Sastre off the Saxo-Riis Program

[bikeGURU]

So is the performance of Sastre this year what happens when you move away from the (anti) doping program of Riis?? Going from tour winner to 25min back in a year is a pretty huge change. The rest of the Riis crowd did exceptionally well with Frank/Andy, Cance and the rest of the uber strong domestiques that they had.

I always found it very hard to believe that CSC was clean last year and had the most strit anti--doping program, yet they were the best team at the Tour and all year long. How does the a team race clean and beat all the other teams that are racing doped?? Doesn't sound right to me.

Any thoughts??

 

[Dr. Maserati]

So is the performance of Sastre this year what happens when you move away from the (anti) doping program of Riis?? Going from tour winner to 25min back in a year is a pretty huge change. The rest of the Riis crowd did exceptionally well with Frank/Andy, Cance and the rest of the uber strong domestiques that they had.

I always found it very hard to believe that CSC was clean last year and had the most strit anti--doping program, yet they were the best team at the Tour and all year long. How does the a team race clean and beat all the other teams that are racing doped?? Doesn't sound right to me.

Any thoughts??

Certainly Saxo Bank have had a successful Tour - however Satre did the Giro this year and we havent seen anyone who was a high GC contender at the Giro be truly competitive - with the best being LA with 12 & 3rd.

I think the only person capable of being able to be competitve in both the Giro & Tour would be Contador.

 

[Rouleur]

Exactly, Sastre rode the Giro to a podium placing ( now that Di Luca is gone ) and won two mountain top finishes.

One thing I've noticed about Sastre is that he can't start climbs at a high pace. He needs time to fine his pace and even then he only has about one good acceleration. Now that he has two teams, Saxo and Astana, raising the pace at the bottom of the climbs he really suffers.

He still remains one of my favourite riders and he is certainly one of the most consistent in the peloton.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

4th and 17th isn't too bad, actually. He was also the best climber in the Giro, along with Diluca (who was doped). If you remove the time he lost on the ITT's in the Giro, he wins the thing.

If you think Sastre had a drop off, take a look at Denny Menchov, who is an hour plus back in this Tour. 51st place, when some people thought he might podium. I'm convinced that Denny is both tired, and riding clean - this Tour at least.

I also imagine Carlos will ride the Vuelta this year, where he could finish in the top 10 as well.

His nickname is also "Mr. Clean". Though that doesn't mean he never doped, that would be naive. But it could mean he is cleaner than most out there. Or just that he's polite.

And now, for the most opinionated part - it's my opinion that the peloton was getting cleaner in the last couple of years. Not clean, mind you, cleaner. I think with this year's Giro, and especially Tour, we've slipped back a few steps, and more riders, at least at the top, are doping using the most advanced and discrete methods. Leaving many behind who can't keep up due to more stringent testing. And Sastre just might be in that latter group.

 

[beroepsrenner]

4th and 17th isn't too bad, actually. He was also the best climber in the Giro, along with Diluca (who was doped). If you remove the time he lost on the ITT's in the Giro, he wins the thing.

If you think Sastre had a drop off, take a look at Denny Menchov, who is an hour plus back in this Tour. 51st place, when some people thought he might podium. I'm convinced that Denny is both tired, and riding clean - this Tour at least.

I also imagine Carlos will ride the Vuelta this year, where he could finish in the top 10 as well.

His nickname is also "Mr. Clean". Though that doesn't mean he never doped, that would be naive. But it could mean he is cleaner than most out there. Or just that he's polite.

And now, for the most opinionated part - it's my opinion that the peloton was getting cleaner in the last couple of years. Not clean, mind you, cleaner. I think with this year's Giro, and especially Tour, we've slipped back a few steps, and more riders, at least at the top, are doping using the most advanced and discrete methods. Leaving many behind who can't keep up due to more stringent testing. And Sastre just might be in that latter group.

Alpe, you are very right in what you say here. Very few riders can maintain top form for extended periods. Too many people jump to conclusions when they see fluctuating performances.

 

[Parrot23]

Levi L. is a good example of that (overcooked before he showed up at Giro, from a long season).

Am also amazed sometimes how the Dauphine is NOT a good indicator of subsequent Tour form (e.g. Evans this year). Peaking is tricky.

 

[beroepsrenner]

Levi L. is a good example of that (overcooked before he showed up at Giro, from a long season).

Am also amazed sometimes how the Dauphine is NOT a good indicator of subsequent Tour form (e.g. Evans this year). Peaking is tricky.

Absolutely! For those in the habit of speculation, i would be most suspicious of anyone who is winning races consistently throughout the year.

 

[Laszlo]

I think cervelo as sponsors have ensured their riders don't give them a bad name; I also think that is why the split from riis, now they are big enough to sponsor a team on their own- they call the shots who to hire or fire

 

[beroepsrenner]

I think cervelo as sponsors have ensured their riders don't give them a bad name; I also think that is why the split from riis, now they are big enough to sponsor a team on their own- they call the shots who to hire or fire

An interesting observation. Without being in GC contention they have still gotten good exposure.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

If you watch some of their videos, you'll see there appears to be very little pressure to get good performances. Cervelo seems to have a more global or viral marketing campaign that goes just beyond winning races to get exposure. I'd say they've actually done quite well.

Anyone remember the 2004 Dauphine? Iban Mayo dropped Lance on every hill. How about the 2006 version? Levi dominated the DL and looked like a heavy favorite for the Tour...where he crapped out and lost a lot of time even in his specialties, the ITT. How about 2003 when Simoni dominated the Giro and said he'd push Lance and everyone else at the Tour...and was never a factor (though he did win a mountain stage)?

 

[Escarabajo]

Levi L. is a good example of that (overcooked before he showed up at Giro, from a long season).

Am also amazed sometimes how the Dauphine is NOT a good indicator of subsequent Tour form (e.g. Evans this year). Peaking is tricky.

Evans could have been a coincidence because, maybe, he was sick.

 

[CerveloFan]

I do think that Sastre probably peaked too early, and the observation about his climbing style (longer to get going, less ability to accelerate repeatedly) are accurate.

I actually started a thread on whether companies with a vested interest in cycling (like bike companies) would make better team sponsors, primarily for the reason suggested here - less pressure for wins might mean less pressure to dope - but it didn't get any responses (guess I should have posted in the Clinic section - or titled the thread "Should Trek sponsor Lance's team?")

Still, I am suspicious when a successful rider leaves a wealthier team and subsequently has a significant drop in performance - this was certainly the case with Popovych and US Postal, and I think a lot of people have talked about ex-Bruyneel riders getting busted. I'm not sure what I think about Sastre in this case.

 

[Escarabajo]

Still, I am suspicious when a successful rider leaves a wealthier team and subsequently has a significant drop in performance - this was certainly the case with Popovych and US Postal, and I think a lot of people have talked about ex-Bruyneel riders getting busted. I'm not sure what I think about Sastre in this case.

I don't think he is getting any younger either. That does not help.

 

[BroDeal]

I actually started a thread on whether companies with a vested interest in cycling (like bike companies) would make better team sponsors, primarily for the reason suggested here - less pressure for wins might mean less pressure to dope - but it didn't get any responses (guess I should have posted in the Clinic section - or titled the thread "Should Trek sponsor Lance's team?")

I don't see that a "cycling company" would have any less incentive than a regular sponsor to have a cleaner team. The argument could be made that they would have more pressure to get results. If Garmin fails to win much, no one will attribute their lack of success to GPS units. If a bike company's team fails to get results, it reflects on the company's core product to some degree.

 

[psychlist]

If you watch some of their videos, you'll see there appears to be very little pressure to get good performances. Cervelo seems to have a more global or viral marketing campaign that goes just beyond winning races to get exposure. I'd say they've actually done quite well.

Anyone remember the 2004 Dauphine? Iban Mayo dropped Lance on every hill. How about the 2006 version? Levi dominated the DL and looked like a heavy favorite for the Tour...where he crapped out and lost a lot of time even in his specialties, the ITT. How about 2003 when Simoni dominated the Giro and said he'd push Lance and everyone else at the Tour...and was never a factor (though he did win a mountain stage)?

Based on the number of Cervelo bikes I see in Central Park and in Prospect Park (in Brooklyn), it seems their marketing campaign is a big success.

 

[El Imbatido]

If you watch some of their videos, you'll see there appears to be very little pressure to get good performances. Cervelo seems to have a more global or viral marketing campaign that goes just beyond winning races to get exposure. I'd say they've actually done quite well.

Anyone remember the 2004 Dauphine? Iban Mayo dropped Lance on every hill. How about the 2006 version? Levi dominated the DL and looked like a heavy favorite for the Tour...where he crapped out and lost a lot of time even in his specialties, the ITT. How about 2003 when Simoni dominated the Giro and said he'd push Lance and everyone else at the Tour...and was never a factor (though he did win a mountain stage)?

Also Valverde at last years dauphine libere. he started the tour on fire but fizzled after that to basically nothing

 

[CerveloFan]

I can't figure out how to quote someone on here (I'm new to these forums), but I agree with BroDeal that poor performances could reflect poorly on bike companies products, and thus create more incentive to dope. But I think there are some interesting issues about the role of sponsors, money and doping.

I also wonder if companies whose advertising is targeted toward those people that actually watch cycling (in North America, at least, a tiny minority) might be more interested in the overall health of the sport - I mean, if professional cycling is completely discredited and loses popularity due to (even more) extensive doping revelations, I think Cervelo, Specialized, etc. would suffer - one of their primary advertising forums would be restricted - whereas Discovery Channel, or Radioshack really have no long term interest.

I certainly don't think that bike companies teams (or even sportswear-sponsored teams) are automatically clean, or cleaner - but I think that it might provide a positive direction for the future of the sport. I admit I still have a lot to learn about the business/financial side of professional cycling, though.

 

[the delgados]

Cervelofan:
Cycling has already been discredited and has never been popular in North America.
But I'll still buy a Cervelo, so no worries.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Absolutely! For those in the habit of speculation, i would be most suspicious of anyone who is winning races consistently throughout the year.

My thoughts exactly. It just isn't possible to peak consistently throughout an entire season. Just another reason why Contador's shortest ever cycling "grand slam" should be viewed with suspicion.

On the original thread topic about Sastre performing worse in a different team, I also have to wonder about the magical form slump of Popavich when he went to Silence-Lotto and then a miraculous return when he is back with Lance and Johan. I mean seriously, just looking at Johan Bruyneel's record (of association with doping) is enough to raise an eyebrow or two.

 

[beroepsrenner]

My thoughts exactly. It just isn't possible to peak consistently throughout an entire season. Just another reason why Contador's shortest ever cycling "grand slam" should be viewed with suspicion.

On the original thread topic about Sastre performing worse in a different team, I also have to wonder about the magical form slump of Popavich when he went to Silence-Lotto and then a miraculous return when he is back with Lance and Johan. I mean seriously, just looking at Johan Bruyneel's record (of association with doping) is enough to raise an eyebrow or two.

Are you saying that the silence lotto bean counters didnt leave enough in the budget for a creative doctor. Mmmmm..maybe thats why they've had such a s...t season eh?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I actually started a thread on whether companies with a vested interest in cycling (like bike companies) would make better team sponsors, primarily for the reason suggested here - less pressure for wins might mean less pressure to dope - but it didn't get any responses.

Obviously a good topic, as we're discussing it now!

I can't figure out how to quote someone on here (I'm new to these forums), but I agree with BroDeal that poor performances could reflect poorly on bike companies products, and thus create more incentive to dope. But I think there are some interesting issues about the role of sponsors, money and doping.

Well, I was saying that I think Cervelo looks beyond living and dying by their cycling team. Look at their ad's, look at the videos they put up on their site, and the ones they made this year. It's about their company, their factory, about making quality bikes people want to ride, and having some fun sponsoring a team. There's very little talk about winning, or even any goals racing. And ads featuring their riders isn't really the "buy one to ride like Carlos" angle. They even had a fun contest last year to make your own Cervelo video.

CerveloFan - To quote someone, look at the little buttons to the bottom right of any window pane someone wrote in. Or you can copy some text, then when you get to the reply window (the one I'm in now), there is a little quote box up top in the toolbar - farthest to the right.

 

[blackcat]

the bike companies are the most expedient of all.

Cervelo were "hot" earlier this season too.

 

[Laszlo]

I think that if the pressure was on from a bike manufacturer to have a winning team to help boost sales some one might be tempted to introduce performance enhancing dope to certain riders - but at the same time too there will be an element of risk of suggesting that to the wrong person, someone who might even go so far as to help set up a sting operation; and then there is the possibility that a doped rider gets caught and leads a trail right back to a bike cos. executive. Legal action against that co would probabally have them banished from compettion and tarnish them for bad sportsmanship/ supporting doping- there are enough honest people in the world that that kind of negative publicity would probabally be terminal for the company. delorean.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

One thing I do like about the Cervelo Test Team is that is all new.
They didn't just set up on a pre-existing team or management company.

They have had to build the team from the bottom and although they have some ex pro's acting as DS at least it is not part of the 'old guard'.

 

[jonjungel]

The reason Sastre didn't do well this year is because he's tired. Now, after the tour is over, he says so himself. Looking at his quotes during the tour it is obvious that he was feeling tired the whole time.