When is the smackdown on Chris Horner?

Page 56 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
If anything this would serve to invalidate Armstrong's results?

Armstrong's results have already been invalidated, Horner didn't have to go full genius on the Vuelta to achieve that.
Of course they are but you missed the context. I responded to a poster assuming Armstrong would find Horner's result somehow amusing or satisfying. Quite the opposite.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,530
1
0
Escarabajo said:
This is an American thing you have in your soul. Your loosing your objectivity.
Last time it was the spaniards... No, it´s not about race or country. I just found it extremly unfair that Sky/Froome got all the heat, and Horner was still excused until after stage 11.
Now it seems to change, but still 50% believe in the grandpa (as some1 posted here).
 
Galic Ho said:
Sky really have done cycling a major disservice. Horner has as well. Equilibrium and the natural level of doping have been rapidly shifted. It's going to get a lot worse.
Huh? Maybe there was one or two times things were cleaner. They almost aren't doing EPO-fueled times, but the remarkable third week power remains a tell.

If I'm Pat, Horner's a fantastic opportunity to "grow" cycling viewers some more. Horner's never tested positive in the cleanest peloton ever.
 
delleErbe said:
Can somebody explain the Horner defenders? It's Lance all over again. "Show me where/how Horner doped", "Horner's worked hard his entire career to get to this point!", "He was well-rested!", etc. "Biological passport"! is the new "Passed 500 tests!". These f'n true believers. Did you learn nothing?!?!?!

Watching bike racing I feel like the wife who knows her husband is cheating but doesn't mind so long as he's somewhat discreet and allows the wife the chance to pretend things are okay. At least don't make it blatantly obvious. Maybe hide it a little? With Horner's win, there's no way one can even pretend things aren't horribly, horribly off.

Sky/Wiggins/Froome were bad but this is off-the-charts ridiculous.
^ this ^ summarizes all
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,530
1
0
delleErbe said:
Can somebody explain the Horner defenders? It's Lance all over again. "Show me where/how Horner doped", "Horner's worked hard his entire career to get to this point!", "He was well-rested!", etc. "Biological passport"! is the new "Passed 500 tests!". These f'n true believers. Did you learn nothing?!?!?!

Watching bike racing I feel like the wife who knows her husband is cheating but doesn't mind so long as he's somewhat discreet and allows the wife the chance to pretend things are okay. At least don't make it blatantly obvious. Maybe hide it a little? With Horner's win, there's no way one can even pretend things aren't horribly, horribly off.

Sky/Wiggins/Froome were bad but this is off-the-charts ridiculous.
Well said... Totally agree

Hugh Januss said:
Edit: After following that link to the Stage 20 story on the front page, wow those people are still out there, but why don't you go argue with them? You are preaching to the choir in here, well other than your claim that Froome is somehow less of a doper than Horner.
B/C we are not allowed to talk there. I got my infraction today just for a few (in)direct words on the "Respect Horner Thread".
 
Sep 7, 2012
25
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
Who are all these people that are saying Horner is not doping? Because I have not seen more than, well haven't seen anyone making that claim.
Sky/Wigans/Froome/let's add Porte here winning everything in sight for a year and a half and then with a couple exceptions coming right back down to earth right after a test for the latest wonder drug starts actually catching one or 2 is less ridiculous?:rolleyes:

Edit: After following that link to the Stage 20 story on the front page, wow those people are still out there, but why don't you go argue with them? You are preaching to the choir in here, well other than your claim that Froome is somehow less of a doper than Horner.
You're right, nothing new to people here. Was just surprised and horrified to see the public spouting the same nonsense we had in the lance years. Set me off. I don't even know why I care.
 
Aug 16, 2012
275
0
0
All this talk about Horner's age is misleading. Yes he was born in 1971 but he was cryogenically frozen from 1986 to 1996. His handlers realised Mr Clean would have no chance in the doping era so to enable his natural talent to rule supreme they decided to wait 10 years.
 
What Horner's impending win cries out for, among other things, are more studies of performance vs. age. There don't seem to be that many in the literature. The studies I've found are fairly old, but suggest that V02 max declines about 5% per decade after 30 for endurance athletes (more like 10% per decade for non-athletes). If we assume Horner reached his physical peak in his late 20s, this suggests a decline of about 7% in V02 max, and presumably that correlates fairly closely with power.

By his own SRM data, Horner put out 393 watts and allegedly 6.05 watts/kg in stage 10, during a 15 minute climb. The aging data suggest that if he did this naturally, then naturally he would be able to put out about 6.5 watts/kg in his prime. That's for 15 minutes, it would be less for 30-40 minutes, but even in the wild west EP0 era of the late 90s and early 00s, you would think someone with that much power would end up as an elite rider on the Euro circuit. And that 6.05 value is contested, it assumes a weight that some think is overestimated (resulting in an underestimate of watts/kg).

Another value of performance vs. age studies is the flip side. We need to be able to estimate how much a young athlete can naturally improve as he matures. E.g., how much better could a teen-aged Froome be expected to be in his mid 20s?
 
Yes, performance versus age is the big question here that needs answering.

Also, what effect does a late(r) start to a European professional career have on longevity? ie; Horner was already 34 when he moved to Saunier Duval in 2006. Is there some sort of long term buildup of fatigue in the body when training and racing at the level of a European Pro? Maybe this fatigue builds over time and the normal period of recovery between major races of weeks or months does not apply?

How does having a previous season GT in your legs (Nibali) affect your performance in another GT - 4 months later? Does the fact Horner is fresher account for his performance advantage over Nibali in the 3rd week - despite being 13 years older ? Why wouldn't Nibali have time to fully recover from the Giro in time for this Vuelta - at least in comparison to Horner ?
 
Horners SPEECH

Just seen Horner's post race SPEECH. If you haven't heard it, its HILARIOUS.

He turns to the camera - yes turns to the camera - and speaks to all the fans out there. Its UNBELIEVEABLE.

Gary Imlach turned to Jens in the studio and said that was Horners speech to run for president of the United States.

That speech will make you VOMIT.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Oldman said:
You are entirely wrong. This is Horner's revenge on a rider that messed with much of his career via LA's control over the American scene. While Horner's very irritating public support of Lance should be defined as what it was: holding the company line to guarantee his paycheck. I don't think Horner ever liked or admired Armstrong. Armstrong certainly only endures sycophants and unicorn-lovers. He was a total d*ck to Horner and any other talented American.

If anything this would serve to invalidate Armstrong's results. As I've witnessed and contested for years: given identical "support" Horner was always a better rider than Armstrong. There were many others as well and this should serve to place Armstrong where he should be in history: a manipulated chemistry experiment and above-average athlete.

All this and he wasn't groomed in the USCF system. He was grass roots. And Weisel never liked him either.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
131313 said:
Agree with all of the that. His age is a tiny fraction of the ridiculousness, enough that it's not even worth mentioning. The real reason you don't see a ton of 42 yr old pros is that guys just get tired of it. Horner strikes me as a guy who will never stop racing, ever. He loves racing more than anyone I've ever seen. I bet he'll go from a 48 year euro pro to a 49 year old going back to try and win Redlands, then maybe racing cross full-time.

While there's a slight loss in vo2 as one ages, the effects are small. Also the studies available tend to look at untrained subjects, not guys who are still active. Whatever detrimental effects his age has on his performance, it's more than offset by the fact that he's carried an awfully light race schedule over the last couple of years. Even with all of the top guys juiced, guys still get tired. Whether real or contrived, he has a lot of "knee injuries" that keep him from racing a lot. That's a pretty big advantage he has going for him, that would more than offset a 1% loss in vo2.

I seriously doubt there's any new and improved doping going on. I agree with Rasmussen: he's not doping, well, anymore than he used to...

As far as this being 'sudden form', I have to say that his comments on the subject reflect my own thoughts. He's had this ridiculous form plenty of times. Thing is, he's a stage racer who's not a great TT'r, so that doesn't give him a lot of options. He also can't sprint, so that's going to limit his options for big wins, unlike a guy like Dan Martin or Hesjedal--guys who can climb but have some pop. Lastly, he's always been a legit "team player". Again, unlike someone like Hesjedal who rode at 90% in the team role, hoping for his chance, Horner always sold out in that role (Lotto, RS). Really not the best thing for career advancement or to get results.

In other words, his ridiculous form is no more ridiculous than it's been in the past, IMO. And it's no more ridiculous than the form of Nibali or Valverde, et al.
Agreed. He's gonna win by 35 seconds. But somehow he's the mutant of all time.
 
Aug 5, 2012
2,290
0
0
Cycle Chic said:
Just seen Horner's post race SPEECH. If you haven't heard it, its HILARIOUS.

He turns to the camera - yes turns to the camera - and speaks to all the fans out there. Its UNBELIEVEABLE.

Gary Imlach turned to Jens in the studio and said that was Horners speech to run for president of the United States.

That speech will make you VOMIT.
Promo of the year
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,530
1
0
Merckx index said:
What Horner's impending win cries out for, among other things, are more studies of performance vs. age. There don't seem to be that many in the literature. The studies I've found are fairly old, but suggest that V02 max declines about 5% per decade after 30 for endurance athletes (more like 10% per decade for non-athletes). If we assume Horner reached his physical peak in his late 20s, this suggests a decline of about 7% in V02 max, and presumably that correlates fairly closely with power.

By his own SRM data, Horner put out 393 watts and allegedly 6.05 watts/kg in stage 10, during a 15 minute climb. The aging data suggest that if he did this naturally, then naturally he would be able to put out about 6.5 watts/kg in his prime. That's for 15 minutes, it would be less for 30-40 minutes, but even in the wild west EP0 era of the late 90s and early 00s, you would think someone with that much power would end up as an elite rider on the Euro circuit. And that 6.05 value is contested, it assumes a weight that some think is overestimated (resulting in an underestimate of watts/kg).

Another value of performance vs. age studies is the flip side. We need to be able to estimate how much a young athlete can naturally improve as he matures. E.g., how much better could a teen-aged Froome be expected to be in his mid 20s?
I just hope "Moose" reads this.... Good post BTW.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,530
1
0
Moose McKnuckles said:
LMAO. Nobody needs to convince me that Horner's doping. I'm just laughing at your shrill whining.
I know you know that Horner is doping. But you still come up with that early US palamares. So you still have some bitter sweet love left for him. That he had some talent, something missing with Froome... No, both had nothing to show for when looking at around age 25.
My new randomly picked favo Haga has more results than Horner had his age.
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
I know you know that Horner is doping. But you still come up with that early US palamares. So you still have some bitter sweet love left for him.
I have some appreciation of the facts, which seem to escape you. We all agree he's doping. But ignoring the fact that he's always been a very good bike racer just makes you look really silly and undermines any other point you're trying to make.

Do I like Horner? I think he's lame for defending Armstrong. I think he figured out that, hey, everybody's getting theirs, I'm going to get mine. I think it's interesting how he was anti-Armstrong before though.

Stop trying to sniff Froome's chamois and realize that the guy's a chemical experiment, a british version of Armstrong. We can argue about Froome and Horner's comparative palmares, but in the end they're both dopers.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
LOL. The german commentators just said Horner is the first rider ever w/o a contract for the next season (so it seems Froome did sign a new one during the Vue11).
The list of "greatness":
Oldest ever stage winner in a GT, oldest winner overall, just 15 race days before Vuelta, zero palamares before age 38, taped-(thus still injured)-out-of-the-saddle grandpa...

OMG, pro sports never saw such a farce before, not in fixed boxing or wrestling events, not at the BlackSox scandal. This one is a new low...
Look, I get it, you love Froome. He completes you (and that fish hack Walsh).
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
B/C the other riders are feared since the AC incident. So they tried to dope less. Now they´ll wait if the grandpa (who had nothing to fear since having no contract) gets popped. If not, we won´t see a 41 year old winning next year, but plenty of new climbing records. Welcome to the new era.
Meh, you're a little late. I called an escalation in the arms race after Froome went full genius...oh, I forgot, you love Froome, so you are blinded to the obvious fact that he was doped to the gills...:rolleyes:
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,530
1
0
Moose McKnuckles said:
We can argue about Froome and Horner's comparative palmares
We get closer... if the whole thing goes more silly (of which the chance is nearly 100%), i don´t care about calling Froome doubtful or a flat out doper. The whole circus is back to absurd outcomes anyway.
 
ChewbaccaD said:
Meh, you're a little late. I called an escalation in the arms race after Froome went full genius...oh, I forgot, you love Froome, so you are blinded to the obvious fact that he was doped to the gills...:rolleyes:
Your the one who thinks Brunyeel was overseeing a clean radioshack in 2011

I have a bridge to sell if you want to buy it.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS