When is the smackdown on Chris Horner?

Page 99 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Master50 said:
From whom? The only investigation on Horner is here in the Clinic. Trouble is the Clinic has never imposed a penalty that stuck!
Presumably wada are after him.
If he continues racing they might catch him offguard.
anyway, i agree that this looks like a real injury.
 
Mar 19, 2009
832
0
0
The WC road race proved one thing - that neither Nibali, Rodriguez nor Valverde were knackered after a long season. Not only did Horner win a GT at almost 42 years of age, he beat three of the top stage racers in the world, all of whom were still strong enough to finish top 4 in the WC. I've been a cycling fan for 30 years and it's not hyperbole to say that Horner's Vuelta ranks among the most suspicious performances I've seen.

I think you'd have to be a fool to give Chris a contract based on his Vuelta, especially given how crazy performances in the bio-passport era usually don't get repeated. Even Cancellara and Gilbert, talented guys in the prime of their careers, haven't been back to the levels they showed during their dominating 2010 and 2011 respective classics campaigns (and Gilbert hasn't been anywhere close).
 
Epicycle said:
I think you'd have to be a fool to give Chris a contract based on his Vuelta, especially given how crazy performances in the bio-passport era usually don't get repeated.
Yes, but he seems to have picked up some rather zealous fans who "pity the ones who don't believe" during the show.

As a result, cycling teams/UCI/promoters seem to have no problem with dopers as long as they bring a fan base, and probably some sponsor money too.
 
Epicycle said:
The WC road race proved one thing - that neither Nibali, Rodriguez nor Valverde were knackered after a long season. Not only did Horner win a GT at almost 42 years of age, he beat three of the top stage racers in the world, all of whom were still strong enough to finish top 4 in the WC. I've been a cycling fan for 30 years and it's not hyperbole to say that Horner's Vuelta ranks among the most suspicious performances I've seen.

I think you'd have to be a fool to give Chris a contract based on his Vuelta, especially given how crazy performances in the bio-passport era usually don't get repeated. Even Cancellara and Gilbert, talented guys in the prime of their careers, haven't been back to the levels they showed during their dominating 2010 and 2011 respective classics campaigns (and Gilbert hasn't been anywhere close).
WC 2012

10 char
 
StyrbjornSterki said:
At 40 kph, rolling resistance and drive train friction combined account for ~12% of total system drag. The remaining 88% is consumed by aerodynamic drag, of which the bicycle accounts for only ~30% (in mass start trim). The rider himself is the remaining 70%.

Which makes the rider responsible for ~60% of total drag. So this alleged 1-2% improvement the equipment is responsible for necessarily must have come from only ~40% of the total friction profile.


But the chief problem with the "it is about the bike" answer is that it assumes a 2% increase in speed equals a 2% in performance.

It doesn't

Aerodynamic drag increases with the square of the increase in velocity, but the energy required to overcome the added drag increases at the cube of the change. Which means any net change in rider speed occurs at the cube root of the gross change in effort. So a 2% increase in effort, at 35 kph, will net the rider about 0.88 kph more speed. To net a 2% increase in performance would require an (2^3=) 8% increase in effort, or 8% increase in efficiency, or a combination of the two.

This chart was prepared by Ranier Pivit


Based on Pivit's data, Froome's 2013 average output was ~23% higher than Lemond's 1990 average output. 2013 was 101 km shorter than 1990 and the same number of stages, a 5 km difference average stage length.

Horner's 2013 Vuelta average output was ~24% higher than Eddy Merckx's 1973 output. 1973 was 17 stages averaging 180 km. 2013 was 21 stages averaging 160 km.


It's easy to trivialize use of rider speed to indicate doping, but less so when you understand that 2013 Horner's 3.6 kph edge over 1973 Merckx is more than simply 3.6 kph, it's also an additional 24% more energy.

Look me in the eye and tell me you find it credible that a clean 41-year old Chris Horner could be a 24% stronger stage racer than a 28-year old Eddy Merckx.

And how much power put Merck on Coppi?

You try to find an scientific explanation for something that t is not possible to calculate that way.

I am a bad cyclist and I can go faster that the 30's Tours.

The fact is that today, there is not an increase in performance, as always in cycling history, even today the performance is worse than previous years.
 
Apr 14, 2010
1,368
0
0
Epicycle said:
The WC road race proved one thing - that neither Nibali, Rodriguez nor Valverde were knackered after a long season. Not only did Horner win a GT at almost 42 years of age, he beat three of the top stage racers in the world, all of whom were still strong enough to finish top 4 in the WC. I've been a cycling fan for 30 years and it's not hyperbole to say that Horner's Vuelta ranks among the most suspicious performances I've seen.

I think you'd have to be a fool to give Chris a contract based on his Vuelta, especially given how crazy performances in the bio-passport era usually don't get repeated. Even Cancellara and Gilbert, talented guys in the prime of their careers, haven't been back to the levels they showed during their dominating 2010 and 2011 respective classics campaigns (and Gilbert hasn't been anywhere close).
Where to begin.

1. The fact that Nibali, Purito, and Piti weren't fatigued should make them seem just as suspicious.
2. Don't get repeated? 2012 Tour-Vuelta Froome and 2013 Tour Froome
3. And in regards to Gilbert your argument relies on assuming that he was always clean and hasn't either a. lost a supplier or b. just gone off the juice for some reason.

Again I don't think Horner is clean but make sure your reasoning makes sense.
 
Jul 8, 2009
323
0
0
Master50 said:
You post this porn in response to my post? I am not going to read this. I am an electrician and not a blood expert. You obviously miss my point. If this is some form of evidence of doping am happy to wait for the official announcement from USADA, WADA, or the UCI. If you are an actual expert then you are still talking to a cycling forum and not a doping panel.
Of course you won't read it but you sure will take time to comment on its not read contents, which only proves that you couldn't resist the surreptitious and "salacious" solicitations of its suppositions after all. And then you subvert yourself still further with your hypocritical observation that this forum indeed cannot supersede its function as a vehicle of opinion rather than legal conviction. If your rebuttal gets scuttled with so little trouble then maybe the voltmeter is a better fiddle. Personally, I fail to fathom why someone would acquiesce to indulging the apparent feebleness of 59 pages of fatuous fiction when said someone's disposition is the termination of the very object of his rather pornographic 59 page obsession. I would say that I'm befuddled but then I have never underestimated the rather prevalent pugnacious proclivity of humans to pontificate on one hand while preempting the right for others do likewise on the other.
 
Epicycle said:
Even Cancellara and Gilbert, talented guys in the prime of their careers, haven't been back to the levels they showed during their dominating 2010 and 2011 respective classics campaigns (and Gilbert hasn't been anywhere close).
I dunno, Cancellara looked pretty good about 6 months ago.
 
May 13, 2009
407
0
9,280
vrusimov said:
Of course you won't read it but you sure will take time to comment on its not read contents, which only proves that you couldn't resist the surreptitious and "salacious" solicitations of its suppositions after all. And then you subvert yourself still further with your hypocritical observation that this forum indeed cannot supersede its function as a vehicle of opinion rather than legal conviction. If your rebuttal gets scuttled with so little trouble then maybe the voltmeter is a better fiddle. Personally, I fail to fathom why someone would acquiesce to indulging the apparent feebleness of 59 pages of fatuous fiction when said someone's disposition is the termination of the very object of his rather pornographic 59 page obsession. I would say that I'm befuddled but then I have never underestimated the rather prevalent pugnacious proclivity of humans to pontificate on one hand while preempting the right for others do likewise on the other.
Too many words :D
 
vrusimov said:
Of course you won't read it but you sure will take time to comment on its not read contents, which only proves that you couldn't resist the surreptitious and "salacious" solicitations of its suppositions after all. And then you subvert yourself still further with your hypocritical observation that this forum indeed cannot supersede its function as a vehicle of opinion rather than legal conviction. If your rebuttal gets scuttled with so little trouble then maybe the voltmeter is a better fiddle. Personally, I fail to fathom why someone would acquiesce to indulging the apparent feebleness of 59 pages of fatuous fiction when said someone's disposition is the termination of the very object of his rather pornographic 59 page obsession. I would say that I'm befuddled but then I have never underestimated the rather prevalent pugnacious proclivity of humans to pontificate on one hand while preempting the right for others do likewise on the other.
"V" is "S" and "P".

Verisimilitude?

Dave.
 
Mar 10, 2009
1,295
0
0
vrusimov said:
Of course you won't read it but you sure will take time to comment on its not read contents, which only proves that you couldn't resist the surreptitious and "salacious" solicitations of its suppositions after all. And then you subvert yourself still further with your hypocritical observation that this forum indeed cannot supersede its function as a vehicle of opinion rather than legal conviction. If your rebuttal gets scuttled with so little trouble then maybe the voltmeter is a better fiddle. Personally, I fail to fathom why someone would acquiesce to indulging the apparent feebleness of 59 pages of fatuous fiction when said someone's disposition is the termination of the very object of his rather pornographic 59 page obsession. I would say that I'm befuddled but then I have never underestimated the rather prevalent pugnacious proclivity of humans to pontificate on one hand while preempting the right for others do likewise on the other.
How completely pretentious of you to say so too. It seemed a short comment on such a long post. If anything I was pointing out I have no particular training to interpret that post and it seems to me the post was intended to provoke me as it certainly does not win me over.
My basic problem with this part of the forum is its negativity and lack of objective reasoning. It offends my sense of fair play (yes I can see the irony) that so much drivel is typed out to make rather lousy accusations and then debate the merit of each point. That there are 198 posts in the thread yet CH has not been charged with a doping offence. Until this win, barely ever was spoken of as a doper and the simple lack of a willingness to see how much things are changing for the better. Add a Flat 40 K TT and CH would not have made the podium.
More to the point is I have been an active official for 25 years and have followed a lot of races. They physically look and develop very differently than 6 years ago. The conversations at the hotels are changing and the riders are too. I see so many reasons for optimism that these unfounded, Yes I'll repeat myself since it is so contrary to the regulars, unfounded, accusations against both Chris F and H. just offends me. It is ingrained both in my work and avocation that there is no guilt without proof and casting aspersions is a bad thing. I would bet that most of the regulars teach that to their kids but actively are involved with Lynchings every day.
I come here because it is as much my forum as yours and I want to see a change so I speak up. For the most part this thread is offensive to the principle of innocent until proven guilty (not every member thinks this) that I think the Clinic would be a lot healthier if it was restricted to generic discussions on doping, specific cases where a person is officially accused by an anti doping body or if defamed in the press as a doper but to so often run threads of 2 and 300 posts on people that are "officially" innocent of an offence or investigation should be left alone. I have faith that the Clinic can be a great place for Darkside discussion but I believe it needs more stringent review and higher standards applied.
Maybe you can edit my post with a lot of really big words so you will sound smart.
 
proffate said:
I dunno, Cancellara looked pretty good about 6 months ago.
Cancellara has been more or less the same level the last 4 seasons. 2011 he was as strong as 2010 but everyone rode against him. 2012 he won MSB with a 20 k solo break and was the strongest rider in MSR before crashing at RVV where its very possible he could have done another double.
2013 he of course won the double though maybe a bit weaker as PR was quite close.

The only difference is in 2010 he was stronger in the tts than he has been since.
 
Master50 said:
...
More to the point is I have been an active official for 25 years and have followed a lot of races. They physically look and develop very differently than 6 years ago. The conversations at the hotels are changing and the riders are too. ....
That is refreshing to hear.

Excuse me for being jaded, but we are still mucking out the crap that has piled up in the stalls and it is hard to avoid the lingering smell.

Dave.
 
D-Queued said:
That is refreshing to hear.

Excuse me for being jaded, but we are still mucking out the crap that has piled up in the stalls and it is hard to avoid the lingering smell.

Dave.
The smell won't go away cause some of the Managers of current teams were involved in organized doping in the 1990's. We have riders from the transfusion era. For sure the situation is improving at the rate of 10% with every scandal. But riders like Di Luca , Santa seemed intent on proving it wrong. At least they were caught. Now we have Horner doing something so incredible that no champion has previously done and even he has not even come close to before. We have Nibali, Valverde, Rodriguez struggling gasping for breath whereas Horner smiling puts 30 s into them with ease pushing a big gear for which he had an operation. We have Cadel at 36 struggling at the Giro and completely off the pace at the TDF. So we are back at square one which most riders put at 2006.
 
Master50 said:
My basic problem with this part of the forum is its negativity and lack of objective reasoning.
What facts do we have? All those riders telling us about their doping? UCI being perfectly transparent in the matter? CN needs Pepe Marti to write a series. Old Chris Carmichael won't even be honest about it.

Deduction is good for nothing? What smells like a duck, has feathers, feet and quacks like a duck can't possibly be a duck?

Master50 said:
..there are 198 posts in the thread yet CH has not been charged with a doping offence.
Uh huh. Yeah, that Marion Jones or Lance Armstrong finally got ejected from the sport for a doping positive... I could go on, but I think you get it.

Master50 said:
there is no guilt without proof...or the most part this thread is offensive to the principle of innocent until proven guilty...
Newsflash! Sport administration does not operate inside a judicial system. There is no transparency to even BEGIN operating like a judicial system.


Please explain why a group of athletes somatotype is changing in a BRAND NEW WAY is evidence of a cleaner peloton?
 
DirtyWorks said:
...


Please explain why a group of athletes somatotype is changing in a BRAND NEW WAY is evidence of a cleaner peloton?
That is frikkin weird.

One data point that has received very little air time is Wiggo's power output.

There was a time when Indurain's 508 watts was such an aberration you couldn't possibly claim he was clean without snickering, rolling your eyes, or coughing up your milk.

Wiggo at 450 watts for an hour? From someone with the new cycling somatotype? And, though he is still a sitck figure, he claims to have gained weight to increase power, but his power actually goes down? C'mon.

Then some guy like Horner comes out of the clear blue sky (hint: b for blue and s for sky) offering an even more miraculous miracle.

Well, like someone said, I'm sorry I don't believe in them. Not even the less miraculous miracles.

We may be seeing less doping in some areas, which would be fantastic, but the sleight-of-hand in the pro peloton is making Barnum and Bailey look more tame by the moment.

Or, to put a finer point on it, it is like the startup that only needs 2-3 more breakthroughs so the Engineer asks 'Would you like me to schedule them for you?"

Looks like we are now scheduling miracles in cycling with the miracle of Wiggo replaced by the miracle of Froome, and then by the miracle of Horner.

If you believe in miracles, shouldn't they at least be slightly unpredictable?

Dave.
 
Oct 16, 2009
3,864
0
0
Daniel Benson deserves some credit for putting this troll line at the end of every Horner article: "Previously, Horner had opted not to answer when asked by Cyclingnews if his was a redacted name in rider testimony published last year as part of USADA’s Reasoned Decision on the Lance Armstrong doping case."

Drives the fanboys up the wall. :D
 
D-Queued said:
...
Or, to put a finer point on it, it is like the startup that only needs 2-3 more breakthroughs so the Engineer asks 'Would you like me to schedule them for you?"
I was at that meeting! :D

D-Queued said:
Looks like we are now scheduling miracles in cycling with the miracle of Wiggo replaced by the miracle of Froome, and then by the miracle of Porte, then Kennaugh.
You have to give it to Chris, though. He cracked the "non-existent racing schedule to Grand Tour domination while never testing posiive" mystery better than Sky.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Fatclimber said:
M50, it appears you're confusing this discussion forum with some sort of legal proceeding. Nobody gets convicted by anything written here.
Too many fans of the sport believe the lies and then the damned lies.

Being told the sport is cleanER is such a smoke screen. Yes we aren't seeing 60%+ HcTs but that the teams are not doping to a big degree requires the belief that Unicorns roam the Alpe D'Huez and the Ax3 Domaines.

Seeing Belsen like skinny guys climbing better than the dopers and TTing better or equal to the worlds best TTers is not clean or cleanER riding.

The 'reasoned decision' has had an effect in the sport and that is the secrecy levels have risen. Their could be team programs where riders on the team dont know what their team mates are doing or if they are even on the team program.

The hiring of doping docs didn't stop.

Would love to see the sport clean up its act where it gets to the stage where the riders ostracise ALL the dopers, not protect any of them.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts