• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Will Alberto Contador keep his 2010 Tour de France crown?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Who will go down as the 2010 Tour de France Champion.

  • Dont know/ Schleck will test positive too

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Maxiton said:
Chill, pill. I don't know what you're talking about. There was no mockery intended.

Go and read the rules on posting then;)

No mockery better word your posts in a different manner.

Back to topic;

UCI are caught between a rock and a hard place and boy would i love to be a fly on McQuaids office wall watching him squirm...bet ASO are regurlarly screaming down his phone, Fran Contador too, LA aswell calling and i wonder who else...
 
May 14, 2010
5,303
4
0
Visit site
Vonn Brinkman said:
Alright enough bothering one another, let's get back on topic.
I think Andy will get the Tour title of 2010.
But I sincerely hope he doesn't, I don't like all this post-awarding Tours, moving up people unto the podium and changing everything. It's not good for cycling to take away titles and give them to other riders.
Having said that, I mean, if Schleck gets the Tour, will everyone recognize him as the 2010 Tour champion? Will it officially be known as his first Tour win?
I'd rather just give Alberto a ban of a half year and let him keep his title.

Well, think about Tour '06. Most of the time when you see it referred to now the winner is stated to be Oscar Pereiro, with no mention of Landis. If this one goes to Schleck (assuming they don't give him the same test as our man Contador, natch) I think the same thing will happen here; it'll be a win by technicality initially, and then over time the details will be forgotten and it'll pretty much just be a win.
 
May 26, 2009
377
0
0
Visit site
Given the failed test is controversial and the rider valuable, I'll vote for the most likely outcome being the UCI letting Contador off if they plausibly can.
 
We, the smalltime riders and fans, as well as the national cycling sponsors, need to stand up, en masse, and demand these retro-active plasterizer tests. Not a few of them, LOTS of them. We should not ask the UCI, we should go to WADA and declare we do not the UCI in governing clean sport.

It should be all over the newspapers around the world. Millions of signings. Dozens of thousands of UCI licenced riders signing. If the signing goes hrough a notary office, it can even be anonimous, for fear of "fixing" by that same UCI of future tests.
Money talks, and we need to get money on our side. Yes, we'll have to break "cycling" as UCI calls it, sponsors pumping loads of money into the UCI and their friends. This money is really not needed to give us cycling on TV. TV stations get sufficient funds to buy the $$$ live broadcasts through non-cycling corps.

The big cycling sponsors, Saxo, Rabo, etc, will need to be confronted, are they for or against retro-active plastrizer tests?
 
Jul 9, 2010
85
0
0
Visit site
IMO the 2010 tdf title will go to schleck, but for me it is hard to except another winner, when if the eventual winner is found to have cheated, then surely the man who finished 39secs behind him cheated aswell.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
5
0
Visit site
Benotti69 said:
why? the Lotto team were known as a doping team were they not?

All Belgians are clean. Their dogs however are dirty dirty dopers.

No, in all honesty. I'm convinced people are clean and they are:

Jurgen van den Broeck, Tom Boonen(the fact that he's stupid enough to test positive for coke is proof by it self) and Philippe Gilbert.
 
May 12, 2010
1,998
0
0
Visit site
El Pistolero said:
All Belgians are clean. Their dogs however are dirty dirty dopers.

No, in all honesty. I'm convinced people are clean and they are:

Jurgen van den Broeck, Tom Boonen(the fact that he's stupid enough to test positive for coke is proof by it self) and Philippe Gilbert.

So you are only convinced that the best Belgian riders are clean.

Shouldn't that Boonen defense work for Ullrich as well?
 
50/50 at this stage. If there are doubts about the testing, politics will intrude and he will get off and retain the title. If he is suspended, AS gets the the title. I just read that the Spanish meat industry no longer uses the drug found in Contador's system. But we all know that the food industry is about as reliable as the UCI. You always have people breaking the rules to some extent, usually to save money. In the short term it will be a disaster for cycling if Contador is suspended. The future of Riis' team will be in serious doubt as it will not have a recognized leader and the sponsors will probably pull the plug. In the long term it could be a good thing.

Contador is adamant about his innocence at the moment but we have seen that, plenty of times before. It could be just bravado. He looked very nervous at the initial press conference. Now he is talking about retiring if he is found guilty. Here I was thinking I had seen three entertaining grand tours this year and free of controversy except for the dropped chain incident and neutralised stage in the TDF. Now two are tainted and a former doper won the other one. Would hate to be doing PR for professional cycling at the moment.
 
JVDB: Giro results in CERA age ?
Boonen: once said after a hard TDF stage they should not be surprised riders dope to finish stages like that
Gilbert: I believe he had a 50+ hematocrit in U23

All three moved (Italy, Monaco), for training, taxes or ...

That said, great riders with a good mentality and no real proof of PED use. And Lotto has always been a team with excellent riders and moderate results, so I assume they are taking less risks than e.g. Liquigas.


My question is: will Cadel Evans win the 2007 TDF ?
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
5
0
Visit site
Scatto said:
JVDB: Giro results in CERA age ?
Boonen: once said after a hard TDF stage they should not be surprised riders dope to finish stages like that
Gilbert: I believe he had a 50+ hematocrit in U23

All three moved (Italy, Monaco), for training, taxes or ...

That said, great riders with a good mentality and no real proof of PED use. And Lotto has always been a team with excellent riders and moderate results, so I assume they are taking less risks than e.g. Liquigas.


My question is: will Cadel Evans win the 2007 TDF ?

Or they were sick and tired of being super famous in Belgium and everyone recognizing them, so they moved to Monaco were no one knows them? That and tax evasion.

And if you want to be a GT contender then you can't stay in Belgium. That's why Van den Broeck moved to Italy. About his result in the Giro during the CERA age. Well, Contador won it and he sure as hell wasn't taking any CERA. All the CERA abusers also finished infront of him anyway. The guy even paid all of this him self and don't think he makes that much money. I doubt he has enough to set up a good doping program à la Armstrong.

And about the Boonen comment. This is coming from a guy who hates the Tour de France with all his heart and even more. Of course he's going to say stuff like that. He really really really hates the Tour. And well, how many Tours did Boonen actually finish? ;) That comment is even more proof that he isn't doping to me. The Tour has been too hard for him on several occasions.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
5
0
Visit site
roundabout said:
in other words: they have never tested positive ;)

And never been implicated in any doping case what so ever? :rolleyes:

Cause last time I checked Valverde, Armstrong, Fränk Schleck and Basso never tested positive as well.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
5
0
Visit site
roundabout said:
So apparently it's possible to compete against people on CERA, blood transfusions etc in Grand Tours or be amongst the very best single day riders (as if they don't "prepare") clean.

I guess only hacks dope then.

Please, stop watch cycling if you think everybody dopes. Go away, the sport obviously doesn't need people like you.

Why punish anyone then? They're all doping according to you, so tests and punishments don't matter. If everybody is doping then no one is cheating.

Yes, it's possible to take on people who dope while being clean. It's by being better. I bet you're the kind of guy who always loses in any sport and blames doping for other people beating them. Face it, you suck with or without doping. You won't win P-R without experience on the cobbles, doped or not.

Anyway if you compare the last 10 winners of Paris-Roubaix and the Ronde van Vlaanderen, you'll get a cleaner list then the last 10 winners of Luik-Bastenaken-Luik. And that's because most of the LBL winners are also GT contenders.
 
Okay, i'm going to break it down to you in easily digestable parts

1. Nowhere have i said that everybody dopes so your demand that i should "go away" is only based on your fail at reading

2. Basso and Valverde to give just 2 examples are very talented riders. Yet they doped. Shocking huh.

3. Me sucking with or without doping doesn't give anyone a right to cheat.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
5
0
Visit site
roundabout said:
Okay, i'm going to break it down to you in easily digestable parts

1. Nowhere have i said that everybody dopes so your demand that i should "go away" is only based on your fail at reading

2. Basso and Valverde to give just 2 examples are very talented riders. Yet they doped. Shocking huh.

3. Me sucking with or without doping doesn't give anyone a right to cheat.

1. Yes you did. You claimed it to be impossible to win anything important clean.

2. And because they dope every talented rider dopes? That's a fallacy.

3. Doesn't give you the right the accuse people without evidence either. Crybaby.
 
Jul 27, 2010
260
0
0
Visit site
usedtobefast said:
based on current protocol AC is DQ'd. i feel bad for the guy if his story is true.
Magic 8 Ball says unable to say for sure. it will be a huge black mark for pro bike racing if his result is nullified. like the sport needs more bad press. me, i don't want it to go bad, but i don't have much clout.:(

My question is will the protocol still be in effect with the vaules as low as Contador's? Doesn't the rule about Clen tests say that they can only give a rider with values lower than the minimum level a positive with reasonable suspicion that he doped? In that case, if he can prove that it was a tainted steak, he should be free of any penalty.
 
Wow, you're even worse than i thought.

Last try. Impossible to win important races clean is not the same as everybody dopes. Capish?

Talented riders who are doping will always beat talented riders who are not doping unless they turn to same preparation.

It may seem irrational, but why should i trust any top cyclist given the obvious way the UCI protects it's big names?
 
El Pistolero said:
...
And if you want to be a GT contender then you can't stay in Belgium. That's why Van den Broeck moved to Italy. About his result in the Giro during the CERA age. Well, Contador won it and he sure as hell wasn't taking any CERA. All the CERA abusers also finished infront of him anyway. The guy even paid all of this him self and don't think he makes that much money. I doubt he has enough to set up a good doping program à la Armstrong.
...
1 Contador
2 Ricco
3 Bruseghin
4 Pellizotti
5 Menchov
6 Sella
7 Van den Broeck
8 Di Luca
9 Pozzovivo
10 Simoni

In comparison with LA all riders are just taking dextrose. That's not the point. Show me your friends and I'll tell you who you are. Show me your neighbours' house and I'll describe yours. In cycling, it's the same. JVDB would have finished third and won the young rider classification. He was kind of outspoken about Ricco, but still I'm unsure.

I don't see doping as a reason not to watch cycling. Sport is about emotions and cheating is interesting because of the same reason. At the same time, you can wish the good ones get a fair chance.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
5
0
Visit site
roundabout said:
Wow, you're even worse than i thought.

Last try. Impossible to win important races clean is not the same as everybody dopes. Capish?

Talented riders who are doping will always beat talented riders who are not doping unless they turn to same preparation.

It may seem irrational, but why should i trust any top cyclist given the obvious way the UCI protects it's big names?

1. Yes, it is.

Because talented riders who are doping with a team that's doping will aways beat talented riders who are doping with a team that isn't doping.

And your last sentence is another fallacy. Big names have been punished before like Valverde, Basso, Rebellin, Di Luca, Museeuw, Ricco, Sella, etc
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
5
0
Visit site
Scatto said:
1 Contador
2 Ricco
3 Bruseghin
4 Pellizotti
5 Menchov
6 Sella
7 Van den Broeck
8 Di Luca
9 Pozzovivo
10 Simoni

In comparison with LA all riders are just taking dextrose. That's not the point. Show me your friends and I'll tell you who you are. Show me your neighbours' house and I'll describe yours. In cycling, it's the same. JVDB would have finished third and won the young rider classification. He was kind of outspoken about Ricco, but still I'm unsure.

I don't see doping as a reason not to watch cycling. Sport is about emotions and cheating is interesting because of the same reason. At the same time, you can wish the good ones get a fair chance.

So, you're accusing van den Broeck for Cera. Then why didn't he test positive? Cause your list only includes people who got caught during that Giro(or Tour of that year) with Cera except for Contador and Pelli.

And I suppose you're going to assume Contador had blood transfusions during Il Giro. 150 cc blood transfusions can't explain a gap of over 6 minutes.
 
El Pistolero said:
So, you're accusing van den Broeck for Cera. Then why didn't he test positive? Cause your list only includes people who got caught during that Giro(or Tour of that year) with Cera except for Contador and Pelli.

And I suppose you're going to assume Contador had blood transfusions during Il Giro. 150 cc blood transfusions can't explain a gap of over 6 minutes.
More like 450 cc.

He's not saying Van den Broeck used CERA, he's saying he probably doped somehow. Likely blood transfusions. Van den Broeck is one of my favourite riders, but Scatto is probably right. Again, I recommend you read about Jörg Jaksche, it will open up your eyes.
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
5
0
Visit site
hrotha said:
More like 450 cc.

He's not saying Van den Broeck used CERA, he's saying he probably doped somehow. Likely blood transfusions. Van den Broeck is one of my favourite riders, but Scatto is probably right. Again, I recommend you read about Jörg Jaksche, it will open up your eyes.

Good luck taking 450 cc and not set off your biological passport. And the passport was already well established during that Giro if my memory serves me correctly.

Just saying. If Contador won that Giro with only a 150 cc blood transfusion then Van den Broeck's performance in that Giro is not impossible without doping. As a 150 cc blood transfusion won't make you 6 minutes faster.
 
El Pistolero said:
1. Yes, it is.

Because talented riders who are doping with a team that's doping will aways beat talented riders who are doping with a team that isn't doping.

And your last sentence is another fallacy. Big names have been punished before like Valverde, Basso, Rebellin, Di Luca, Museeuw, Ricco, Sella, etc

Ok, i've had enough. Off to the ignore list with you. *plonk*