When is the smackdown on Chris Horner?

[veganrob]

Huh? Plenty of busted dopers work in the sport.

The UCI is letting him dope. Based on that, he probably can hang around the sport after retiring. Why does Chris get special permissions? <shrug>

Judging by the support/indifference to doping Horner gets in comments in stories at CN he's got fans. He could be the title name of a gran fondo, he could sponsor a development team. He could show up to domestic events and crush them all. You'd have to see what he sounds like doing sports commentating to see if that would work.

At this point, he's all set.

Who said UCI is letting him dope? I certainly did not. Based on 2013 Vuelta he must be feeling pretty good about his program though, eh.
Ther are plenty of dopers in the sport still, sadly, but commentators, I am not sure. And I am not counting Frankie.
I personally don't like Horner, some people here seem to though. whatever their reason. But in this sordid circus that is professional bike racing, Horner fits in nicely and laughs all the way to the bank.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Oh, well I was looking for something other than winning as evidence.

Yes, because implicitely, I hate winners and winning. Am I right?

Chris is so confident he's never testing positive he released some of his profile data last year.

“In this case, the haemoglobin has done what you would expect it to do in the first part of the Vuelta, but what is unusual is that the last two samples, the haemoglobin has actually, while not quite returning to baseline, has certainly gone up. However what you would expect in such a late stage of the race is that the haemoglobin would actually keep decreasing, particularly when you are getting into the third week.

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...biological-passport-values.aspx#ixzz3AJHPvWAx

Read the Parisotto article all the way through. What "dark forces" are working such that some riders legitimately fear the UCI and doping and others can post suspicious profiles and smile the whole time?

I'm one of those that thinks if they pass the test - that should be enough.

How do you know he's passed tests? You don't. Armstrong passed tests. Hundreds of them according to him. Only it turns out he didn't some times and did others yet on a doping program throughout. It's the same anti-doping system today.

What about the grand tour hole in the APMU?

Having rules that are clearly unenforceable does not do any sport any good.

Who said they are unenforceable? They just don't process the positive. It works pretty good for IOC sports and happens frequently.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Who said UCI is letting him dope? I certainly did not. Based on 2013 Vuelta he must be feeling pretty good about his program though, eh.

I never meant to attribute it specifically to you. Please accept my apology if one of my posts suggests that.

What other conclusion can be reached with the bizarre confidence Horner has in releasing never tested positive blood data?

 

[veganrob]

Sorry for misunderstanding you

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Oh, well I was looking for something other than winning as evidence.

I'm one of those that thinks if they pass the test - that should be enough.

Yeah but what if they pass 500 tests? What then?

 

[Futuroscope]

Maybe Horner is sitting on some information that makes him untouchable.

 

[Oldman]

Maybe Horner is sitting on some information that makes him untouchable.

They do come for random testing. Twice this Spring but he wasn't "reachable" on the cell....

 

[Energy Starr]

They do come for random testing. Twice this Spring but he wasn't "reachable" on the cell....

Do those count as missed tests...or whatever the proper term?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Do those count as missed tests...or whatever the proper term?

Yes. 3 strikes is an ADRV.

 

[Energy Starr]

Yes. 3 strikes is an ADRV.

Does he have 2 strikes?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Does he have 2 strikes?

I'm going on what Oldman wrote? Where the word, "twice" means 2.

 

[Energy Starr]

I'm going on what Oldman wrote? Where the word, "twice" means 2.

I guess I meant official, so that if it happens again...well, I don't know what happens. Ha...because somehow I'm guessing that Horner isn't worried about a third.

 

[the sceptic]

Got info on that?
Not that I doubt anyone is doping, but what is your evidence Chris is?

Last time I checked there was no evidence even though some skyfans have told me he is doping anyway.

Either way, now we will finally get the answer to the eternal question. No need for tailwinds or weight adjustments. Just man against alien.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I guess I meant official, so that if it happens again...well, I don't know what happens. Ha...because somehow I'm guessing that Horner isn't worried about a third.

Ah yes. I have afforded Oldman's post a level of sincerity it perhaps does not deserve. Oops! Realising now it was a play on the Daniel Benson attempt at interview.

I need more sleep.

 

[Oldman]

Ah yes. I have afforded Oldman's post a level of sincerity it perhaps does not deserve. Oops! Realising now it was a play on the Daniel Benson attempt at interview.

I need more sleep.

Offline for a moment...whether they eventually "saw" him and how they recorded the test event is certainly internal. To the point that perhaps some riders are accorded a wider latitude on availability. I would guess they stuck around until Chris returned to cell range. By the way; I've known reliably pristine pros to get the same latitude so it is not necessarily a confirmation of anything other than the testing is slacker than #2 linguine after 20 minutes of boiling.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Offline for a moment...whether they eventually "saw" him and how they recorded the test event is certainly internal. To the point that perhaps some riders are accorded a wider latitude on availability. I would guess they stuck around until Chris returned to cell range. By the way; I've known reliably pristine pros to get the same latitude so it is not necessarily a confirmation of anything other than the testing is slacker than #2 linguine after 20 minutes of boiling.

Is this something you heard through the grapevine, or is there mention of it elsewhere as well?

I do find it interesting - I am guessing these were not whereabouts violations?

ie properly random tests?

*pictures Chris switching his phone off and hiding in the kitchen, a BV expander taped to his ankle*

 

[Oldman]

Is this something you heard through the grapevine, or is there mention of it elsewhere as well?

I do find it interesting - I am guessing these were not whereabouts violations?

ie properly random tests?

*pictures Chris switching his phone off and hiding in the kitchen, a BV expander taped to his ankle*

Random tests.

 

[blackcat]

i would be sad if he got caught cos i hope he is a DS or a commentator.

 

[sponsor]

Yeah but what if they pass 500 tests? What then?

Each event has its tests. Pass that test for that event and that event is closed. Like soccer - player confesses after the game they handled the ball to score and were not caught - the game / scores stand. I am pretty sure other sports dope as much, but cycling makes it a circus. We need to test and more on. Sure - make the tests better and get rid of corruption, but end the circus.

I would expect going with just "test passing" there would still be as many or more dopers. But they would not dope at a level that would fail the test.
If they confessed later they doped - it would not be relevant because it would be passing the test and only passing the test that would validate a race.

Thing is now we are using winning as the primary evidence of doping. I care more about fairness than doping. Focusing only on tests would make it fair.

 

[Oldman]

Each event has its tests. Pass that test for that event and that event is closed. Like soccer - player confesses after the game they handled the ball to score and were not caught - the game / scores stand. I am pretty sure other sports dope as much, but cycling makes it a circus. We need to test and more on. Sure - make the tests better and get rid of corruption, but end the circus.

I would expect going with just "test passing" there would still be as many or more dopers. But they would not dope at a level that would fail the test.
If they confessed later they doped - it would not be relevant because it would be passing the test and only passing the test that would validate a race.

Thing is now we are using winning as the primary evidence of doping. I care more about fairness than doping. Focusing only on tests would make it fair.

In an honest world we'd all be with you on that logic. The problem is: this sport is a circus with no shortage of clowns. The smart ones seem to know well in advance when trouble is approaching and when it's OK to be tested.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Each event has its tests. Pass that test for that event and that event is closed. Like soccer - player confesses after the game they handled the ball to score and were not caught - the game / scores stand. I am pretty sure other sports dope as much, but cycling makes it a circus. We need to test and more on. Sure - make the tests better and get rid of corruption, but end the circus.

I would expect going with just "test passing" there would still be as many or more dopers. But they would not dope at a level that would fail the test.
If they confessed later they doped - it would not be relevant because it would be passing the test and only passing the test that would validate a race.

Thing is now we are using winning as the primary evidence of doping. I care more about fairness than doping. Focusing only on tests would make it fair.

Have you looked into doping all that much? How it's done, the effect it has, the trade off between VO2 max and efficiency when it comes to Hgb mass in the blood stream of an athlete?

Because there are a bunch of things at play that kinda put your "pass the test for this instant in time" to rest.

Why have the BP if you're going to rely entirely on the IC testing?

After the reading I have done, I think they are heading in the right direction, and find your suggestion severely lacking.

 

[sponsor]

Have you looked into doping all that much? How it's done, the effect it has, the trade off between VO2 max and efficiency when it comes to Hgb mass in the blood stream of an athlete?

Because there are a bunch of things at play that kinda put your "pass the test for this instant in time" to rest.

Why have the BP if you're going to rely entirely on the IC testing?

After the reading I have done, I think they are heading in the right direction, and find your suggestion severely lacking.

I think its too late. UCI should regulate U12+
Look at the kids winning in Europe now. I do not believe the old Lemonds and certainly not the 17 year old Lance could hang with these kids. I am not saying they are doping, but they are at another level than everyone focuses on and by the time they are age to draw blood from - it is mostly over.

A rider does not need to prove age until UCI (17) if they race internationally. So testing a rider at 16 that could be 20 seems silly. I have seen 15 tear olds that look 20.
The BP is a stamp in time that is taken too late. So do we take BPs of 12 year olds? Kind of harsh I think.

I have little doubt the current system, as the prior system can be beat.

 

[sponsor]

Have you looked into doping all that much?

Yes. Very much for many years.

 

[Gavandope]

Random tests.

With a second test less than 24 hours later would be great.

 

[The Hitch]

So when the doctor tells you to stop smoking, do you tell him that you only take that kind of advice from your mortician?

I approve this. Goes well with the avy too