When is the smackdown on Chris Horner?

[Granville57]

So...
By allowing everyone to dope, everyone is allowed to use the same stuff. That is fair.

"Allowed." That's mighty generous of you.

So who pays for all this? Do the wealthy riders get to spend more on more doping than those who don't make as much? Or should those wealthy riders be required to fund some the lower-income riders themselves, in the interest of "fairness"?

Or should it be paid for by the teams? Because all teams have the same financial resources as each other, right?

Or should the governing body of the sport simply hand out equal amounts of dope to each rider at the start of the season? Because every rider responds exactly the same to the same dosage of the same drug, so that would definitely make it fair, yes?

Since you've looked into doping so much, tell me who this quote is from. Thanks.

Q: Is there doping at every level of athletics?

A: Yes, the only difference is the quality of the doping. Athletes with little money use simple steroids and hope they don’t get tested. The stars earn 50,000 dollars a month, not including starting bonuses and sponsorship contracts. The very best invest 100,000 dollars – I’ll then build you a designer drug that can’t be detected.

 

[sittingbison]

And with that gentle(wo)men...and sponsor...lets get back to discussing Pappy and his upcoming Veulta win

cheers
bison

 

[doperhopper]

And with that gentle(wo)men...and sponsor...lets get back to discussing Pappy and his upcoming Veulta win

cheers
bison

well, why that irony - one can imagine even bigger favoricide than at the Tour, Vroomie&Clentador affected by injuries, Burrito tired, Nairito may crash this time, and Piti doing Piti for 3rd, and suddenly we're left with one and only real contender (unless mighty Rafal shows up well tired from the Giro/Tdf/TdP which is the prerequisite for MTF success)

 

[sponsor]

"Allowed." That's mighty generous of you.

So who pays for all this? Do the wealthy riders get to spend more on more doping than those who don't make as much? Or should those wealthy riders be required to fund some the lower-income riders themselves, in the interest of "fairness"?

Or should it be paid for by the teams? Because all teams have the same financial resources as each other, right?

Or should the governing body of the sport simply hand out equal amounts of dope to each rider at the start of the season? Because every rider responds exactly the same to the same dosage of the same drug, so that would definitely make it fair, yes?

Since you've looked into doping so much, tell me who this quote is from. Thanks.

On topic - we share a doctor with the GT winner. I think Chris is clean.

Back to the other point/s - multiple posts.

Set the limits low. Pre-teen cyclist using PEDs? That would be 12 year olds. Does the unlikelihood of that need to be explained?

First maybe have age verification. A 19 year old can race against 16 year olds in most national competitions - just lie. No age proof required.
That is something we have seen more than once.

At 17-18 UCI range there is still hardly any junior drug testing in practice (even in Nations Cup races), so I don't understand how implementing anything we are discussing changes that.

Riding on the road is more dangerous statistically from accidents than PEDs in the amount below what would be detected.
Keep the tests, make the tests harder, but keep it to the tests. Asking friends and looking on Facebook to see who may have doped is not what we want - is it?

What the [non cyclist] kids are doing in school should be of greater concern.

How do we ensure it is fair for adults?
I am not reading anyone coming up with anything, rather only poking holes at suggestions. What do "you" propose.

Re Chris...
He was riding away from Cat 1s and Pros who were 5-10 years older in his teens. A Dara Torres can break her 15 year old own WR 20 years later. Joop did OK too (I don't know about his PED use). Why can't a 40+ year old cyclist?

I am a fan, and I think he won his last GT, because in part - he is clean, and the other part - he is old.

 

[Oldman]

On topic - we share a doctor with the GT winner. I think Chris is clean.
Back to the other point/s - multiple posts.

Set the limits low. Pre-teen cyclist using PEDs? That would be 12 year olds. Does the unlikelihood of that need to be explained?

First maybe have age verification. A 19 year old can race against 16 year olds in most national competitions - just lie. No age proof required.
That is something we have seen more than once.

At 17-18 UCI range there is still hardly any junior drug testing in practice (even in Nations Cup races), so I don't understand how implementing anything we are discussing changes that.

Riding on the road is more dangerous statistically from accidents than PEDs in the amount below what would be detected.
Keep the tests, make the tests harder, but keep it to the tests. Asking friends and looking on Facebook to see who may have doped is not what we want - is it?

What the [non cyclist] kids are doing in school should be of greater concern.

How do we ensure it is fair for adults?
I am not reading anyone coming up with anything, rather only poking holes at suggestions. What do "you" propose.

Re Chris...
He was riding away from Cat 1s and Pros who were 5-10 years older in his teens. A Dara Torres can break her 15 year old own WR 20 years later. Joop did OK too (I don't know about his PED use). Why can't a 40+ year old cyclist?

I am a fan, and I think he won his last GT, because in part - he is clean, and the other part - he is old.

In one post you argue for the parity of open doping and the next claim the Blind Faith of a Fan.

Because you have a common doctor (do you really thing your pediatrician or orthopod knows about his "program") would not make you any more of an authority than sharing a bartender....except the bartender may be more inclined to tell the truth.
Having shared several teammates with him and having raced against him since his teens I've said repeatedly that he is talented and perhaps as much as those he's racing against.
The rest is your fantasy. Hold it close.

 

[Granville57]

The rest is your fantasy. Hold it close.

Oh I don't know. I think the "because he is old" part is an excellent explanation for Horner's success. How could we have missed the obvious?

 

[Oldman]

Oh I don't know. I think the "because he is old" part is an excellent explanation for Horner's success. How could we have missed the obvious?

We're not astride the same Unicorn, I guess. Mine's purple; what color's yours?

 

[sponsor]

do you really thing your pediatrician or orthopod knows about his "program"

What do you know about his program?

 

[Granville57]

We're not astride the same Unicorn, I guess. Mine's purple; what color's yours?

Red

 

[Archibald]

Because you have a common doctor (do you really thing your pediatrician or orthopod knows about his "program") would not make you any more of an authority than sharing a bartender....except the bartender may be more inclined to tell the truth.

Like you, I'm a bit mystified by his statement, because everyone's doctor talks to you about their other patients, right?

 

[glassmoon]

red

:d


-------------

 

[Dazed and Confused]

yep, that image deserves more attention. Brilliant.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Seriously, how is he still riding ?

 

[Benotti69]

Seriously, how is he still riding ?

Machine calibration errors.....

 

[BYOP88]

They bust who they want, they bust who they want, the UCI, they bust who they want.

 

[Merckx index]

They bust who they want, they bust who they want, the UCI, they bust who they want.

A riff on that old umpire joke:

First UCI official: Some are positives and some are negatives, and I bust them as I see them.

Second UCI official: Some are positives and some are negatives, and I bust them as they are.

Third UCI official: Some are positives and some are negatives, but they ain’t nothing till I decide what they are.

 

[Oldman]

What do you know about his program?

Read back in time. Then talk to some other retired Bend pros. There are a few.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Machine calibration errors.....

OK that got a laugh.

 

[Futuroscope]

How do you analyse that type of chart? His off-score numbers seem to be all over the place. Is it a clear sign of blood withdrawl and re-infusion?

 

[zlev11]

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y151/catwhoorg/Horneroffscore_zpsbe1b4f07.jpg

Seriously, how is he still riding ?

hasn't hit 155 yet

 

[Catwhoorg]

How do you analyse that type of chart? His off-score numbers seem to be all over the place. Is it a clear sign of blood withdrawl and re-infusion?

I have his ret% and HGB levels in other charts as well as some cross correlations. You don't just focus on offscore, but in a truly clean athlete there certainly wouldn't be wild swings in that parameter.

But being as we were discussing JTL's ridiculous 155 off score in another thread, it seemed appropriate to show Horner's record (Based of the lab reports he freely released).

 

[Master50]

A riff on that old umpire joke:

First UCI official: Some are positives and some are negatives, and I bust them as I see them.

Second UCI official: Some are positives and some are negatives, and I bust them as they are.

Third UCI official: Some are positives and some are negatives, but they ain’t nothing till I decide what they are.

How many uci officials control the tests? 1.

if USADA, ASADA, CCES or any federation administer the tests how many UCI officials? 0 they do not attend.
The samples go to the lab of the national anti doping organization and the UCI only gets the results of the negatives completely out of their influence or possible control of the UCI.

When do high level UCI politicos get informed of positives from the UCI when they are testing? they get an email after the positive is been addressed. So if there is actual corruption in this process it must be by office staff. Believe what you like but if Brian could or pat was influencing doping results it has stopped years ago just because they have done a lot to close that door.

Conspiracy theories to the contrary notwithstanding.

 

[Granville57]

Conspiracy theories to the contrary notwithstanding.

You missed the word "joke" perhaps?

 

[DirtyWorks]

How many uci officials control the tests? 1.

if USADA, ASADA, CCES or any federation administer the tests how many UCI officials? 0 they do not attend.
The samples go to the lab of the national anti doping organization and the UCI only gets the results of the negatives completely out of their influence or possible control of the UCI.

When do high level UCI politicos get informed of positives from the UCI when they are testing? they get an email after the positive is been addressed. So if there is actual corruption in this process it must be by office staff. Believe what you like but if Brian could or pat was influencing doping results it has stopped years ago just because they have done a lot to close that door.

Reread this carefully, because this is my understanding of the process.

What's missing is the UCI/anti-doping authority is the one that decides to do the sanction.

 

[Wallace]

I have his ret% and HGB levels in other charts as well as some cross correlations. You don't just focus on offscore, but in a truly clean athlete there certainly wouldn't be wild swings in that parameter.

But being as we were discussing JTL's ridiculous 155 off score in another thread, it seemed appropriate to show Horner's record (Based of the lab reports he freely released).

Still, you have to admire Horner's unabashed, unapologetic arrogance in releasing the lab reports.

"Look: I'm clean. I released my lab reports."
"But the lab reports show that you doped."
"No they don't. I'm clean because I released my lab reports. No matter what the reports reveal, I'm clean, because I released my lab reports. So **** you."

End of discussion.