When is the smackdown on Chris Horner?

[Moose McKnuckles]

That doesn't make any sense. I've not set up a norm. I've just said Horner, who you said won from an early age unlike Froome, had won sod all at Froome's age.

My opinion on Horner is open. I really have little idea whether he's doping or not. Froome is just an informed hunch.

My point is merely the incredibly poor way some of you use information.

Uh, no. Horner won from EARLY IN HIS CAREER. The guy turned pro when he was 24/25. Basically his first real year, he wins a stage at the Tour du Pont. The fact that you regard that as a nothing shows how limited your cycling knowledge really is.

Froome was a nobody with no contract for next year before his miraculous 2011 Vuelta transformation.

 

[the sceptic]

That doesn't make any sense. I've not set up a norm. I've just said Horner, who you said won from an early age unlike Froome, had won sod all at Froome's age.

My opinion on Horner is open. I really have little idea whether he's doping or not. Froome is just an informed hunch.

My point is merely the incredibly poor way some of you use information.

You have watched cycling for years and have little idea whether he is doping or not. How is that possible? or is this just a variant of never tested positive.

 

[Parker]

Not sure what you were watching, but it wasn't cycling. Not sure what your point is here anyway. Horner won the stage in a tour with all the major players in the sport, all this with an unknown as a breakaway companion? How does that help your point?

So all these major players in the sport had centred their season on winning stage 10 of the Tour du Pont had they? And only the amazing Horner could hold them all off. A heroic victory that showed the great talent that would win another race four years later.
Or was it just one of those days when the peloton couldn't be bothered chasing?

 

[Parker]

Uh, no. Horner won from EARLY IN HIS CAREER. The guy turned pro when he was 24/25. Basically his first real year, he wins a stage at the Tour du Pont. The fact that you regard that as a nothing shows how limited your cycling knowledge really is.

Froome was a nobody with no contract for next year before his miraculous 2011 Vuelta transformation.

And in Froome's first year he came 14th in a Tour de France time trial - a better indication of talent than getting in a breakaway in a minor stage race.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

So all these major players in the sport had centred their season on winning stage 10 of the Tour du Pont had they? And only the amazing Horner could hold them all off. A heroic victory that showed the great talent that would win another race four years later.
Or was it just one of those days when the peloton couldn't be bothered chasing?

The peloton couldn't be bothered chasing in one of the biggest races of the year? That's your theory? Any, say, evidence?

Strange how that "peloton couldn't be bothered chasing" phenomenon just didn't quite happen with Froome.

Yeah, Horner's wins were because he was lucky. Peloton just couldn't care about chasing. They just gave the stage away. That's what pelotons do right?

This is too funny.

 

[Parker]

You have watched cycling for years and have little idea whether he is doping or not. How is that possible? or is this just a variant of never tested positive.

I can suspect, sure. But I have little to support it. Anyone can suspect - that's easy, but in the presence of little actual evidence I would rather keep an open mind than condemn with certainty.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

And in Froome's first year he came 14th in a Tour de France time trial - a better indication of talent than getting in a breakaway in a minor stage race.

The fact that you think Tour DuPont was a "minor stage race" makes your opinion all more laughable. Please continue.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I can suspect, sure. But I have little to support it.

Wonderful.

 

[Parker]

The peloton couldn't be bothered chasing in one of the biggest races of the year? That's your theory? Any, say, evidence?

Yes. It happens all the time. That's often how breaks succeed. It happened today in the Vuelta. The peloton didn't seem bothered to chase down Kiryienka et al.

 

[hrotha]

The fact that you think Tour DuPont was a "minor stage race" makes your opinion all more laughable. Please continue.

Well that's what it was at the time. It certainly wasn't "one of the biggest races of the year", as you put it. Furthermore, it was a flat stage. Come on, this is going to be like Wiggins's famed "mountain stage" victory at l'Avenir now, isn't it.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Yes. It happens all the time. That's often how breaks succeed. It happened today in the Vuelta. The peloton didn't seem bothered to chase down Kiryienka et al.

I'll let that comment stand so everyone else can laugh at it as well. Probably had nothing to do with the fact that the guy rode his a$$ off, right?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Well that's what it was at the time. It certainly wasn't "one of the biggest races of the year", as you put it. Furthermore, it was a flat stage. Come on, this is going to be like Wiggins's famed "mountain stage" victory at l'Avenir now, isn't it.

How is a race attended by all the top pros in the US and Europe a "minor stage race?"
WTF were Rominger, Dekker, etc. doing there? Half of that small team called "Festina" was there. Mapei, Rabobank, Motorola.

You know, Tour of the Gila type teams. Good grief. Some of you.

 

[Parker]

The fact that you think Tour DuPont was a "minor stage race" makes your opinion all more laughable. Please continue.

It was a minor stage race. Same as the Tour of California is now. The Americans may have thought it was the fourth Grand Tour, but Europeans didn't - it was a cat 2.2 race - just one of five that month.

 

[hrotha]

How is a race attended by all the top pros in the US and Europe a "minor stage race?"
WTF were Rominger, Dekker, etc. doing there? Half of that small team called "Festina" was there. Mapei, Rabobank, Motorola.

You know, Tour of the Gila type teams. Good grief. Some of you.

You're aware that everybody rode more back then and that the racing calendar wasn't as centralized as with the WT, right? Do you want to compare the field of the Vuelta a Asturias then and now, for example?

 

[Race Radio]

after the Vuelta Horner is going home to the USA for ten days before flying back for the World Championships and Lombardia. Just needs to feed the dog, water the lawn etc.

 

[the sceptic]

after the Vuelta Horner is going home to the USA for ten days before flying back for the World Championships and Lombardia. Just needs to feed the dog, water the lawn etc.

Needs to win the worlds too if he is gonna secure the 2013 alien of the year award

 

[BYOP88]

And in Froome's first year he came 14th in a Tour de France time trial - a better indication of talent than getting in a breakaway in a minor stage race.

He came 16th in the TT. But the last TT in a GT is only really contested by TT specialists and those fighting at the top end of the GC. Froome cherry picked stages to show his 'talent' and on the days building upto those he lost shed loads of time. All this he was riding with Menchov on Alpe d'huez for 25 meters means nothing, as the two stages before that stage Froome lost 25'33 on stage 15 and 31'56 on stage 16.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

You're aware that everybody rode more back then and that the racing calendar wasn't as centralized as with the WT, right? Do you want to compare the field of the Vuelta a Asturias then and now, for example?

You're aware that "rode more back then" also applies to Horner right? We're comparing Horner vs. his peers AT THE TIME.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

It was a minor stage race. Same as the Tour of California is now. The Americans may have thought it was the fourth Grand Tour, but Europeans didn't - it was a cat 2.2 race - just one of five that month.

You can repeat this canard as long as you want, it's still false. And once again, you're left a bit short of evidence.

Yeah, the Tour du Pont, who has had former winners like Erik Breukink, Greg Lemond, Raul Alcala, Mullet Ekimov, and Lance Armstrong.

Like the Tour of California, right?

 

[hrotha]

You're aware that "rode more back then" also applies to Horner right? We're comparing Horner vs. his peers AT THE TIME.

What does that have to do with anything?

I'm just saying minor races had much better fields back then, before the Pro Tour. Sure, the Tour du Pont had a very good field for a couple of years. So? It was still a minor race and most European teams did it just as training.

 

[Parker]

He came 16th in the TT. But the last TT in a GT is only really contested by TT specialists and those fighting at the top end of the GC. Froome cherry picked stages to show his 'talent' and on the days building upto those he lost shed loads of time.

All I'm saying is that coming 14th in the TT, to me, is a better show of ability than winning a two up sprint in the Tour du Pont. Nothing more.

(It's 16th if you include Schumacher and Kohl - they got DQ'd)

 

[Parker]

You can repeat this canard as long as you want, it's still false. And once again, you're left a bit short of evidence.

Yeah, the Tour du Pont, who has had former winners like Erik Breukink, Greg Lemond, Raul Alcala, Mullet Ekimov, and Lance Armstrong.

Like the Tour of California, right?

Yeah. Those names weren't at the 1996 race. Armstrong, Rominger, Dekker and the ageing Bauer and Hampsten was your list of stars.

ToC had Sagan, van Garderen, De Gendt, Schleck, Gilbert, Chavanel, Hushovd. That seems at least as good to me.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

What does that have to do with anything?

I'm just saying minor races had much better fields back then, before the Pro Tour. Sure, the Tour du Pont had a very good field for a couple of years. So? It was still a minor race and most European teams did it just as training.

You have your facts wrong. Looks like quite a few weren't doing it "just for training."

Tour du Pont had a solid field for years.

Final General Classification

1. Lance Armstrong (USA), Motorola, 48:20:05
2. Pascal Herve (FRA), Festina, @ 3:15
3. Tony Rominger (SUI), Mapei-GB, @ 5:38
4. David Plaza (ESP), Festina, @ 7:24
5. Jean Cyril Robin (FRA), Festina, @ 7:26
6. Andy Hampsten (USA), U.S. Postal Service, @ 7:43
7. Arsenio Gonzalez (ESP), Mapei-GB, @ 7:59
8. Felix Garcia-Casas (ESP), Festina, @ 8:06
9. Federico Echave (ESP), Mapei-GB, @ 8:27
10. Axel Merckx (BEL), Motorola, @ 8:52

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Yeah. Those names weren't at the 1996 race. Armstrong, Rominger, Dekker and the ageing Bauer and Hampsten was your list of stars.

ToC had Sagan, van Garderen, De Gendt, Schleck, Gilbert, Chavanel, Hushovd. That seems at least as good to me.

The list of stars was longer than that. Read the results.

Yeah, VanGardered is right up there with Giro winner Hampsten. DeGendt, up there with Rominger, right?

Hilarious.

 

[hrotha]

I already knew the GC, thankyouverymuch. I have it (and a summary of the race) in a magazine I bought 17 years ago. I have a picture of Axel Merckx pulling in front of Armstrong, and of Rominger in a hideous jersey. I know my stuff.

Would you expect those riders from the European peloton to not do well in an American race, when the only local team on par with their methods was Motorola (who won the race, with Armstrong crushing everyone)? They were up there almost by sheer inertia. What I said earlier about riders racing more back then also applies: riders were more competitive back then, and up to the mid 90s doing both the Giro and the Tour was standard procedure for many. It was a completely different time. You can't just look at the field and say "Yep, that was one of the most important races that year". It wasn't.

I casually mentioned the Vuelta a Asturias before. Do you know what the podium for that one looked like in 1996?
1. Indurain
2. Escartín
3. Marcelino García

Not too shabby, huh?