Who was the real winner of Flanders?

[sadfitty]

thats fake! he had a bike change during the race, @285w he would consume 1000Kcal/hr, the race was 6hrs 25min, that^ says 6500Kcal which is exactly right, and the avg speed was 6hrs 25min for about 260km =40km/hr, its not Cancellara's power numbers but is someone's who was in the race alright, he had no time to put it on during the bike change there was video of it on youtube

6500 Kj = 1550 Kcal

 

[ianfra]

Spellung

Yeth. As a jonnolest I cunnot spelt. Bout Eye kan 'ave mai oponions. Eye ham de fist purse-on two kmplayn abowt peeples speltin onn de enternot. Eye ham awlso han head hit her. Eye pwoof weed awl dae. Sew kive mee sum spayce.

 

[ianfra]

But I am not a PR person for the UCI. Indeed, I have written to the Irish goblin who runs the UCI many times but he does not acknowledge or answer. My original point is that there is no evidence that Cancel Era is doping and until he is caught (if ever) I will continue to view him as a talented fellow cyclist. To say that most riders are doping, as some on this thread suggest, does a great disservice to those who ride clean and who have displayed genuine anger against the abusers. Many people who post here are self opinionated prats who believe they have a monopoly on truth. When in fact they are talking through their lycra-clad bottoms. Provide the evidence and I'll side with you. No evidence? Then wrap it up.

 

[Race Radio]

But I am not a PR person for the UCI. Indeed, I have written to the Irish goblin who runs the UCI many times but he does not acknowledge or answer. My original point is that there is no evidence that Cancel Era is doping and until he is caught (if ever) I will continue to view him as a talented fellow cyclist. To say that most riders are doping, as some on this thread suggest, does a great disservice to those who ride clean and who have displayed genuine anger against the abusers. Many people who post here are self opinionated prats who believe they have a monopoly on truth. When in fact they are talking through their lycra-clad bottoms. Provide the evidence and I'll side with you. No evidence? Then wrap it up.

few would say that his working with a doping doctor like Checcini is "No Evidence".

 

[ianfra]

Agreed. But rephrase: few bigots would say so. But perhaps a court of law, with a proper jury, would disagree. I am not willing to condemn without evidence. No jury would convict without evidence. Case closed.
Actually, I wish a few of the 'accused' would come around here and sling a few lawsuits around.

 

[Race Radio]

Agreed. But rephrase: few bigots would say so. But perhaps a court of law, with a proper jury, would disagree. I am not willing to condemn without evidence. No jury would convict without evidence. Case closed.
Actually, I wish a few of the 'accused' would come around here and sling a few lawsuits around.

Bigots?

A court of law would not look kindly on the testimony of his former teamate Dario Frigo when he described the organized, team wide, doping that everyone on Fasso participated in.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Agreed. But rephrase: few bigots would say so. But perhaps a court of law, with a proper jury, would disagree. I am not willing to condemn without evidence. No jury would convict without evidence. Case closed.
Actually, I wish a few of the 'accused' would come around here and sling a few lawsuits around.

So by your definition, Pantani, Ullrich, Manzano, Riis are all innocent.

 

[skidmark]

Agreed. But rephrase: few bigots would say so. But perhaps a court of law, with a proper jury, would disagree. I am not willing to condemn without evidence. No jury would convict without evidence. Case closed.
Actually, I wish a few of the 'accused' would come around here and sling a few lawsuits around.

Fair enough, if that's your yardstick, but this is not a court of law. People here are pretty free to draw their conclusions off of whatever evidence they choose. So great, if you're saying that's the level of evidence you require, but that by no means is the level of strictness to which you should expect everyone here to hold.

I think on the opposite end of the spectrum are people who are frustrated that riders who are obviously doping don't get convicted because of technicalities of legal systems and the burden of proof. Take Valverde's case, for example - he's been allowed to continue racing for almost a year after his 'suspension' because, even though the courts ARE ruling against him, there are so many legal delays. Yet by your standard, you would consider him innocent, even though to most people, the writing is clear on the wall.

 

[ianfra]

You cannot be selective about evidence. Frigo, for example, was hurt by what happened to him and threw a lot of accusations around that have not been verified. Pantani admitted being a user (as did Riis) and so that is a sufficient burden of proof. Other riders mentioned in this thread were of a previous era and people like Walsh made some very powerful arguments about custom and practice in the peloton at that time. However, there is now a huge movement towards a clean sport. Agreed, the sport (no sport) is not 100% clean but, my God, we have come a long way forward since the dark days. I dare you to stand up in front of Cavendish, Stannard and Wiggins (to name just three) and accuse them of doping. I think you'd be flattened very quickly (either physically or verbally!!!). Confront David Brailsford about systematic doping at Sky and you'll be in a court of law before you could say 'epo'. There is no evidence that systematic doping exists in the sport as of now. Of course, there are unscrupulous individuals who will always try and buck the system in any walk of life. Were it ever so?
There are also false negatives because the science of dope testing may, just may, still not be up to scratch allowing errors to occur. That just makes the waters slightly murkier. Zirbel is a case in point. I wouldn't say that I 100% believe that he doped.
And where do you draw the line at doping? I have just edited an article about someone's personal best time trial where he talks about 'necking a caffeine gel 10 minutes before the off'. Tell me guys, is that doping or not? I was very uncomfortable reading that, so believe me I'm not an apologist for cheats. No way.

 

[ianfra]

Just a second thought. Where do you guys stand on the issue of Armstrong? Did he dope in your view or was he always clean? Is he clean now? David Walsh made some very courageous statements firmly planting the finger on Armstrong's shoulder and he suffered a lot of abuse because of it. Or did everyone dope except Armstrong?

 

[frenchfry]

Just a second thought. Where do you guys stand on the issue of Armstrong? Did he dope in your view or was he always clean? Is he clean now? David Walsh made some very courageous statements firmly planting the finger on Armstrong's shoulder and he suffered a lot of abuse because of it. Or did everyone dope except Armstrong?

Good grief, are you for real! There are a gazillion megabits of server space taken up by discussions on Armstrongs doping.

Or am I just feeding a troll. Hard to tell with posts like this.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You cannot be selective about evidence. Frigo, for example, was hurt by what happened to him and threw a lot of accusations around that have not been verified. Pantani admitted being a user (as did Riis) and so that is a sufficient burden of proof. Other riders mentioned in this thread were of a previous era and people like Walsh made some very powerful arguments about custom and practice in the peloton at that time. However, there is now a huge movement towards a clean sport. Agreed, the sport (no sport) is not 100% clean but, my God, we have come a long way forward since the dark days. I dare you to stand up in front of Cavendish, Stannard and Wiggins (to name just three) and accuse them of doping. I think you'd be flattened very quickly (either physically or verbally!!!). Confront David Brailsford about systematic doping at Sky and you'll be in a court of law before you could say 'epo'. There is no evidence that systematic doping exists in the sport as of now. Of course, there are unscrupulous individuals who will always try and buck the system in any walk of life. Were it ever so?
There are also false negatives because the science of dope testing may, just may, still not be up to scratch allowing errors to occur. That just makes the waters slightly murkier. Zirbel is a case in point. I wouldn't say that I 100% believe that he doped.
And where do you draw the line at doping? I have just edited an article about someone's personal best time trial where he talks about 'necking a caffeine gel 10 minutes before the off'. Tell me guys, is that doping or not? I was very uncomfortable reading that, so believe me I'm not an apologist for cheats. No way.

You say that you cannot be selective about evidence - but that is exactly what you are doing.

Pantani never admitted he doped and was never sanctioned for a doping offense - by YOUR definition he is innocent.

Where has the sport "come a long way'? According to BikePure there were over 60 positive cases last year.

Dave Brailsford? I would ask him for his comments on Rob Hayles, he would tell me he "looked him in the eye" and I would remind him that didn't work so well on David Millar.

Systematic doping was never uncovered by UCI controls - Festina, Telecom, Liberty Seguros all came about through police investigations.
Check out todays news on Lampre.

Armstrong clean? Well going on what you said earlier in this thread....

Cancellera clean. Yes! 100% unless and until testers prove otherwise.

....then by your definition, yes. But if you do a quick search through 'The Clinic' you will find not everyone shares your view.

 

[Digger]

Just a second thought. Where do you guys stand on the issue of Armstrong? Did he dope in your view or was he always clean? Is he clean now? David Walsh made some very courageous statements firmly planting the finger on Armstrong's shoulder and he suffered a lot of abuse because of it. Or did everyone dope except Armstrong?

Firstly, they were not courageous, as they were witness statements and were backed up by facts.
But it was courageous to not go with the status quo, ala Graham Watson et al.

 

[bobbins]

It is impossible for there to be a 'real' winner.

As per the criteria used to identify dopers on this forum, anyone, anywhere that wins a bike race is a doper. Therefore it is not possible that anyone ever has been clean and won a bike race.


Apart from Lance of course

 

[Escarabajo]

... Agreed, the sport (no sport) is not 100% clean but, my God, we have come a long way forward since the dark days. ....

History is relative.

In 10 years they would know today's ages like the dark ages for Blood Doping since EPO and CERA can now be detected. History has proved to us many times that doping has not stopped one bit. Just the methods change. I have been coming to this realization lately.

Look into the latest doping scandal in Italy. Here is the link:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/gaz...-more-details-of-mantova-police-investigation

 

[delgado]

Cancellara has shown a "progressive" development, from being a pure TTer to a Classic Rider & now with his weight lost, he could be aiming some "week races"
but to believe he could ever become a GT contender with -let's say- a Ferrari program- is simply out from his reach-and he already knows that.

Olano was a Vuelta winner, a Giro contender and heck, at the time his name even popped up in the pre-TdF favorite discussions. What did he have that Cancellara does not? And I'm saying this as a die-hard Olano fan.

 

[BikeCentric]

History is relative.

In 10 years they would know today's ages like the dark ages for Blood Doping since EPO and CERA can now be detected. History has proved to us many times that doping has not stopped one bit. Just the methods change. I have been coming to this realization lately.

Look into the latest doping scandal in Italy. Here is the link:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/gaz...-more-details-of-mantova-police-investigation

Oh geeze, the more things change the more they stay the same. So much for "the little prince" Cunego being clean eh? Last year at the Giro he insinuated that the reason he got dropped was because the lead climbers were doped up and he was clean. Guess not.

 

[rhubroma]

Cancallera's hematacrit level was theoretically 64.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It is impossible for there to be a 'real' winner.

As per the criteria used to identify dopers on this forum, anyone, anywhere that wins a bike race is a doper. Therefore it is not possible that anyone ever has been clean and won a bike race.


Apart from Lance of course

Damn 'Bobbins' - you used a pretty broad brush when you wote the above - and as a member of this forum it also paints you.

Why do you follow the sport when you believe "it is not possible that anyone ever has been clean and won a bike race"?

 

[BroDeal]

Oh geeze, the more things change the more they stay the same. So much for "the little prince" Cunego being clean eh? Last year at the Giro he insinuated that the reason he got dropped was because the lead climbers were doped up and he was clean. Guess not.

Since the investigation concerns a pharmacy that is a long time supplier of Lampre, it could very well involve events that happened years ago. Is there any doubt that Cunego was charged in 2004 when everyone else was? Some riders may have had a change of heart after 2005 when the authorities began ratcheting up the fight against doping and the consequences for getting caught became more severe. Of course, with the return of Arsmtrong and the abandonment of the doping fight by the UCI and ASO, riders may have decided to reverse their change of heart.

Do the Italians want to decimate their ranks by prosecuting riders for doping five years ago even as other countries are looking the other way as their riders dope today?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Since the investigation concerns a pharmacy that is a long time supplier of Lampre, it could very well involve events that happened years ago. Is there any doubt that Cunego was charged in 2004 when everyone else was? Some riders may have had a change of heart after 2005 when the authorities began ratcheting up the fight against doping and the consequences for getting caught became more severe. Of course, with the return of Arsmtrong and the abandonment of the doping fight by the UCI and ASO, riders may have decided to reverse their change of heart.

Do the Italians want to decimate their ranks by prosecuting riders for doping five years ago even as other countries are looking the other way as their riders dope today?

According to this article Lampre said that Cunego was not one of the riders under investigation.

Also from an earlier article I got the impression that the investigation appears to be for the 2008 & 2009 season.

 

[BroDeal]

According to this article Lampre said that Cunego was not one of the riders under investigation.

Also from an earlier article I got the impression that the investigation appears to be for the 2008 & 2009 season.

Go back five years and no top rider would come out clean. (Except for Evans, of course. Don't want to upset ACF94 ) There has to be pharmacies like this all over Italy. The Ferrari investigation centered on a pharmacy used by his clients.

Doesn't Cunego's Giro win predate most of the Italian criminalization of doping? He could be safe because of that or the limitation period.

 

[ianfra]

I have never read such ridiculous twaddle. Robert Hayles was never convicted of doping and there was no evidence at all that he had doped. Miller confessed and is now a sincere anti-doper. I challenge you, all of you, to confront Brailsford. I challenge you to truly look at the British Cycling programme and what messages it is delivering on a daily basis to its riders. From my French base I have ridden with some French riders who are vehemently anti-dopage, so it is not just the brits. In the era before the internet you guys would have been done for libel. Unfortunately, these days you can post what stupid arguments you like, make what claims you like and get away with it.
I assert that today very few riders dope compared to even five years ago. On that basis I will say that Armstrong joins a long list of riders whose performances are suspicious. I happen to think the man is a horrible creature, but nevertheless I am not prepared to sit here and accuse him, or others, without evidence. Pantani admitted to his girlfriend of seven years that he doped - and she is an honest lady with no axe to grind who has kept away from the media spotlight.
60 riders caught in the past period? More fools they - but that figure includes riders like Zirbel about who I have previously commented.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Go back five years and no top rider would come out clean. (Except for Evans, of course. Don't want to upset ACF94 ) There has to be pharmacies like this all over Italy. The Ferrari investigation centered on a pharmacy used by his clients.

Doesn't Cunego's Giro win predate most of the Italian criminalization of doping? He could be safe because of that or the limitation period.

Evans is just exceptionally talented.

An interesting question to evans on his twitter

GPREBOIS: @CadelOfficial Cadel, how is it possible to be competitive against druged riders being clean?

I am very interested to hear an answer!

 

[Oldman]

I have never read such ridiculous twaddle. Robert Hayles was never convicted of doping and there was no evidence at all that he had doped. Miller confessed and is now a sincere anti-doper. I challenge you, all of you, to confront Brailsford. I challenge you to truly look at the British Cycling programme and what messages it is delivering on a daily basis to its riders. From my French base I have ridden with some French riders who are vehemently anti-dopage, so it is not just the brits. In the era before the internet you guys would have been done for libel. Unfortunately, these days you can post what stupid arguments you like, make what claims you like and get away with it.
I assert that today very few riders dope compared to even five years ago. On that basis I will say that Armstrong joins a long list of riders whose performances are suspicious. I happen to think the man is a horrible creature, but nevertheless I am not prepared to sit here and accuse him, or others, without evidence. Pantani admitted to his girlfriend of seven years that he doped - and she is an honest lady with no axe to grind who has kept away from the media spotlight.
60 riders caught in the past period? More fools they - but that figure includes riders like Zirbel about who I have previously commented.

Twaddle? TWADDLE!? Them's fightin' words, mate.