Vincenzo Nibali

[melkemugg]

The only guy faster than him since 1996 was Armstrong

Like I said. Not that fast.

 

[roundabout]

Like I said. Not that fast.

You sound somewhat in denial if you think that beating CERAed times is "not that fast"

 

[Bronstein]

Extraterrestrial performance today. There would have been a thermonuclear war had Froome and Contador been there.

 

[Mishrak]

I wouldn't say a 37'20 is extraterrestrial. It's a really top notch performance but an alien performance would have been much better.

Nibali's not been put under any pressure at all in the mountains, so I'm not surprised he's got this much energy at this stage of the Tour.

Clean or not, I don't know, but it's at least in the realm of believable.

 

[melkemugg]

You sound somewhat in denial if you think that beating CERAed times is "not that fast"

In denial? I expected "full ***" and Extraterrestrial performance like everyone else in here.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Vincenzo Nibali's climbing time 37:20 on the Hautacam into a head wind (according to LeMond)
27th of all time. Best since Armstrong in 2000.
http://www.climbing-records.com/2014/07/hautacam-top-100-go-big-or-go-home.html

2008: http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/tour-de-france-2008/stage-10/results

Piepoli wins on a climb with attacks and a Frank Schleck wheel to follow at 6km to go. His time: 37:30.

Went positive for CERA in a sample the next day, and the day before the start of that Tour.

 

[Bronstein]

Clean or not, I don't know, but it's at least in the realm of believable.

In the realm of the believable? Could you point out another 'believable' performance from those listed here http://www.chronoswatts.com/en/watts/22/?

I'm sure he would have cracked 37 minutes had he been properly challenged.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Remove all the 50% Hct rule times (<1997) from that Hautacam list and all of a sudden you only have 1 time beating Nibali - Armstrong's.

 

[hfer07]

2008: http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/tour-de-france-2008/stage-10/results

Piepoli wins on a climb with attacks and a Frank Schleck wheel to follow at 6km to go. His time: 37:30.

Went positive for CERA in a sample the next day, and the day before the start of that Tour.

perhaps the Piepoli result near to Nibali's time seems rather an anecdote, well considering Piopoli himself has an "alien" performance back in 1996 close to the Riis record, whereas the results you're comparing between are ranking top 30.

http://www.chronoswatts.com/en/watts/22/

 

[Taxus4a]

2008: http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/tour-de-france-2008/stage-10/results

Piepoli wins on a climb with attacks and a Frank Schleck wheel to follow at 6km to go. His time: 37:30.

Went positive for CERA in a sample the next day, and the day before the start of that Tour.

Piepoli was doped, but that not indicated that the rest where doped...You can dope to do 30 min and not dope to do 27.

They were trying in all the ways to find something in Cobo then and later, but they couldnt, and that is for something. I understand he looks very suspicious, but he has one of the best engines for three weeks. He has a `problem with his mind, and sometimes with luck.

More than 27 in Hautacam is never suspicious if the rider is really good. lees than 27, I think is possible as well for people as Quintana.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

perhaps the Piepoli result near to Nibali's time seems rather an anecdote, well considering Piopoli himself has an "alien" performance back in 1996 close to the Riis record, whereas the results you're comparing between are ranking top 30.

http://www.chronoswatts.com/en/watts/22/

Did you read my next post?

1996 was the last year you could go full *** with the doping your Hct. In 1997 they checked and if your Hct was over 50% you had a 15 day holiday.

So your observation of Piepoli doing a 1996 alien performance - and then still winning in 2008 but with a slower time indicates to me that the Hct rule had an impact, but he was still doping. And a very good responder in both cases.

 

[Gung Ho Gun]

'94-'96 times are ridiculous on any climb

 

[Taxus4a]

Teams nowadays dont spend a lot of money in all kind of specialists, to go to Teide, etc... to take care on things that they didnt care in the past, with better bikes, to make a worst time than before.

Of course the improvement that Nibali has had in Astana last twoo years, could have been by doping,l I dont think so, but of course looks a little that way... but of course his climbing time is not by itself an evidence of that...

 

[Beech Mtn]

[tinfoil hat] I thought as long as Valverde was in 2nd, there's no way in hell the authorities would want to pop Nibs. Now, looking at the GC, and today's performance, and the fact that Vino runs this team, etc, Nibs maybe should be hiding from the gendarmes, AFLD, ASO, and everybody else. [/tinfoil hat]

 

[Taxus4a]

'94-'96 times are ridiculous on any climb

So you admit at least that cycling is nowadays fearer than then, dont you?

But people love more Pantani that Nibali, Froome, Contador...curious...

 

[perico]

Remember, if they have not yet tested positive they are clean. But if they have tested positive once, then they will retroactively have been, and continue to be, doped to the eyeballs despite all those negatives.

This.........

 

[Benotti69]

David Walsh @DavidWalshST · 14m
@woodallc87 Charlie trust is the problem. It is very difficult to trust unrepentant former dopers.

Walsh being a hypocrite calling Martinelli and Riis unrepentant former dopers yet letting Yates, Julich, De jongh, Barry and Knaven off the hook.

 

[perico]

Walsh being a hypocrite calling Martinelli and Riis unrepentant former dopers yet letting Yates, Julich, De jongh, Barry and Knaven off the hook.

I'm no Walsh fan and don't agree with his view on who is or isn't trustworthy, but I think the key word is "unrepentant."

 

[Benotti69]

I'm no Walsh fan and don't agree with his view on who is or isn't trustworthy, but I think the key word is "unrepentant."

Show us where Yates, Julich, De jong, Barry and Knaven (denies doping) have been truly repentant?

 

[Mishrak]

Remove all the 50% Hct rule times (<1997) from that Hautacam list and all of a sudden you only have 1 time beating Nibali - Armstrong's.

That's a really good point. In looking a little more closely, I'll concede my previous statement. This is definitely really suspicious.

 

[jens_attacks]

'94-'96 times are ridiculous on any climb

do keep in mind that in 1994 and in 1996, there wasn't a single climb on the route just hautacam
i think lance in 2000 just with hautacam on the route could have beaten bjarne or very close. just like nibali would have went around 36 minutes today.
unfortunately, these days, aso, at libertine seguro's orders, decided to never use a ______________/ mtf stage. those are the best

 

[kingjr]

do keep in mind that in 1994 and in 1996, there wasn't a single climb on the route just hautacam
i think lance in 2000 just with hautacam on the route could have beaten bjarne or very close. just like nibali would have went around 36 minutes today.
unfortunately, these days, aso, at libertine seguro's orders, decided to never use a ______________/ mtf stage. those are the best

I'm still hoping that one day they will do a stage where they ride up Mont Ventoux with only a 10-20km flat run-up so that everyone will be super-fresh.

 

[broken chain]

He looks fresh as a daisy.Might even be holding back a tad.

 

[Mishrak]

Do we have a w/kg estimate for his climb yet? I've seen 6.09 floating around on twitter which would be within reasonable limits.

 

[rsergio007]

What Nibali did today is just taking the ****.
Just like Froome on the Ventoux.
Even Armstrong understood he couldn't win all mountain stages in order to protect his image.
Seeing Nibali, yet again, going over the finish line in first with Vino smiling in the car behind him was just a big letdown.
At least the race for second is open and realistic.