's clearly very strong and always has been, but he seems to suffer in some areas if he tries to improve in others and he's been beaten when you might expect him to win. Id like to give him the benefit of the doubt at the moment and I'm really not much of a fan of him other than of his bike riding.

 

[Netserk]

Jalabert also became a worse sprinter when he learned to climb

 

[Nomad]

Re:

I never stated creatine doesn't work, I actually said otherwise. I have been using creatine for over a year now, its effects aren't that noticeable. Most people use it because it's really cheap. In practical terms, if you're on creatine you can get one more rep or you're able to add one or two extra pounds to the bar when your lifting. This means your trainning volume increases a little bit and you'll be able to gain more muscle. But like I said, it's a really tiny advantage.

BCAAs, as a supplement, are useless if you already consume enough protein. Sagan has a team doctor and nutritionist, so this is of no use for him. There are 1 or 2 studies that say it may help recovery in endurance exercises, but from personal experience, it's also not very noticeable. (http://examine.com/supplements/Branched+Chain+Amino+Acids/)

I've tried to look for the article, but I can't seem to find it. He clearly gained some muscle in these past couple years, but without knowing the exact amount of muscle and time period it's difficult to conclude anything.

My apologies...I misinterpreted your statement on creatine. As I mentioned there's a good analysis with creatine specific to cyclists at CyclingTips.

On BCAAs: Thanks for the link, and I'm aware of the 2 studies showing improved recovery with endurance. There's also a recent study showing significant improved recovery with older subjects (me). I'm a senior competitive runner (55+) with a chronic injury history and started using BCAAs about 6 mos ago. A noticable difference in improved recovery, stronger workouts, less injuries, etc. And when you're a competitive runner over 55, the name of the game is to "stay in the game." Lol

Whether or not Sagan is doping using androgens...I wouldn't really know (who would?). What I do know is that he couldn't use very much, if any at all, due to the steriodal module of the ABP. Any fluctuations on the adaptive model would be a dead give away and result in target testing. As I mentioned, I think WADA's got the advantage on this one, and athletes aren't going to risk getting caught using roids/T...a good thing!

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

Jalabert also became a worse sprinter when he learned to climb

When Sagan wins the green jersey at the Tour, then wins the Vuelta GC, that comparison will hold up more