What gear is Horner on to make such outrageous statements like this ?

[cyclelicious]

Excellent post VeloFidelis. I agree almost word for word.

 

[Anonymous]

Hey, the guy was on form at the Giro and he knows it. Anybody who was there knows it. Why shouldn't he talk with the press about it. If you were looking to get paid to ride for another season or two you'd talk about it too. Any athlete I've ever met who was at the top of his game certainly knew it when he was. If you're seriously kicking *** in a group that select, you tend to be one of the first to know.

As to the rampant speculation regarding the inspiration for his excellent form, chatter on... that's what Forum geeks do. Your preoccupation with this thought train is comical. Do you really think you know who is and who isn't? Wow!... that's hubris.

Here's a thought to speculate on... every cyclist hero you've ever had doped! All of them... By your own line of consistent logic espoused here daily, how could they ever have done what they did with out it. if Coppi or Merckx never did CERA well it wasn't available, but they would have. Do you think Tom Simpson was the only guy in the peloton on amphetamines. Every cycling generation made full use of any advantage, real or perceived, that they could. If the science and thus the advantage is better now, guess what?... today's riders have to deal with testing, and the likely prospect of expulsion and disgrace, most previous generations did not.

So now you have a new element of competition in cycling; Beat the Testers. Should they give a jersey for it, or should it be a team competition? If you are all correct, then the best teams in cycling have to have the best doping programs. How else could they do it?

The difference is that when you make statements like, "arguably the best climber in the world", that's based on actual performance and results, not speculation and opinion. When you accuse a rider of doping, until he's busted, you're just talking sh!t, which is what you all do here anyway. He may well be, and your speculation may be accurate, but he's winning over the Testers right now, because if it's there for everybody, they are not finding it like they should. Seems like the Testers need to up their game.

The stakes in this competition are high. Lose once and it can end a career. But high stakes don't mean riders won't compete... they'll just get really good at it,... or they won't.

It's all part of cycling and it always has been. If you love it, hate it, or don't give a sh!t, it's not going to change, and neither is Baseball, Football, Formula 1, Track and Field. But lest you think that parity in sport is dead, I am reminded of a quote by David Millar, "I took EPO and it didn't make me Lance Armstrong". So it would seem that the Boonen's and Basso's and Schleck's and yes, Armstrong's would still rise to their podiums either way.

The risk is theirs to take, the potential rewards justify it for many. The playing field in any competition will never be level, and competitors will never shy away from a possible advantage.

Ahhh, the "bad *** dudes rock and you don't know reality and so what if they all dope" response. The funny thing is that you think you have some originality. You are entitled to your opinion, but don't flatter yourself by thinking it makes you smarter than everyone else.

 

[Escarabajo]

Hey, the guy was on form at the Giro and he knows it. Anybody who was there knows it. Why shouldn't he talk with the press about it. If you were looking to get paid to ride for another season or two you'd talk about it too. Any athlete I've ever met who was at the top of his game certainly knew it when he was. If you're seriously kicking *** in a group that select, you tend to be one of the first to know.

As to the rampant speculation regarding the inspiration for his excellent form, chatter on... that's what Forum geeks do. Your preoccupation with this thought train is comical. Do you really think you know who is and who isn't? Wow!... that's hubris.

Here's a thought to speculate on... every cyclist hero you've ever had doped! All of them... By your own line of consistent logic espoused here daily, how could they ever have done what they did with out it. if Coppi or Merckx never did CERA well it wasn't available, but they would have. Do you think Tom Simpson was the only guy in the peloton on amphetamines. Every cycling generation made full use of any advantage, real or perceived, that they could. If the science and thus the advantage is better now, guess what?... today's riders have to deal with testing, and the likely prospect of expulsion and disgrace, most previous generations did not.

So now you have a new element of competition in cycling; Beat the Testers. Should they give a jersey for it, or should it be a team competition? If you are all correct, then the best teams in cycling have to have the best doping programs. How else could they do it?

The difference is that when you make statements like, "arguably the best climber in the world", that's based on actual performance and results, not speculation and opinion. When you accuse a rider of doping, until he's busted, you're just talking sh!t, which is what you all do here anyway. He may well be, and your speculation may be accurate, but he's winning over the Testers right now, because if it's there for everybody, they are not finding it like they should. Seems like the Testers need to up their game.

The stakes in this competition are high. Lose once and it can end a career. But high stakes don't mean riders won't compete... they'll just get really good at it,... or they won't.

It's all part of cycling and it always has been. If you love it, hate it, or don't give a sh!t, it's not going to change, and neither is Baseball, Football, Formula 1, Track and Field. But lest you think that parity in sport is dead, I am reminded of a quote by David Millar, "I took EPO and it didn't make me Lance Armstrong". So it would seem that the Boonen's and Basso's and Schleck's and yes, Armstrong's would still rise to their podiums either way.

The risk is theirs to take, the potential rewards justify it for many. The playing field in any competition will never be level, and competitors will never shy away from a possible advantage.

I agree if 100% of the peloton is doping. If there is 1 rider of the 200 that is not doping, then it is unfair. If there are 5 riders in the peloton that are not doping then it is not fair. If there are 10 riders in .......

I respect you opinion but I disagree. My Mom was always asking me why I was always telling the truth, that in the real world everybody cheats and lie. I know She was really preparing me for life, but they gave me a good example for being honest in life and they have done good in life too. But I have lived a life of truth and integrity at work and expect everybody to live at least to the same standards. Up to date I have been succesful and happy and I have no reason to change. And I have no respect for people who cheat.
Thanks.

 

[Parrot23]

Tough to know with Horner.

Seems he's deliberately talking his form as it's touch-and go if he can get back for TDF/Astana selection. In markets, they call it "talking your position". Only done when there is a lot doubt and things are getting dicey. Other explanation: he's worried about bio-passport pre-emptively?

Always been a notorious junk food eater. Everyone knows that (just read his Giro blog about consuming several Snickers bars on the bike). Riis/Saxo would NEVER allow that (obsessed with weight for watts/kg metric). Riis knows weight is a kicker from his TDF days, even though he was jacked, of course.

As BroDeal says in his Evans' weight thread, a 10 pound drop is HUGE. IF true, it's enough to explain improved performance with no jacking. Not inconceivable, given his past junk food diet. And think: his VO2 max is very likely higher than Lance's to begin with, and then he drops 10 pounds versus Lance, his performance makes sense.

Now of course there's Astana's likely "medical program" too. But ceteris paribus, weight drop alone should be enough to explain the diff. Perhaps beyond reasonable doubt, IF he's dropped junk food. Here's to hoping.

 

[Anonymous]

Ahhh, the "bad *** dudes rock and you don't know reality and so what if they all dope" response. The funny thing is that you think you have some originality. You are entitled to your opinion, but don't flatter yourself by thinking it makes you smarter than everyone else.

While you and your cohorts do the same thing from the opposite perspective?

Huh

 

[Parrot23]

Snickers

Junk.....! Sugar...fat....junk.

I just saw that one Snicker bar=8 cubes of sugar. He consumes several on the bike in a long stage.

 

[Snake8]

Ahhh, the "bad *** dudes rock and you don't know reality and so what if they all dope" response. The funny thing is that you think you have some originality. You are entitled to your opinion, but don't flatter yourself by thinking it makes you smarter than everyone else.

No the funny thing is that you think you have originiality. You have no response! Argue the man's points if you are so damn smart? You don't so you say the same old boring crap over and over and over- - BORING!

And to Escarabajo, please enjoy your life where virtually everyone else fails to meet your expectations. By all means be the best person you can be, but why would you expect everyone to be as shiny perfect as you. I for one hope never to try.

Volefidelis - very well said!

 

[BroDeal]

Junk.....! Sugar...fat....junk.

I just saw that one Snicker bar=8 cubes of sugar. He consumes several on the bike in a long stage.

How much different is a Snickers than an energy drink or a gel?

 

[Anonymous]

No the funny thing is that you think you have originiality. You have no response! Argue the man's points if you are so damn smart? You don't so you say the same old boring crap over and over and over- - BORING!

I have had the same discussion 1000 times and have see that argument ad nauseum. I didn't originate any of the things that show Mr Armstrong to be the doping POS that he is. I didn't originate any of the things that make just another fanboy, hero worshiping chamos sniffer.

 

[Escarabajo]

No the funny thing is that you think you have originiality. You have no response! Argue the man's points if you are so damn smart? You don't so you say the same old boring crap over and over and over- - BORING!

And to Escarabajo, please enjoy your life where virtually everyone else fails to meet your expectations. By all means be the best person you can be, but why would you expect everyone to be as shiny perfect as you. I for one hope never to try.

Volefidelis - very well said!

I never said that I expect everybody to live the life as perfect as mine. Who am I to judge my life is perfect? But at least with honesty and integrity. I hate to see what happened in Wall Street with that crooked of Bernard Madoff. Don't you? Why do we have to accept it? So why do we have to accept the blatant cheating that is going on in cycling now? The least we can do is hope for a cleaner sport.

No, I am not going to applaud Velofidelis for accepting cheating. I'll never will.
Thanks.

 

[Parrot23]

How much different is a Snickers than an energy drink or a gel?

That, I don't know.

Coke is even worse than a Snickers--standard can of Coke is 10 cubes of sugar. And I guess, pros use flat Coke all the time. Not talking of Tommeke, of course, LOL

But then, of course, fruit is high too--not that high, but high. An apple is a couple of cubes of sugar. So maybe this is overblown.

Don't have a website link, so can't post.

 

[BroDeal]

That, I don't know.

Coke is even worse than a Snickers--standard can of Coke is 10 cubes of sugar. And I guess, pros use flat Coke all the time. Not talking of Tommeke, of course, LOL

But then, of course, fruit is high too--not that high, but high. An apple is a couple of cubes of sugar. So maybe this is overblown.

Don't have a website link, so can't post.

I don't think it matters that much on bike. If he is snarfing this crap down off the bike then that is different.

I have tried all sorts of energy drinks, gels, and bars over the years. I have tried lots of stuff while ultra running, and I honestly have a hard time finding any difference between the high tech, super duper products and cheapo simple stuff. The only issues I have is that products, like Gatorade, that use sucrose make your mouth pretty nasty after twelve or more hours. Over long periods of time I find that maltodextrin based drinks do not seem as sickly sweet. And for some reason on the bike, soda does not seem to help me much.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

An entire team riding 100km on the front of the peleton to a base of a mountain then only losing 2 team-members in the up the climb for Lance to break away with 3km to go.

That was maybe my first real clue things were amiss. World class climbers being dropped by the USPS train in about 2002-2003.

Also found it crushingly boring.

get your fact straight: 37...there you go again.

I feel like Jimmy Carter...

Still, not going to apologize for being jaded. Been burned too many times before, and proven right too many times now.

Yeah, that sucks about StolenUnderground. However, he never really came through on his promises of "if you're a doper, you're screwed". It was mostly a lot of empty threats. Sad he's just an MLM guy now, selling Team Omerta products.

 

[Snake8]

I have had the same discussion 1000 times and have see that argument ad nauseum. I didn't originate any of the things that show Mr Armstrong to be the doping POS that he is. I didn't originate any of the things that make just another fanboy, hero worshiping chamos sniffer.

This is exactly the point. You don't argue facts, you just say "Armstrong - doper" and think because you believe it to be true that anyone who has a different or more nuanced view of things is putting their head in the sand, or is as you say a hero-worshipper. There are people on this site who similar views as you, Alpe D comes to mind, who can speak intelligently about this issue AND OTHER ISSUES. You cannot. You are the worst fanboy out there with your doping/lance hard-on.

I've had my view of things change from reading some posts on here. There are definitely some people who not only know what they are talking about but can present it in such a way that it becomes convincing. You on the other hand think because you are a hammer everything is a nail.

But at this point I believe it is me becoming the fool for arguing with one.

Escarabajo, I think the point I was making was that cheating/lying/stealing are part of life. No one is condoning these things. Madoff? Are you serious? Do you really think doping in sport is on the same level as swindling folks of billions of dollars? My point was that you lack the ability to put things in perspective when you all you see is black and white. I don't think anyone is saying that cheaters should not be caught and punished, just that cheating is part of life and sport and frankly it will always be. No we should not accept it nor condone it, but we should not be so naive as to think it will ever go away completely. Furthermore, there is nothing wrong with enjoying cycling for the spectacle with a full and nuanced understanding of the state of the sport without being obsessed with doping.

OK, now I am getting as boring as you guys are, time to go put some miles on the bike....

 

[whiteboytrash]

That was maybe my first real clue things were amiss. World class climbers being dropped by the USPS train in about 2002-2003.

Also found it crushingly boring.

Agreed. It was also riders like Hincapie who would sit on the front of the peleton for 150km approaching the final climb of the day. He would sit up whilst riding at 45km p/h, take his hands off the bars, adjust his sunglasses, check the contains of pockets, share a joke with his team-mates to resume riding up a French col at a speed even the team cars couldn't keep up with.

I think Lance's success was not only based on jacking himself up to the hilt be ensuring his team-mates were equally jacked up.

I really don’t know why the rest of peleton put up with it. T-Mobile tried to fight fire with fire by running their own game but how did any other team without the resource of USPS even compete ?

 

[rolfrae]

...but how did any other team without the resource of USPS even compete ?

They didn't.

 

[whiteboytrash]

They didn't.

Good point !

 

[gjdavis60]

In an interview published in Sports Illustrated on Monday, Dan Patrick asked Danica Patrick if she would take performance-enhancing drugs if she would not get caught and it would lead to her winning the Indianapolis 500.

Danica, who finished third at Indy last month, said, "Well, then it's not cheating, is it? If nobody finds out?

"Yeah," she added. "It would be like finding a gray area. In motorsports, we work in gray areas a lot. You're trying to find where the holes are in the rule book."

Although politically incorrect, I appreciate Danica's refreshing candor, and believe it to reflect the prevailing attitude in most professional sports.

 

[Angliru]

Although politically incorrect, I appreciate Danica's refreshing candor, and believe it to reflect the prevailing attitude in most professional sports.

Ethically challenged and not ashamed to show it. So she gets 3rd while racing clean and makes this statement? Sports in general is in a sad state.

 

[Parrot23]

Ethically challenged and not ashamed to show it. So she gets 3rd while racing clean and makes this statement? Sports in general is in a sad state.

Agree.

There's a type of sociopathy in sports now--"anything I can get away with" attitude. Amazing. That's the sociopathic mentality. The concept of fair play, empathy etc. is non-existent to sociopaths. It doesn't exist; it's not even on their radar screen. But we see this in sport now.

Must be the money, not the sport or win in itself, that is motivating this "corruption". Almost a criminal sociopathy, that is, gain at any cost over anybody, at any price to others.

 

[VeloFidelis]

Although politically incorrect, I appreciate Danica's refreshing candor, and believe it to reflect the prevailing attitude in most professional sports.

To my point exactly! The stakes in international and professional sports are so high, and the stake holders so highly invested, the game now includes all aspects of consideration, not just what goes on in the competitive arena. It is not about condoning or condemning cheating. You can only do that with you TV remote. If you are tuning in to watch, you are accepting the unfortunate reality. If you are turning it off, then you've cast your vote. Any dialogue justifying your position is just moral equivocation.

 

[Escarabajo]

To my point exactly! The stakes in international and professional sports are so high, and the stake holders so highly invested, the game now includes all aspects of consideration, not just what goes on in the competitive arena. It is not about condoning or condemning cheating. You can only do that with you TV remote. If you are tuning in to watch, you are accepting the unfortunate reality. If you are turning it off, then you've cast your vote. Any dialogue justifying your position is just moral equivocation.

I see your point. I'll admit it, I watch TV with a blind "eye" on the riders, but at the same time I have a big joy everytime they catch someone new. So I guess that's another reason to watch or follow the sport, to see the cheaters fall.

Velofidelis I have a question for you, do you accept "doping" in cycling then? (I am talking abot the enhancers like EPO or blood doping).
I don't. I now it happens but I don't have to accept it.

 

[Anonymous]

He turned to the "Dark Side".

Think about it. He was good without doping. My guess is if he is doping now he believes that he has a big chance of winning a Grand Tour.
That's just my best guess.

that's pretty much always your guess isn't it?

 

[gjdavis60]

To my point exactly! The stakes in international and professional sports are so high, and the stake holders so highly invested, the game now includes all aspects of consideration, not just what goes on in the competitive arena. It is not about condoning or condemning cheating. You can only do that with you TV remote. If you are tuning in to watch, you are accepting the unfortunate reality. If you are turning it off, then you've cast your vote. Any dialogue justifying your position is just moral equivocation.

I would suggest that the system of motivation and reward within professional sports makes "cheating" almost inevitable. I can think of no professional sport that does not have to spend significant effort addressing compliance with its own rules.

If a professional sport wants to remain viable as a product - which all pro sports are first and foremost - it must perpetuate the perception of credibility to its customers, whatever that means in the context of a particular sport.

That "cheating" goes on in cycling doesn't surprise me in the least. I am, however, somewhat surprised and amused by how badly this sport manages its own enforcement. Perhaps it has something to do with the battle for control among the sport's various organizing bodies. More than anything, I believe this is why cycling is perceived to have a differentially serious doping problem, rather than a preponderance of morally bankrupt participants.

On the other hand, if this forum is any gauge, doping scandals seem to attract a lot of attention, so who knows, maybe there is a method to cycling's doping madness?

 

[Escarabajo]

that's pretty much always your guess isn't it?

Nowadays, it has been so hard to trust anybody. There is always that doubt. I include some of my favorite riders like Sastre, Soler and other compatriots. That's why I support Greg in the fight against doping. We need to destroy or at least minimize that doubt. But I am afraid we are loosing that battle.

Let's let it go for now. I am sorry for your loss.
Take care.