Will Contador Be Juiced Up Again Upon His Return

[No_Balls]

"An unnamed rider from CSC’s 2008 roster claimed that Riis had informed Carlos Sastre that he could blood dope and avoid detection by using small blood bags, citing the 2007 Discovery Channel team as an example."

And, omg, who won their first tdf in 2007 riding for discovery.

Lol, clentadoppucci is a pioneer in doping that carefully chose the teams he rode/rides for to support his need.

The great "exciting, attacking" myth is as "real" as armstrong.

Why do you call Bertie clentadoppucci? We realize he's probably doped to the gills, but you come off as trying way too hard. Just saying.

Preaching to the converted Big D in a Contador doping thread. 78% agree with you more or less I guess. Hope you feel better you got that off your chest though. Nothing is 'real' with any GC contender my friend, deal with it and your hatred of Contador might, maybe might, lessen, he's no worse than any GT guy out there. But please do feel free to point out to me who I've got completely wrong who you obviously think is clean over Clentador..

Another one believing Big Floppy is against doping. Havent you heard? His boyhood sweetheart before doper Ryder was Macarena.

As far as nick names go. Hush now, be kind against the greatest invention in his life: the genius stroke of combining Il Diablo with Pistolero.

 

[djpbaltimore]

Re: Re:

My guess is that if he wins by 6 minutes while matching Armstrong's best times on popular mtfs, he will get a lot of attention and if he hobbles to a silent 4th place without winning a stage, he won't get that much attention

Please don't be so obtuse. You know well enough that the doping talk from the media can start way before the meaningful GC stages.

 

[Archibald]

Did you never read page 11 and 12 of Levi's Affadavit

nope
just went with the general rhetoric of "stopping in 2006"...

 

[del1962]

Did you never read page 11 and 12 of Levi's Affadavit

nope
just went with the general rhetoric of "stopping in 2006"...

That's why I like to read the affidavit's it is what the rider's actually said and are willing to testify to, not what gets reported in the press which they can get wrong/misinterpret etc.

It clearly gives an insight into what was going on at Discovery (at least as far as Brunyeel and Levi where concerned) in 2007 which is corroborated what is reportedly said by Riis in the ADD report.

 

[Archibald]

Did you never read page 11 and 12 of Levi's Affadavit

nope
just went with the general rhetoric of "stopping in 2006"...

That's why I like to read the affidavit's it is what the rider's actually said and are willing to testify to, not what gets reported in the press which they can get wrong/misinterpret etc.

It clearly gives an insight into what was going on at Discovery (at least as far as Brunyeel and Levi where concerned) in 2007 which is corroborated what is reportedly said by Riis in the ADD report.

so where'd the "the peloton all stopped doping in '06" come from?
It's usually mentioned with JV and George...

 

[del1962]

Well according to Hincapie's affadavit "EPO Use was common on the US Postal service and Discovery Channel Teams during the period from 1999 through 2007", however he personally claims in his affadavit "I have not used any banned drugs or methods since 2006".

Zabriskie's Affadaivit says he last used a banned substance in June 2006.

April 2006 was the time CVV claims he last used a banned substance,, interestingly CVV affadavit implies no team program at CSC

I guess that where the 2006 thing comes from, but not in Levi's affadavit

 

[Nilsson]

Re:

interestingly CVV affadavit implies no team program at CSC

I guess that where the 2006 thing comes from, but not in Levi's affadavit

Apparently there was never really a 'full' team program at CSC. There was support, at least to some extent

Concerning Levi. You can read in his affadvavit that 2007 was, apparently, some kind of transition year. Essentially there was (originally) no organized team program for 2007 anymore, and they had to do it themselves. Bruyneel explicitly told him this, and asked on multiple occasions if he was going to do anything. Levi thought this was too stressful and in the end they worked 'something' out. Meaning there were some staff members, riders (at least Levi and Popovych) and an apartment in France involved.

 

[hrotha]

We say 2006 mostly to be funny. In reality, it doesn't matter whether it's 2006, 2007 or 2008, or whether each of them claimed to have stopped in completely different years. The underlying joke is simply how convenient it is that they all had repented long before being caught - many of them before achieving their best results.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

We say 2006 because of this:

Not sure who I'm supposed to reply to. You guys get going pretty fast...

Anyhow, thanks for the support. For those of you less supportive, not really sure what to say? I guess wait 5 yrs and see how it all comes out?

As for those with specific questions:

Me, in the past, saying the sport was cleaner (2006)... Yes, it was. 2006 was cleaner than 2002... 2002 was cleaner than 2000...1997 was cleaner than 1996... 1996 was errr... pretty much the peak. Sorry if I couldn't convey that at the time. The overall blood data I have seen as a UCI anti-doping funding committee board member shows the overall trend quite clearly. I know that data is not public. Sorry, I can't leak it to the clinic. What's more amazing is if you take average times of top 30 guys up any key climb, note the % slowdown, adjust for bikes being a little lighter, etc, you can track it almost exactly to the hemoglobin mass decreasing in the overall peloton data. Of course, exceptions exist, but the mean is quite convincing.

I tend to focus on the mean or median, as opposed to saying "yeah, but what about this guy or that guy!!"... But I have more access to information than most, so perhaps that's why? Even though the trend was towards less and less doping from 1997>>> 2006, sadly, I'd say that the reaction of doping only made those still willing to risk even more efficacious. But the overall was getting cleaner. The numbers prove that (and again, i apologize I can't show you the numbers..Not sure why UCI doesn't just release them??)


Allan Lim: It pains me to defend this guy. I am not a fan. Nor a friend. However, you guys should ask Floyd as to what his exact involvement was with him on the medical level. I did, after Floyd tested positive. Floyd said "listen, he didn't have a part in that stuff with me, you should hire him full time, so he doesn't get wrapped up in my downfall" (paraphrasing)... So, since I knew Allan, and knew he was a very smart guy, I went with it. I'm a big one on guys not getting railroaded, unfairly. During his time with us, he was a huge proponent of clean racing. When we implemented the no needles policy in 2008, he was the most in favor (even more than Prentice!).. He argued that from a strictly scientific standpoint, there was no need for injectable recovery. He rebuilt his reputation with our team. I think he forgets that...

When Radio Shack came with big money, he left without any hesitation. I have not spoken to him since.

JV

 

[blackcat]

Re:

We say 2006 because of this:

mebbe JV is actually interpolating actual data, but does he address the meta aspect? if some programs instituted, made full *** doping more difficult, have the peloton just tweaked their behaviour to be under this enforcement regimen? say, akin to game theory?

and how can one assess this? from the data? the data only? or is it the pornography test, i know it when I see it. well, the biochemists can tell from the urine samples, if there is something going on, but not necessarily breaching a threshold to run a sanctionable case. I think the more elucidating trope is from the social sciences, and to understand the motives of these athletes, and their self-identity. Does a rider sanctioned like Di Luca, return without seeking enhancement? This is just not credulous. These are athletes who put it on the line everyday, and enter a workplace where there are norms on doping. It is not a major or character fault to uses PEDs. So what has altered to the environment, and fundamentally shifted the norms, and makeup of the individual actors? I dont think it is the UCI testing. The UCI testing existed before. If the testing is more stringent, the operations undertaken to evade positives merely takes this new model into account.

If one can prove to me, the individuals who have entered the professional sphere, are completely different than all those that have come before them, p'raps you could start to formulate a dialogue for me. Otherwise, you and i aint going nowhere with this discussion (generic you)

 

[PremierAndrew]

I personally find it amazing that so many Contador fans believe he's clean, yet claim his rivals are all juiced up. His rivals are absolutely incredible, and if they are indeed doping, do people really think Contador is more than 10% better than them without 'substances'? Please

 

[SeriousSam]

Re:

The mean or the median , eh? Professor JV is clearly a data analysis whiz. Or someone who did a dumbed down stats class in business school.

I personally find it amazing that so many Contador fans believe he's clean, yet claim his rivals are all juiced up. His rivals are absolutely incredible, and if they are indeed doping, do people really think Contador is more than 10% better than them without 'substances'? Please

No Contador fans posting in the clinic believe he's clean. I think some in the RR section probably do but then we ought to be charitable and not view them as representative of Contador fans.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

I personally find it amazing that so many Contador fans believe he's clean, yet claim his rivals are all juiced up. His rivals are absolutely incredible, and if they are indeed doping, do people really think Contador is more than 10% better than them without 'substances'? Please

"So many"?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

I personally find it amazing that so many Contador fans believe he's clean, yet claim his rivals are all juiced up. His rivals are absolutely incredible, and if they are indeed doping, do people really think Contador is more than 10% better than them without 'substances'? Please

"So many"?

Yeah he's got a list and he's checking them twice.

 

[nayr497]

Re:

We say 2006 because of this:

Not sure who I'm supposed to reply to. You guys get going pretty fast...

Anyhow, thanks for the support. For those of you less supportive, not really sure what to say? I guess wait 5 yrs and see how it all comes out?

As for those with specific questions:

Me, in the past, saying the sport was cleaner (2006)... Yes, it was. 2006 was cleaner than 2002... 2002 was cleaner than 2000...1997 was cleaner than 1996... 1996 was errr... pretty much the peak. Sorry if I couldn't convey that at the time. The overall blood data I have seen as a UCI anti-doping funding committee board member shows the overall trend quite clearly. I know that data is not public. Sorry, I can't leak it to the clinic. What's more amazing is if you take average times of top 30 guys up any key climb, note the % slowdown, adjust for bikes being a little lighter, etc, you can track it almost exactly to the hemoglobin mass decreasing in the overall peloton data. Of course, exceptions exist, but the mean is quite convincing.

I tend to focus on the mean or median, as opposed to saying "yeah, but what about this guy or that guy!!"... But I have more access to information than most, so perhaps that's why? Even though the trend was towards less and less doping from 1997>>> 2006, sadly, I'd say that the reaction of doping only made those still willing to risk even more efficacious. But the overall was getting cleaner. The numbers prove that (and again, i apologize I can't show you the numbers..Not sure why UCI doesn't just release them??)


Allan Lim: It pains me to defend this guy. I am not a fan. Nor a friend. However, you guys should ask Floyd as to what his exact involvement was with him on the medical level. I did, after Floyd tested positive. Floyd said "listen, he didn't have a part in that stuff with me, you should hire him full time, so he doesn't get wrapped up in my downfall" (paraphrasing)... So, since I knew Allan, and knew he was a very smart guy, I went with it. I'm a big one on guys not getting railroaded, unfairly. During his time with us, he was a huge proponent of clean racing. When we implemented the no needles policy in 2008, he was the most in favor (even more than Prentice!).. He argued that from a strictly scientific standpoint, there was no need for injectable recovery. He rebuilt his reputation with our team. I think he forgets that...

When Radio Shack came with big money, he left without any hesitation. I have not spoken to him since.

JV

Is this saying that Lim was the one who suggested they could dope them really well and not have to use needles? As in, he was heavily and personally involved in the USPS doping?

I ask because he said in an interview 1-2 years ago that he had no involvement and no knowledge of USPS doping. I found that hard to believe.

And if so, it pisses me off even more that he now has a nutrition company and so many hipsters with blogs are promoting it...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

That Lim stuff they sell is repulsive to me for that reason, yes. He was definitely involved. The ad lib interview where he gets asked, he acts as shifty as a used car salesman.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

"An unnamed rider from CSC’s 2008 roster claimed that Riis had informed Carlos Sastre that he could blood dope and avoid detection by using small blood bags, citing the 2007 Discovery Channel team as an example."

And, omg, who won their first tdf in 2007 riding for discovery.

Lol, clentadoppucci is a pioneer in doping that carefully chose the teams he rode/rides for to support his need.

The great "exciting, attacking" myth is as "real" as armstrong.

"pioneer in doping"? Uh, what?

Most people here believe, as do I, that Contador doped and still does. But to call him a pioneer in doping is just plain stupid.

 

[nayr497]

Re:

That Lim stuff they sell is repulsive to me for that reason, yes. He was definitely involved. The ad lib interview where he gets asked, he acts as shifty as a used car salesman.

Thanks for confirming! I read his interview on Cycling News a few years ago and found his denial very hard to believe. That really made me angry.

And now his Skratch stuff is being pushed as all hip and cool by the anti-roadie road crowd, the dummies with beards and tattoos and ear stretchers. It pisses me off. He's using cool marketing to appeal to jerks and yet these "soul cycling" dudes look right past his dirty history. Really bugs me.

 

[djpbaltimore]

Re: Re:

No Contador fans posting in the clinic believe he's clean. I think some in the RR section probably do but then we ought to be charitable and not view them as representative of Contador fans.

I think that is a fair assessment, but I think the same charity should apply to other riders' fans as well. Of course that is quite often not the case IMO.

 

[Taxus4a]

Contador 22 second worse today than in 2010.. it is so obvious he is another after his sanction...He and his people around him maybe though he could be cheating all his life..but he was put at the same level that the rest.

Wonderfull time finished, forget the Tour Alberto, la Vuelta or the Giro could be an option if the best contenders are not there at his best level and you has luck.. even ig you has an small illness you can say is important and say you almost didnt train and some people could think you do the imposible, when you are the best prepared for a race...

Just you can do those amazing things.

For me would be great to admit that you stole to people as Evans a lot of great victories, but there is a lot of money and reputation on that, so, I know you will never do that... I admit in that era other people stole you some races, becouse you were better that most of the people, of course better than any rider who was in Discovery, but that is not to win 7 GT.

The fact is that you never won the Tour after the santion. You have your oportunity last year with Froome on the ground and without quintana, but... dificult anyway becouse Nibali was at a similar level.

 

[ppanther92]

Re:

Evans

No

 

[SeriousSam]

If something stole races from Evans, it was gutless cowardly wheel following by a certain Australian

 

[rm7]

Please sh*t up Taxus.

And I am really into the whole doping stuff, but could there be any chance that Contador's form will increase very much after the first rest day? A little like ex. Aru did in the Giro, or we've seen with other riders in the past. '

Maybe a blood bag or something?

 

[Taxus4a]

Re:

If something stole races from Evans, it was gutless cowardly wheel following by a certain Australian

When you are a clean rider among a lot of doping, you just can be regular and try to follow wheels as Evans and Sastre did. No more.

Maybe some people must give back contador some result,s but of couse he must give back most of his victories.

But that is impossible to proof, except if UCI want really clearyfy as much as possible the dark era...and I dont think so, so much to hide then.

 

[Taxus4a]

Re: Re:

Evans

No

http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/article/2015/01/22/lemond-doping-era-denied-evans-his-best-years

And know if you want give arguments and I will answered if i get into here and I read it, I dont use to answer to people that his poor argumenta re yes or no.
itis your opinion, weel, it is ok, I prefer Lemond opinion, sorry about, an di see that in the transitional and clean era evans managed to win Tour de France and the worlds and just a temperature avoid him to win the Giro and just a puncture to win la Vuelta after to ride le Tour.

When he was in Telekom, he was just a domestique.

If you want to say that he has links to Ferrari, I will answer why that is not an strong argument.

I hope for your arguments, see you.