When is the smackdown on Chris Horner?

Page 94 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
darwin553 said:
Maybe he will for future tours since I can't see the clinic finding too much wrong in Horner's numbers...
you mean other than HB being the highest at the end of the race despite the fact that retics are seriously suppressed all along?

right, got it.

but yes, at least horner has the guts to release his data. another marginal gain up his alley.
 
Jun 25, 2013
1,442
0
0
meat puppet said:
you mean other than HB being the highest at the end of the race despite the fact that retics are seriously suppressed all along?

right, got it.
All within the acceptable limits though, right?
 
Kind of scuttles the bullshirt excuses SKY have come up with for not releasing their riders' data.

Hope this pressures other riders to be as transparent has Horner has been, though the SRM data is so easy to fudge it's almost irrelevant. Anyway, good on Horner for doing it, though clearly it proves nothing more than the Passport means almost nothing.

Yay for clean cycling.
 
Jan 23, 2013
239
0
0
meat puppet said:
depends on how you define acceptable limits. physiologically, probably not (see TT's post). UCI rules, probably yes.
Well said, Puppet.

Horner's data is not difinitive proof of doping, but it does contain irregularities for which the simplest explanation is taking on a fresh bag during the Vuelta.

I am a "innocent until proven guilty" guy, so I like to believe.

But, as a physiologist, I have to say his reticulocyte values are a bit suspect.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
darwin553 said:
Maybe he will for future tours since I can't see the clinic finding too much wrong in Horner's numbers...
You're not serious are you?

For real? You really found this place 3-4 years too late.

His data is a complete and utter joke. Blind Freddy can see from that data he is blood doping.

Send Dear Wiggo a PM and ask him where he went to get up to speed with all the info on blood doping. He learnt very quickly. Heck, just google Ashenden + velocitynation and read up about Contador. The basics are explained in there. It's not hard to understand at all.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
darwin553 said:
Well then, petition the UCI to sanction him then :rolleyes:
Read up on why Ashenden left the ABP committee. The only time a committee gets together is when they want to throw you under the bus. Like Tedej Valjavec and Franco Pellizotti.

Ashenden was on the committee and never saw Contador's entire profile and when he did, well he didn't have nice things to say. Obvious blood doping. Wake up dude, they've managed the entire ABP as a control measure to con people. It works to a degree but has so much leeway it isn't funny.

Worse the body in charge of regulating and sanctioning is the UCI who forced every expert to sign a non-indemnity contract so they can never speak about what goes on. When the Clinic talks about the UCI controlling who gets busted, this is what is being referred to. The UCI and scientists know really well people are doping...but busting people is bad for business. So they play charades with the public.

That's a brief summary of cycling, blood doping, regulation and accountability within the UCI. In short...they're conning the public every chance they get.
 
Jun 25, 2013
1,442
0
0
Galic Ho said:
Read up on why Ashenden left the ABP committee. The only time a committee gets together is when they want to throw you under the bus. Like Tedej Valjavec and Franco Pellizotti.

Ashenden was on the committee and never saw Contador's entire profile and when he did, well he didn't have nice things to say. Obvious blood doping. Wake up dude, they've managed the entire ABP as a control measure to con people. It works to a degree but has so much leeway it isn't funny.

Worse the body in charge of regulating and sanctioning is the UCI who forced every expert to sign a non-indemnity contract so they can never speak about what goes on. When the Clinic talks about the UCI controlling who gets busted, this is what is being referred to. The UCI and scientists know really well people are doping...but busting people is bad for business. So they play charades with the public.

That's a brief summary of cycling, blood doping, regulation and accountability within the UCI. In short...they're conning the public every chance they get.
Ok, if there is more to the story than what the team released sure he would more than likely have a doping case to answer for but based on these numbers just released he gets away scot-free for the moment, doesn't he?
 
darwin553 said:
Ok, if there is more to the story than what the team released sure he would more than likely have a doping case to answer for but based on these numbers just released he gets away scot-free for the moment, doesn't he?
It's a smoking gun - they need to catch him pulling the trigger. The day he retires will be a great day for the sport.
 
Jun 25, 2013
1,442
0
0
argyllflyer said:
It's a smoking gun - they need to catch him pulling the trigger. The day he retires will be a great day for the sport.
But then we have Contador, Froome and whoever else comes after who wins a GT - conspiracies will never end :rolleyes:
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
argyllflyer said:
It's a smoking gun - they need to catch him pulling the trigger. The day he retires will be a great day for the sport.
That's it. Sanctioned cheating that stops 90s era Pantani and Indurain style madness and to a degree the Armstrong level of ridiculousness.

I will say that 2011 looked to be at a lower level than 2009 and 2010 in GT's. That all changed last year. No doubt AICAR and the other weight loss drugs are playing a huge part as well now.

I was thinking just last night how heavy LA was. Always said to be an underestimation. Now I've thought he was on the same program as Levi and Horner when he returned but naturally, heavier. We're lucky he went when he did, because Lance would actually have had to drop below 70kg to compete against Froome, Wiggins and Horner.

So the passport worked...to a degree. Still allows people to push if they want. Who knows what goes on behind the scenes and what hands are shaken and under the table deals are made.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
darwin553 said:
But then we have Contador, Froome and whoever else comes after who wins a GT - conspiracies will never end :rolleyes:
But Contador was caught. Mostly because the UCI didn't have time to cover it up. German reporter caught a whiff of news about a sample being wrong.

Conspiracies galore on that one. ;)
 

EnacheV

BANNED
Jul 7, 2013
1,441
0
0
Galic Ho said:
...we do have his protege Nibali to cheer for.

I hope Nibali and Italy crush everyone on the final lap. I wanna see some fireworks in Firenze. :p
stop being an expert on how much Horner is doped, your opinion means almost nothing being biased as ****. I find your crusade against Horner hilarious while crying for some dude that has same chances/evidences of doping. Even more, considering in what teams it has been. You are what is called hostile jury.

I see that fanboism transform people overnight in to dehidratation experts. It's wet outside, you can't be dehydrated. blood is the same after 6 hours without drink or after you drink, it doesnt matter when the test is made. jesus rofl, this is hilarious, so much bull****.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
And again, he is the most open cyclist around when it comes to releasing data.
Despite the data's dubiousness, I certainly appreciate the lack of talk and the amount of walk Horner is doing with SRM files and now his BP data.

Makes other riders claiming to be transparent look decidedly opaque.
 
Jun 25, 2013
1,442
0
0
Galic Ho said:
But Contador was caught . Mostly because the UCI didn't have time to cover it up. German reporter caught a whiff of news about a sample being wrong.

Conspiracies galore on that one. ;)
Yes he was caught. But the practice around here is if a cyclist is free to race again after a ban the pursuit doesn't end until you catch them again as no one believes them that they are clean in their comeback.
 
Galic Ho said:
So the passport worked...to a degree. Still allows people to push if they want. Who knows what goes on behind the scenes and what hands are shaken and under the table deals are made.
Ashenden and Mørkeberg who are quoted here couple of pages back have said that normally touring GT blood values go down. In case of Horner his numbers went up. In this sense BP is a failure because Horner numbers are dodgy and BP is not catching him. But from another point of view, reason why Ashenden and Mørkeberg can say that normally blood values go down during GT comes from the fact that they have seen hundreds of passports and seen that for vast majority of peloton blood values act normally (= go down). Basically it indicates that vast majority of peloton is clean (at least clean of blood doping) and this can be regarded as a success of BP.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
EnacheV said:
stop being an expert on how much Horner is doped, your opinion means almost nothing being biased as ****. I find your crusade against Horner hilarious while crying for some dude that has same chances/evidences of doping. Even more, considering in what teams it has been. You are what is called hostile jury.

I see that fanboism transform people overnight in to dehidratation experts. It's wet outside, you can't be dehydrated. blood is the same after 6 hours without drink or after you drink, it doesnt matter when the test is made. jesus rofl, this is hilarious, so much bull****.
Oh you mad little kid?

Cry us a river and go get your jollies watching your boy Froome ride all day watching his top tube.

Obvious doper is an obvious doper. Troll on little kid...troll on. Defending Horner now. Sheesh...the Americans were joking but you're serious. You're in the wrong neighborhood. Move along kid. Move along.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
Von Mises said:
Ashenden and Mørkeberg who are quoted here couple of pages back have said that normally touring GT blood values go down. In case of Horner his numbers went up. In this sense BP is a failure because Horner numbers are dodgy and BP is not catching him. But from another point of view, reason why Ashenden and Mørkeberg can say that normally blood values go down during GT comes from the fact that they have seen hundreds of passports and seen that for vast majority of peloton blood values act normally (= go down). Basically it indicates that vast majority of peloton is clean (at least clean of blood doping) and this can be regarded as a success of BP.
That values go down does not mean clean or clean of blood doping. It means less doping in order to satisfy BP requirements that numbers are down on the previous 2 weeks.

Why do teams hire so many docs and medical specialists? To manipulate this to the full with doping.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
Von Mises said:
Ashenden and Mørkeberg who are quoted here couple of pages back have said that normally touring GT blood values go down. In case of Horner his numbers went up. In this sense BP is a failure because Horner numbers are dodgy and BP is not catching him. But from another point of view, reason why Ashenden and Mørkeberg can say that normally blood values go down during GT comes from the fact that they have seen hundreds of passports and seen that for vast majority of peloton blood values act normally (= go down). Basically it indicates that vast majority of peloton is clean (at least clean of blood doping) and this can be regarded as a success of BP.
You misinterpreted my stance.

I meant the level of permissable doping was reigned in by the ABP.

I never said they don't dope. Like thehog said after last years Tour, one only needed to open their eyes to see what was going on. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck, it's a duck.

People are still being given clear leeway to do more than others are. Why else do you think Ashenden left? He never said he saw full profiles...he said he saw partial values but when he did see them all, well it didn't look good on the top GC rider at the time. That is from values from 2010. We've had almost 3 full seasons since then and the game has changed in terms of who is a GC force. The question is why? Have at it for all I care, it doesn't bother me. I don't need a press conference or some ABP values to tell me the deal...only need to watch the race and see how some people ride. It's absurd at times.
 
Merckx index said:
OTOH, as someone else pointed out, Horner's Vuelta data are a little suspicious. I looked at 5 tests during periods when I was pretty sure he wasn’t racing (Nov – early Feb., various years). His mean HT in those 5 tests was 44.1 +/- 0.90, with a range of 43.2 – 45.1. His pre-Vuelta value of 45.4 is consistent with that (though certainly on the high side), and the value of 40.0 early in the Vuelta is as expected, but the subsequent rise to 43 is not. That is within his normal range, which of course is not what you would expect deep into a GT.

This is the point Ashenden raised wrt LA. A rider can have a "clean" passport, one that does not trigger the criterion, as long as his parameters stay within the baseline. But in a GT, the baseline changes, the HT/Hb drop, so that values that are within the normal baseline may in fact not be within what would be normal within a GT. But the passport does not take this into account. Horner's 43% HT late in the Vuelta is within his normal range, but it may not be within his normal range after plasma expansion. It's still not a huge rise from 40% (which was a single value, so itself has some uncertainty as being representative), but this just reflects how easy it is to stay within acceptable values while still getting a significant benefit.

Not saying that these data show Horner doped, but he could have doped, and substantially, and gotten numbers like these.
I know nothing about blood testing, so apologies for the simplicity of the question, but out of interest does anyone know what the expected variance in HT is on a standard blood test? MI above identifies +/- 0.9 in Horner's baseline - is that a normal ranger of testing variance?

From my crude understanding, obviously if you the results are absolutely accurate then it looks fishy, but I want to get a sense of how fishy they are given you'd expect some natural variance in results.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Von Mises said:
Basically it indicates that vast majority of peloton is clean (at least clean of blood doping) and this can be regarded as a success of BP.
What it may indicate instead, is that there is not a lot of In Competition testing done.

At the 2013 Vuelta, Horner wore red for a few days and won overall. He was only tested 4 times over the three weeks.
 
Benotti69 said:
That values go down does not mean clean or clean of blood doping. It means less doping in order to satisfy BP requirements that numbers are down on the previous 2 weeks.

Why do teams hire so many docs and medical specialists? To manipulate this to the full with doping.
And if Horner and Armstrong values went up - does it mean that they did not hire so many docs and medical specialists? Or their docs are so bad that they do not know how to manipulate it properly?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY