When is the smackdown on Chris Horner?

[Ferminal]

I don't know...I couldn't remember Horner having team leading potential at a GT before he joined JB at age 36

So he was clean until 2008?

 

[zlev11]

I hope Horner takes the whole enchilada. It would put an exclamation mark on the year of the full ***. Plus it will be hilarious to watch the Skrybabies cast doubt on Horner while keeping the faith with Froome.

Let this new and clean era of cycling march on. Yippee-kai-yay, M'f'kers. Bald dude power!

agreed. it'll be some high quality comedy if nothing else. can't wait to laugh my *** off on Saturday at the sight of Old Man Horner flying up the mountains. the guys whole demeanor is of someone who's there just to troll the whole peloton with his ridiculousness. i really can't blame him after what happened in July. it should be fun.

no doubt that the sky fan boys will cry about him just like they cried about Cobo for "stealing" their Vuelta title from their "clean" riders.

 

[Wallace]

He was too busy winning everything in the U.S. before that. I guess he should have proved his worthiness at the Anatomic Jock Race.

I'm totally with you Dude, because winning Redlands and the Cascades Classic is in every way the equivalent of winning one of the European GTs.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

That is fo' sho', but at that point they had a couple other pretty good options for the GC...

Actually, you guys are going overboard. I am guessing none of you remember what Horner was doing while on Labor Power here in the States.

Seriously, the guy was and still is an enormously talented and dedicated cyclist. My guess is that he figured out what everyone was getting rich off doping while he was crushing clean guys in the States. So, he figured that, WTF, I'm getting a bit long in the tooth, I better get while the getting's good.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I'm totally with you Dude, because winning Redlands and the Cascades Classic is in every way the equivalent of winning one of the European GTs.

Winning Redlands or Cascades clean might not be too far from winning an European GT against dopers.

And Horner's won pretty much every major US race. The guy is ten times the talent Froome will ever be. Froome is a chemical experiment.

 

[woodburn]

I don't know...I couldn't remember Horner having team leading potential at a GT before he joined JB at age 36

He actually had some decent success in the mid-2000s with a stage and fifth overall at the Tour de Suisse and 14th place at the Tour while riding in support of Evans.

 

[BroDeal]

I'm totally with you Dude, because winning Redlands and the Cascades Classic is in every way the equivalent of winning one of the European GTs.

Those American races are GTs compared to the fourth rate events that Froome was getting spat out the back of, causing his mother to ask whether he had any talent as a bike racer.

 

[goggalor]

He's a student of Bruyneel and BFF of Lance whose bio pass looks like an ardennes classic and who's going for a GT win at 41. Seriously, if he wasn't Anglo there wouldn't even be any debate. He's the American Santambroggio, in fact he's worse. I wish cycling journos would take off their star spangled glasses and start asking some questions.

 

[BroDeal]

He's a student of Bruyneel and BFF of Lance whose bio pass looks like an ardennes classic and who's going for a GT win at 41. Seriously, if he wasn't Anglo there wouldn't even be any debate. He's the American Santambroggio, in fact he's worse. I wish cycling journos would take off their star spangled glasses and start asking some questions.

Power levels are down and the riders with unquestionable morals have come to the fore. This is what clean cycling looks like.

 

[Ferminal]

Power levels are down.

No, they are just impossible to observe.

 

[JimmyFingers]

That would have been pretty funny if it didn't point out how ridiculous Froome's rise has been. At least Horner was a good rider and a winner before he joined the dark side. Functionally no difference, they're both IMO clearly doing something untoward to be where they are, but it makes Horner easier for me to stomach somehow. Plus he's pretty funny and a good interview.

This is precisely the sort of flim-flamming that makes a mockery of this place. You can't qualify cheating, you do it or you don't, you can't pick riders you don't like and condemn them and then make excuses for riders you do.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Actually, you guys are going overboard. I am guessing none of you remember what Horner was doing while on Labor Power here in the States.

Seriously, the guy was and still is an enormously talented and dedicated cyclist. My guess is that he figured out what everyone was getting rich off doping while he was crushing clean guys in the States. So, he figured that, WTF, I'm getting a bit long in the tooth, I better get while the getting's good.

Isn't this the Lance line? It was the Euros doping so I had to too? Guess we're seeing your true colours Moose

 

[Shardi]

defending horner with lance-arguments and you might as well go break a 6-pack of cheep american beer with the livestrongs..!

 

[BYOP88]

I love how the Froome/Sky fans are here calling Horner out and no doubt they'll head to the Valverde/Movistar thread in the coming days to call them out, but all the time rabidly defending Froome/Sky and the British honor code. I salute you all and admire your hypocrisy.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Do tell where you've spotted this paradox?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Isn't this the Lance line? It was the Euros doping so I had to too? Guess we're seeing your true colours Moose

I don't think you're seeing anything. I'm not excusing Horner, I'm just guessing that's maybe how he justified doping to himself.

Probably a bit too complicated for you to grasp.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Yes, because everything you say has such hidden depths

 

[gillan1969]

This is precisely the sort of flim-flamming that makes a mockery of this place. You can't qualify cheating, you do it or you don't, you can't pick riders you don't like and condemn them and then make excuses for riders you do.

jimmy, again as per other thread...you can....

Have you ever hear the phrase "you've taken that too far"

Well, apply to Sir Dave and Froome

 

[JimmyFingers]

No, they haven't. If they've cheated then they've cheated, there's no degrees of cheating. Either they have borken the rules or they haven't, if they have they deserve sanction, if they haven't then a lot of people owe them an apology.

There's no sliding scale of doping that starts at 'Acceptable' and ends at 'Godzilla', you do or you don't, end of.

 

[Bernie's eyesore]

Horner did not point out the sponsors logo on his shirt when he crossed the line in first place. My money is therefore on him being clean.

 

[gillan1969]

No, they haven't. If they've cheated then they've cheated, there's no degrees of cheating. Either they have borken the rules or they haven't, if they have they deserve sanction, if they haven't then a lot of people owe them an apology.

There's no sliding scale of doping that starts at 'Acceptable' and ends at 'Godzilla', you do or you don't, end of.

on the administrative and the legal side you are absolutely correct
However, not sure if you missed the whole Armstrong affair or not? The administrators cannot police our sport. It remains the case that had Armstrong given Landis a job, he would still be a 7 time tour winner. We cannot rely on knowing who has broken the rules through the testing procedure. I would go further, with the current incumbent at the UCI you might even argue the testing regime is there to allow the UCI to manage those breaking the rules (for mutual or unilateral benefit).....

Within this landscape the 'educated' cycling fan must make peace with his/her sport. They do so by having a knowledge and understanding of what constitutes, as Armstrong so eloquently put, 'not normal'

Froome = Not Normal, actually sorry scrub that..
Froome > Not Normal

Simple

So, the somewhat tenuous relationship I had with my sport is irrevocably altered whenever Froome (and Porte) turns up. Wiggins, at least, has had the sense not to push it (too far) and has got out....

 

[JimmyFingers]

on the administrative and the legal side you are absolutely correct
However, not sure if you missed the whole Armstrong affair or not? The administrators cannot police our sport. It remains the case that had Armstrong given Landis a job, he would still be a 7 time tour winner. We cannot rely on knowing who has broken the rules through the testing procedure. I would go further, with the current incumbent at the UCI you might even argue the testing regime is there to allow the UCI to manage those breaking the rules (for mutual or unilateral benefit).....

Within this landscape the 'educated' cycling fan must make peace with his/her sport. They do so by having a knowledge and understanding of what constitutes, as Armstrong so eloquently put, 'not normal'

Froome = Not Normal, actually sorry scrub that..
Froome > Not Normal

Simple

So, the somewhat tenuous relationship I had with my sport is irrevocably altered whenever Froome (and Porte) turns up. Wiggins, at least, has had the sense not to push it (too far) and has got out....

Interesting viewpoint, but one I don't subscribe to. Oh and thank you for reminding me about Lance, I'd forgotten.

 

[gillan1969]

Interesting viewpoint, but one I don't subscribe to. Oh and thank you for reminding me about Lance, I'd forgotten.

it sounds as though you have

 

[red_flanders]

This is precisely the sort of flim-flamming that makes a mockery of this place. You can't qualify cheating, you do it or you don't, you can't pick riders you don't like and condemn them and then make excuses for riders you do.

Ease down, Jimmy. As I clearly said in my post, I think they're both cheating.

As a cycling fan I get to like or dislike who I want. It excuses nothing.

 

[veganrob]

on the administrative and the legal side you are absolutely correct
However, not sure if you missed the whole Armstrong affair or not? The administrators cannot police our sport. It remains the case that had Armstrong given Landis a job, he would still be a 7 time tour winner. We cannot rely on knowing who has broken the rules through the testing procedure. I would go further, with the current incumbent at the UCI you might even argue the testing regime is there to allow the UCI to manage those breaking the rules (for mutual or unilateral benefit).....

Within this landscape the 'educated' cycling fan must make peace with his/her sport. They do so by having a knowledge and understanding of what constitutes, as Armstrong so eloquently put, 'not normal'

Froome = Not Normal, actually sorry scrub that..
Froome > Not Normal

Simple

So, the somewhat tenuous relationship I had with my sport is irrevocably altered whenever Froome (and Porte) turns up. Wiggins, at least, has had the sense not to push it (too far) and has got out....

I think you put that very well