Will Contador Be Juiced Up Again Upon His Return

[King Boonen]

No way Clentador was full gas today. Why bother? You have over 2 mins on the opposition so no need to give the game away.

I mean, I'm an out of shape mountain biker and I think I could have come close to winning if I'd had Berto's lead.

 

[roundabout]

Yep, and short TTs are definitely not his thing. Dunno. I was a bit surprised at the time.

He had plenty of excellent short TT results pre ban.

 

[the sceptic]

He had plenty of excellent short TT results pre ban.

The Contador from 2009 would podium an ITT like today.

It wont help if he is better in the mountains if he is going to drop 4 minutes to Dawg in the ITT. He really needs to get back to full *** beating Cancellara shape if he is serious about winning the tour.

 

[Rollthedice]

The Contador from 2009 would podium an ITT like today.

It wont help if he is better in the mountains if he is going to drop 4 minutes to Dawg in the ITT. He really needs to get back to full *** beating Cancellara shape if he is serious about winning the tour.

Unlike in the good old days of Lance and Alberto pre-ban, the skills of being outstanding in TT AND mountains is reserved to only one rider today, Froome.

 

[Big Doopie]

Unlike in the good old days of Lance and Alberto pre-ban, the skills of being outstanding in TT AND mountains is reserved to only one rider today, Froome.

in no way defending froome here, but do you actually know any cycling history?

tour winners came almost universally from riders who excelled both at mountain climbing and could dominate a TT...Merckx, Ocana, Hinault, etc... hardly ever did a mountain goat win the tour.

o2 vector doping allowed those generally challenged in one area to now excel in both -- pantani and clentadoppucci could TT and hincapie could climb.

if clentadoppucci's doping remains somewhat limited (as last year) he should never ever win a tour again (never should have in the first place) -- unless they do away with TTs altogether (which they are slowly doing). Imagine if clentadoppucci had to ride the tour in the time of hinault and had to compete in a 78km flat TT (as only one of the several TTs in the Tour), he wouldn't even come up in conversation of potential tour winners, not even close.

however, if he is back on the 2009 juice, all bets are off.

 

[Rollthedice]

in no way defending froome here, but do you actually know any cycling history?

tour winners came almost universally from riders who excelled both at mountain climbing and could dominate a TT...Merckx, Ocana, Hinault, etc... hardly ever did a mountain goat win the tour.

o2 vector doping allowed those generally challenged in one area to now excel in both -- pantani and clentadoppucci could TT and hincapie could climb.

if clentadoppucci's doping remains somewhat limited (as last year) he should never ever win a tour again (never should have in the first place) -- unless they do away with TTs altogether (which they are slowly doing). Imagine if clentadoppucci had to ride the tour in the time of hinault and had to compete in a 78km flat TT (as only one of the several TTs in the Tour), he wouldn't even come up in conversation of potential tour winners, not even close.

however, if he is back on the 2009 juice, all bets are off.

Surely not as much as you but I'm learning. I said "outstanding" and since Lance and Contador 2009, guys who won mountain stages and ITTs in the same TdF, not just being good, very good or excellent. And I'm in no way defending Contador. The only rider doing this is Froome, OK he lost to Tony Martin last year in ITT but anyway.

 

[bigcog]

Aren't there rumours that the russians developed some new doping products, undetectable, for the olympics. Look at some of the results for endurance events. Tinkov are Russian. QED

 

[bigcog]

Froome was a half decent ITT when he was "fat" and untrained.

 

[the sceptic]

I notice that Baghdad Walsh is a bit more careful about calling out Contador as a doper this time. Probably because he knows he is going to look like an even bigger fool if Froome still beats him.

It should be fun if Contador starts dropping Froome though. Then there will be no doubt in the skybot mind that Contador is doping.

 

[Samson777]

I notice that Baghdad Walsh is a bit more careful about calling out Contador as a doper this time. Probably because he knows he is going to look like an even bigger fool if Froome still beats him.

It should be fun if Contador starts dropping Froome though. Then there will be no doubt in the skybot mind that Contador is doping.

Is that even possible?

 

[Bronstein]

Just wait until Froome's autobiography is released later this year.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

I notice that Baghdad Walsh is a bit more careful about calling out Contador as a doper this time. Probably because he knows he is going to look like an even bigger fool if Froome still beats him.

It should be fun if Contador starts dropping Froome though. Then there will be no doubt in the skybot mind that Contador is doping.

Your name tag says it all. Everyone will be a skeptic. My personal opinion for which I am prepared to take some flak is that AC is the best GT cyclist in the world clean.

 

[the sceptic]

Just wait until Froome's autobiography is released later this year.

I cant tell you how much I am waiting for that.

The comedy value will be off the charts.

 

[SundayRider]

Your name tag says it all. Everyone will be a skeptic. My personal opinion for which I am prepared to take some flak is that AC is the best GT cyclist in the world clean.

What on earth do you base that on? Making a prediction on what GT rider is like clean is impossible.

 

[Bronstein]

I cant tell you how much I am waiting for that.

The comedy value will be off the charts.

Yes, thehog will have a field day with all the new material.

 

[the sceptic]

Your name tag says it all. Everyone will be a skeptic. My personal opinion for which I am prepared to take some flak is that AC is the best GT cyclist in the world clean.

That could very well be the case, I dont have an opinion either way.

But even so, I dont believe Contador would be able to win a GT clean in this day and age. Maybe in a clean field he would win, but that is just speculation. Well never know that.

I think we can all agree he would be way better than Froome though.

 

[SundayRider]

That could very well be the case, I dont have an opinion either way.

But even so, I dont believe Contador would be able to win a GT clean in this day and age. Maybe in a clean field he would win, but that is just speculation. Well never know that.

I think we can all agree he would be way better than Froome though.

He might be better than Froome, he might now. We will never know. There are so many unanswerables. Ability/Talent have been distorted by so many for so long, over years and years that it is just impossible to know. Impossible to know when they started doping, how long they took certain products, what gains they got from these products, the psychological effect of doping. You could go on and on.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

What on earth do you base that on? Making a prediction on what GT rider is like clean is impossible.

What I am saying is Contador clean, and given all the other top GT contenders are also clean, Contador is the best GT cyclist in the world.

Assuming the top contenders are dirty and Conatador is clean, he is still the best GT cyclist in the world.

But you are correct how can one know?

It still comes back to what I have been arguing in the Clinic - transparency by the cyclists. IF it was a condition of holding an UCI license that every rider had to publicly publish or at least advise the UCI on a daily basis,

1. Their hematocrit level
2. Their hemoglobin
3. Their testosterone level
4. The results of every in competition and out of competition test
5. Their request for every TUE sought.
6. Any whereabouts violations

would there still be doping?

Diabetic patients have to measure their blood sugar levels at least daily. Determining these bio-markers on a daily basis is not hard to do, say by the team doctor or physio

Don Catlin long ago suggested the public publication of bio-markers based on regular urine and blood tests to determine a biological profile against which future measurements or test results could be measured.

Then we might be able to predict who is or was doping.

It appears however that cyclists today do not have the guts to agree to such a regime, in spite of the dirty history of their sport. Today's cyclists are content to CLAIM they are clean and expect us to believe them. I don't think they get it or understand the sordid history of the sport.

 

[SundayRider]

What I am saying is Contador clean, and given all the other top GT contenders are also clean, Contador is the best GT cyclist in the world.

Assuming the top contenders are dirty and Conatador is clean, he is still the best GT cyclist in the world.

But you are correct how can one know?

It still comes back to what I have been arguing in the Clinic - transparency by the cyclists. IF it was a condition of holding an UCI license that every rider had to publicly publish or at least advise the UCI on a daily basis,

1. Their hematocrit level
2. Their hemoglobin
3. Their testosterone level
4. The results of every in competition and out of competition test
5. Their request for every TUE sought.
6. Any whereabouts violations

would there still be doping?

Probably not, GTs would know doubt be a lot slower and more about survival than 'racing' in the third week!

 

[BYOP88]

What I am saying is Contador clean, and given all the other top GT contenders are also clean, Contador is the best GT cyclist in the world.

Assuming the top contenders are dirty and Conatador is clean, he is still the best GT cyclist in the world.

But you are correct how can one know?

It still comes back to what I have been arguing in the Clinic - transparency by the cyclists. IF it was a condition of holding an UCI license that every rider had to publicly publish or at least advise the UCI on a daily basis,

1. Their hematocrit level
2. Their hemoglobin
3. Their testosterone level
4. The results of every in competition and out of competition test
5. Their request for every TUE sought.
6. Any whereabouts violations

would there still be doping?

Diabetic patients have to measure their blood sugar levels at least daily. Determining these bio-markers on a daily basis is not hard to do, say by the team doctor or physio

Don Catlin long ago suggested the public publication of bio-markers based on regular urine and blood tests to determine a biological profile against which future measurements or test results could be measured.

Then we might be able to predict who is or was doping.

It appears however that cyclists today do not have the guts to agree to such a regime, in spite of the dirty history of their sport. Today's cyclists are content to CLAIM they are clean and expect us to believe them. I don't think they get it or understand the sordid history of the sport.

It's a great idea. But I'm guessing more riders will vacation in Africa and get 'badzilla', which will be great for messing up their blood profile.

 

[EnacheV]

It's a great idea. But I'm guessing more riders will vacation in Africa and get 'badzilla', which will be great for messing up their blood profile.

or claim that tainted meat messed their test results? excuses can be find everywhere

 

[BYOP88]

or claim that tainted meat messed their test results? excuses can be find everywhere

Seems you have me confused with a Contador apologist.

 

[King Boonen]

IF it was a condition of holding an UCI license that every rider had to publicly publish or at least advise the UCI on a daily basis,

1. Their hematocrit level
2. Their hemoglobin
3. Their testosterone level
4. The results of every in competition and out of competition test
5. Their request for every TUE sought.
6. Any whereabouts violations

would there still be doping?

I don't know if you realise what that would cost, but lets just say cycling cannot afford close to that level of testing.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Just wait until Froome's autobiography is released later this year.

Oh gosh. I wonder if Cound will feature. Probably.

Yikes

 

[proffate]

What I am saying is Contador clean, and given all the other top GT contenders are also clean, Contador is the best GT cyclist in the world.

Assuming the top contenders are dirty and Conatador is clean, he is still the best GT cyclist in the world.

But you are correct how can one know?

It still comes back to what I have been arguing in the Clinic - transparency by the cyclists. IF it was a condition of holding an UCI license that every rider had to publicly publish or at least advise the UCI on a daily basis,

1. Their hematocrit level
2. Their hemoglobin
3. Their testosterone level
4. The results of every in competition and out of competition test
5. Their request for every TUE sought.
6. Any whereabouts violations

would there still be doping?

Diabetic patients have to measure their blood sugar levels at least daily. Determining these bio-markers on a daily basis is not hard to do, say by the team doctor or physio

Don Catlin long ago suggested the public publication of bio-markers based on regular urine and blood tests to determine a biological profile against which future measurements or test results could be measured.

Then we might be able to predict who is or was doping.

It appears however that cyclists today do not have the guts to agree to such a regime, in spite of the dirty history of their sport. Today's cyclists are content to CLAIM they are clean and expect us to believe them. I don't think they get it or understand the sordid history of the sport.

So that would be on the order of several hundred dollars and tens of mL of blood every day. That's non trivial. How far down do you go? All protour riders? All pro conti? Seems a little unfair, wherever you draw the cutoff.