When is the smackdown on Chris Horner?

[hrotha]

Dont know if you watched the stage on TDP or elsewhere, but Perico was saying the same every time Nibali attacked, that this is not the way to ride Angliru.

De Andrés and Perico's tactical analysis is worth less than nothing.

 

[Eshnar]

De Andrés and Perico's tactical analysis is worth less than nothing.

Especially De Andrés

 

[Zam_Olyas]

I rather like Perico's. Anyways, would be great if los pericos band are named after him https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywjosmUhYAQ

 

[Galic Ho]

What exactly is your point? You took Ferrari-Nibali connection as a matter of fact, I showed that this is not proven. I am not saying that you cannot bring up this story, but in sake of fairness it is nice to add: it is just one story, not proven, Nibali has denied, there is no single piece of of other direct or indirect evidence linking Nibali to Ferrari.

Note the dates. Perspectives change over time. A rival DS says something now another rival team has hired one of the riders he said was bad and that very team had TWO riders test positive for EPO at this years Giro.

If you want conclusive proof...yeah read the LA threads. Before 2011 there wasn't enough to convince most people.

How about taking a look at Lampre and their actions the last few years. Wonder why Scarponi is no longer effective despite being the same age (within a year) of Valverde and Purito. Or how about Basso?

There is no direct evidence linking tons of people to Ferrari at one time or another. Rumours in cycling tend to have weight and credence to them. Especially with GT winners.

Asking for a smoking gun...wasting your time. What is going on is obvious. Why else do you think Nibali left Cannondale? For money? Or for Astana's expertise? Or both?

Honestly I don't really care. I like Nibali and Astana. More than happy for them to win. At least they look good winning. Cycling has been lacking a lot of that recently.

 

[Frosty]

Am not suggesting this is the case here at all for a number of reasons but i have a query about this sort of situation. What would happen if someone's third missed test occurred early in the morning after a race? Would the result of a race just finished be in jeopardy or not?

 

[Netserk]

Am not suggesting this is the case here at all for a number of reasons but i have a query about this sort of situation. What would happen if someone's third missed test occurred early in the morning after a race? Would the result of a race just finished be in jeopardy or not?

I don't think it would.

 

[icefire]

De Andrés and Perico's tactical analysis is worth less than nothing.

Dr Ferrari's analysis agrees with Perico's. Don't know what that may be worth

 

[The Hitch]

The problem is that for Nibali staying with Horner was not sufficient. He had to gap him. And I see no evidence he could have made it with a single attack.
Furthermore, his attacks were also meant to try to catch the breakaway so if he couldn't drop Horner he had still the possibility to take the bonus on the sprint. And in order to do so he had to get rid of Purito and Valverde too.

If they had kept Tiralongo out front they could have had bonus second options.

With which all Nibali would have neeeded to do would be outsprint Horner at the finish. Wouldnt need to drop him at all.

 

[pastronef]

Front page of what?

I meant websites, not paper. example corriere della sera website (main italian newspaper) http://www.corriere.it "horner won and disappeared" "they can't find the vuelta winner" and so on

 

[il_cobra]

good job done with miss surprise test chris

american floyd landis old school style

 

[icefire]

If they had kept Tiralongo out front they could have had bonus second options.

With which all Nibali would have neeeded to do would be outsprint Horner at the finish. Wouldnt need to drop him at all.

The forum would have melted down discussing a GT win by 1s due to time bonuses and a bogus 6s split in stage 4.

 

[Eshnar]

If they had kept Tiralongo out front they could have had bonus second options.

huh? How?

 

[The Hitch]

huh? How?

Bonus seconds are 10-6-4 right?

Nibali was 3 seconds back right?

10-6=4.
6-4=2
4-0=4


That means if Nibali beats Horner in a sprint he gets the jersey so long as they finish 1st and 2nd or 3rd and 4th, because 3-4 =-1.

IF they finish 2nd and 3rd Horner keeps the jersey because 3-2=1.

They didnt know whether they would catch the break in the end or not. The way it turned out, the gt contenders caught all but Ellisonde meaning the bonus seconds up for grabs were 6 and 4 which is not enough for Nibali.

But if they had kept Tiralongo with Elissonde Tiralongo would have crossed 2nd, thereby taking the 6 bonus seconds meaning Nibali would win the Vuelta by taking the 4 second bonus on the sprint.

 

[Eshnar]

Bonus seconds are 10-6-4 right?

Nibali was 3 seconds back right?

10-6=4.
6-4=2
4-0=4


That means if Nibali beats Horner in a sprint he gets the jersey so long as they finish 1st and 2nd or 3rd and 4th, because 3-4 =-1.

IF they finish 2nd and 3rd Horner keeps the jersey because 3-2=1.

They didnt know whether they would catch the break in the end or not. The way it turned out, the gt contenders caught all but Ellisonde meaning the bonus seconds up for grabs were 6 and 4 which is not enough for Nibali.

But if they had kept Tiralongo with Elissonde Tiralongo would have crossed 2nd, thereby taking the 6 bonus seconds meaning Nibali would win the Vuelta by taking the 4 second bonus on the sprint.

Ok. But if Nibali hadn't attacked they would have never caught all the rest of the break.

 

[The Hitch]

Ok. But if Nibali hadn't attacked they would have never caught all the rest of the break.

Don't know that for sure. They certainly didnt know at the time what the bonus second situation would be and Astana would have had the Tiralongo card to decide. Nibali could have set pace some of the way. Would have gotten help from Fuglsang. Horner may have tried to drop Nibali to be sure and set pace as well.

 

[Eshnar]

Don't know that for sure.

They barely caught them in the actual stage. I really don't think they could have gone faster without those early attacks.

 

[The Hitch]

Froome may not have won 10 stages of the Tour and Porte may not have won the other 10 but The hog finally got a prediction right.

From 3 months ago

He'll probably win the Vuelta!

They barely caught them in the actual stage. I really don't think they could have gone faster without those early attacks.

I disagree. if Nibali had spent that energy setting pace rather than attacking they would have gone even faster. But it would also have been better if he had put in those early attacks but saved energy later. All hypothetical of course.

 

[TheGame]

6 times in 15 years is not exactly a great sample size. Heck I don't see how anyone could use comparative times unless it was a time trial and even then I wouldn't feel comfortable with it because of weather. And how do you factor in racing strategy, attacking on different parts of the climb or having a comfortable enough lead that one wouldn't need to go all out.

It very much depends on your view of the rider involved. If the ride times relate to Chris Froome and you are non British, then basically over a ten year period all the tactical variances, weather etc balance each other out and climb times are evidence.

If you happen to support the rider involved, then variances in tactics, weather, etc, are proof that climb times alone don't tell the whole story.

 

[coinneach]

Sean Kelly's analysis on British Eurosport at the time was
# it was right of Nibali to try repeated attacks: if one doesn't work, maybe the next one will
# it was wrong of Fugelsang & team-mate to keep riding: once Nibali got the early jump on Horner, they should have stopped, or even cycled back down to join him and help him up

Hindsight is a wonderful thing: strange to see tactics discussed in the clinic: surely to post here you have to believe that its ONLY drugs that make a difference?

 

[B_Ugli]

As.com has updated the story to say that AEA (Spanish ADA) actually went to the right hotel after first going to the wrong one, but couldn't find Horner there either. It is unclear whether they got there within the time window.

They also say he has been targeted by USADA for some months.

http://ciclismo.as.com/ciclismo/2013/09/16/vuelta_espana/1379326260_077120.html

They were never going to get to the 2nd hotel in time. As another poster pointed out in the comments section, the 2nd hotel is 35km outside of the city in the opposite direction to the airport.

He might have played by the rules in notification but the odds were stacked against those testers getting to the 2nd hotel before 7 am. In fact I am amazed that they did.

 

[hrotha]

You guys are forgetting an important factor, namely that Horner would have been an idiot to wait for the sprint. He would have gone all out and dropped Nibali if it had followed the same script as the previous stages. That's why Nibbles went early, to tackle the problem from a different angle.

 

[Fatclimber]

They were never going to get to the 2nd hotel in time. As another poster pointed out in the comments section, the 2nd hotel is 35km outside of the city in the opposite direction to the airport.

He might have played by the rules in notification but the odds were stacked against those testers getting to the 2nd hotel before 7 am. In fact I am amazed that they did.

I was curious about the procedure myself. Not sure how the paperwork is executed, but sounds like another way to get some extra minutes warning to deal with that glow.

 

[barmaher]

Hindsight is 20/20. We know now what Nibali tried wouldn't work, so all other options are potentially better.

I think he did the right thing. Horner is not stupid. He would have attacked Nibali with 1km of climbing remaining if there were bonus seconds up for grabs.

And back on topic, it is insane that Horner can get away with this.

 

[Fatclimber]

.....strange to see tactics discussed in the clinic: surely to post here you have to believe that its ONLY drugs that make a difference?

Maybe you should think again about thrusting you assumptions and stereotypes on large groups of people. It is undeniable that drugs play a large role. And yes, there are many conspiracy theorists that make many silly remarks, but the amount of silliness in the Clinic is of an equal ratio (possibly less) to that of the PRR section of the forum.

 

[Fatclimber]

what wonders me most is, the people who think Horner is doped, but Nibali is somehow clean.

Yes Horner beats previous dopers times on Angliru and Pena Cabarga. But Nibali, only 25 seconds slower on Algiru, beats MANY doper era times as well, including 2008 Contador. So did Valverde.. hell Valverde is faster than before his suspension
And that's somehow possibe then..

If you condemn Horner on base of his climbing times, then you should condemn Nibali and Valverde as well..
No prejudices

Agreed, but can you point out who falls into the category of those who believe Horner is dirty and Nibali is clean?

Horner is getting so much attention because the level of focus is proportional to the level of absurdity and then if it is the winner that is again multiplied 10-fold. Also, as you point out, sporting fans are not known for their logic and impartiality. If you want to witness a real sick show of emotionally driven nonsense try clicking on the forum link in M. John Murphy's signature and read in there. Go back to last years Vuelta if This years discussions aren't enough. That's what happens when the doping discussions aren't separated from the rest, have to give CN credit on that decision.

At least cycling fans aren't killing each other in riots like in soccer stadiums.