Tony the Pony is now a racehorse?

[Willy_Voet]

Cancellara uses an electric motor. Wiggins has a funny shaped head. Tony beats them both. Germany finally has its replacement for Ullrich?

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Martin certainly produced an 'unbelievable' performance.

Can someone remind me what his UCI Suspicion score was?

 

[FTWDC11]

Martin certainly produced an 'unbelievable' performance.

Can someone remind me what his UCI Suspicion score was?

Tony's score was 7. That's also Fab Fabs' lucky number. I guess Tony took it from him.

 

[sniper]

Cancellara uses an electric motor. Wiggins has a funny shaped head. Tony beats them both. Germany finally has its replacement for Ullrich?

the germans do seem to embrace their new hero.
it's all over the german news, and nobody's asking nasty questions. (and not a word about the new ferrari-related revelations, which otherwise would have made headlines in germany.)
it seems the germans have finally overcome their telekom-trauma, and can finally move on.

 

[maltiv]

It bothers me slightly that he was a 7 on the UCI suspicion scale, but else than that I guess there has been nothing on Tony Martin. If he were to be caught I assume it would've been the final killing blow for professional cycling in Germany, so I really hope he is clean.

 

[zigmeister]

His performances over the past many months is quite astonishing!

 

[Benotti69]

It bothers me slightly that he was a 7 on the UCI suspicion scale, but else than that I guess there has been nothing on Tony Martin. If he were to be caught I assume it would've been the final killing blow for professional cycling in Germany, so I really hope he is clean.

Clean? and he just put over a minute into Canc, i somehow doubt that.


Eurosport were using those words again you know the ones....unbelievable etc

 

[Anonymous]

Do we really pay any mind to the suspicion score.

He worked on his time trials, put in a few good time trial perfomances and so his suspicion score rose. Just as Thomas's dauphine performance increased his.

Suspicion is fine, but the UCI index is idiotic with no basis for how things are calculated.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

You would say that wouldn't you?

It's almost as much of a joke as Froome in the Vuelta.

 

[mb2612]

Do we really pay any mind to the suspicion score.

He worked on his time trials, put in a few good time trial perfomances and so his suspicion score rose. Just as Thomas's dauphine performance increased his.

Suspicion is fine, but the UCI index is idiotic with no basis for how things are calculated.

It's calculated based on their biological passport, with anything above 5 being almost certain doping.

Just because Sky did badly doesn't make it a poor measure.

 

[Anonymous]

It's calculated based on their biological passport, with anything above 5 being almost certain doping.

Just because Sky did badly doesn't make it a poor measure.

you are incorrect.

it isnt based purely on their bio passport. It was based on a number of things, bio passport, how frequently the rider has been tested (so a rider tested more frequently would have a lower rating than one who had not been tested for three months), as well as results and performances.

For instance, Cancellara's zero rating was maybe a result of the bio passport, but also maybe a result of him having been tested very heavily in the run up period. Geraint Thomas was a five (from memory), but had barely been tested in the three months prior to the Dauphine (and hence part of the reason for a higher rating).

But it certainly isnt based purely on the bio passport. And that was the critisism most people had of it when it was released. The fact that there where multiple reasons for the numbers with no clear defining explanation.

 

[Escarabajo]

you are incorrect.

it isnt based purely on their bio passport. It was based on a number of things, bio passport, how frequently the rider has been tested (so a rider tested more frequently would have a lower rating than one who had not been tested for three months), as well as results and performances.

For instance, Cancellara's zero rating was maybe a result of the bio passport, but also maybe a result of him having been tested very heavily in the run up period. Geraint Thomas was a five (from memory), but had barely been tested in the three months prior to the Dauphine (and hence part of the reason for a higher rating).

But it certainly isnt based purely on the bio passport. And that was the critisism most people had of it when it was released. The fact that there where multiple reasons for the numbers with no clear defining explanation.

You are probably correct, but the explanation on the scoring system then was wrong, because after a score of 5 Lequipe was claiming that the rider was already under scrutiny of doping.

I know that the frequency and the performance in past races was a factor but why the score explanation??

Having said that, it is the UCI and anything can be expected, sadly.

 

[euanli]

far too many people put too much importance on the meaning of the "suspicion list"

in fact I like to call it the stupidity list and base my opinion on someone from what they know/think about the list.

 

[T_S_A_R]

martin winning by a big margin today wasn't a shock.

however it adds a bit of context to evans finishing 7 secs behind him in the TT in the tour (with 3rd place being over a minute behind)

quite a performance by cadel considering his exertions over the two previous days.

 

[veganrob]

I had a pony named Tony. He was ancient. Had bad feet and was nearly blind. I had to give him pain killers sometimes. He was a great pony. Not a race horse though.
Tony Martin though. Well, you know the best TT guys like the pain killers.

 

[luckyboy]

martin winning by a big margin today wasn't a shock.

however it adds a bit of context to evans finishing 7 secs behind him in the TT in the tour (with 3rd place being over a minute behind)

quite a performance by cadel considering his exertions over the two previous days.

Have to consider Martin's recuperation after 3 weeks and the lumpy course.

 

[danjo007]

this mb2612 character is just 1 huge LOL. thats the sort of response i expect to see of children... wait, thats right, there isnt an age limit to the internet :/

 

[webvan]

Just finished watching the rerun, pretty impressive, but pretty much in line with all of the year's ITTs, 1+ minute on Wiggo.

 

[usedtobefast]

he was well "prepared" no doubt...

 

[simoni]

What I don't understand is how the same people who'll deride the UCI as corrupt imbeciles will happily cite those leaked suspicion scores when it suits them. You can't have it both ways.

 

[sniper]

according to this short german article, Tony is commited to the anti-doping-cause, which is why riding for Saxo Bank was never an option for Tony.
He is even quoted as saying "I could never imagine myself riding in a team with Alberto Contador".

http://www.fnp.de/fnp/sport/ueberregional/rmn01.c.9226552.de.htm

 

[spalco]

Tony Martin is one of the few cyclists who I really want to believe in, not least because he would be risking so much if he's doping, more than probably almost any other cyclist - not only intense condemnation by the German public/media but also his fallback career as a policeman, which surely would over if he's caught.

 

[craig1985]

What, Tony Martin speaks English to a pretty good level, has ridden for an American team his entire pro career, won plenty of TT's in his career and people claim that he is a doper? No way. Plus even though he is from the old East Germany, he and his family escaped before the Berlin Wall came down, so he isn't in the same boat as Klöden, Zabel, Ullrich etc.

 

[spalco]

What's wrong with being a Pony anyway?

 

[mb2612]

this mb2612 character is just 1 huge LOL. thats the sort of response i expect to see of children... wait, thats right, there isnt an age limit to the internet :/

For what reason, because I believe that the UCI anti doping authorities know what they are talking about.

Those in categories six and above (6-10) showed “overwhelming” evidence of some kind of doping, due to “recurring anomalies”, “enormous variations” in parameters, and even the “identification of doping products or methods”, according to L’Equipe.

They have more information than we do, so their evidence is more impressive than the rubbish that you spout.

Back up your arguments with evidence, don't insult me for looking at things logicically rather than with rose tinted glasses.