Will Contador Be Juiced Up Again Upon His Return

[sir fly]

Finally a giro+tour winner we can believe in.

We can be sure about.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Finally a giro+tour winner we can believe in.

let him pull it off first. Ok?

 

[18-Valve. (pithy)]

That's exactly why we don't need the spirit of the past on top of it.
But the treble would be something new... Not seen yet.

There's no such thing as a spirit of the past. The attitudes towards doping have "always" been the same. As long as the dope is effective and the risks are manageable, GT specialists in particular will continue to dope.

If the average risk/reward strategy has changed, it's only because the risks have.

 

[sir fly]

He deserves the credit, nevertheless.
Using the opportunities an era brings to make history is the right attitude.

If I remember correctly, the consensus among the cyclists lately (10-15 years) was that the double is impossible. That's the consensus based on the known methodologies and habits.
It must be something revolutionary, like EPO at the time, that has changed the conception.

 

[Netserk]

He deserves the credit, nevertheless.
Using the opportunities an era brings to make history is the right attitude.

If I remember correctly, the consensus among the cyclists lately (10-15 years) was that the double is impossible. That's the consensus based on the known methodologies and habits.
It must be something revolutionary, like EPO at the time, that has changed the conception.

Basso in both 2005 and 2006 showed it was possible.

 

[mrhender]

That's exactly why we don't need the spirit of the past on top of it.
But the treble would be something new... Not seen yet.

On top of what?
The only difference between the spirit of the past and present.
Is that the spirit of present has learned from the mistakes of the past...

 

[sir fly]

Basso in both 2005 and 2006 showed it was possible.

I'm not sure he achieved more than riding the both Grand Tours in a season. Hansen is on a 10 in a row run and going. But winning and staying inside the borders of regulations on current programs is difficult.
That's what consensus is about, I think.

 

[Netserk]

I'm not sure he achieved more than riding the both Grand Tours in a season. Hansen is on a 10 in a row run and going. But winning and staying inside the borders of regulations on current programs is difficult.
That's what consensus is about, I think.

If not for a bad BB he would have won that Giro. Of course he didn't win the Tour, but getting 2nd behind Lance definitely showed that it was possible to be in top form in both GTs. The next year he crushed the Giro with ease. No doubt that he would have been at least as strong in the Tour as that was the first year after Lance, so a really good chance for him to win it.

 

[sir fly]

If not for a bad BB he would have won that Giro. Of course he didn't win the Tour, but getting 2nd behind Lance definitely showed that it was possible to be in top form in both GTs. The next year he crushed the Giro with ease. No doubt that he would have been at least as strong in the Tour as that was the first year after Lance, so a really good chance for him to win it.

Yes, I remember. The bug that prevented him from winning the Giro I would address to engineering the values. The stomach bug is the most common excuse, I'm sure you know.
And I agree about the 2006..
We''l never know what would have happened, though.
Staying inside the frame is the point.
Allow the charging and you'll have several aspirants every season.
Undetectable substance or method is closest to allowing, and we have two aspirants, it seems.

 

[Rollthedice]

If not for a bad BB he would have won that Giro. Of course he didn't win the Tour, but getting 2nd behind Lance definitely showed that it was possible to be in top form in both GTs. The next year he crushed the Giro with ease. No doubt that he would have been at least as strong in the Tour as that was the first year after Lance, so a really good chance for him to win it.

Yes, 2006 would have been Basso doing a Pantani. Such a shame we didn't get to see the show but Floyd was also fun to watch.

 

[Bratam]

So I don't hear anyone hear denying that Contador is doping again. Most people here seem to think that Contador wasn't even clean last year (2013) despite those mediocre results.

The question then is will he ever be caught again ? What about freezing of blood samples and retrospective testing like the 1998 TDF and Lances old samples that were tested retrospectively. Or will that never happen again ?

 

[RownhamHill]

I think he might be clean.

Or at least I haven't seen any particularly compelling evidence as to how he might be doping since his ban. Whatever he's started doing with the new coach seems to be working, and seems to be weight related, but whether that's doping related, I don't know.

 

[LaFlorecita]

^ lolz Alberto might be cleans no f-ing way

 

[The Hitch]

I think he might be clean.

Or at least I haven't seen any particularly compelling evidence as to how he might be doping since his ban. Whatever he's started doing with the new coach seems to be working, and seems to be weight related, but whether that's doping related, I don't know.

I have a bridge I want to sell you

(if your post is serious, which I have real trouble believing)

I don't know if you realize this but you are basically saying drugs don't work. At all. And then you defend this argument which is based around an astounding ignorance of recent sporting history and is barely less ridiculous than creationism with " oh but its just my opinion".

 

[the sceptic]

The drugs dont work they just make you worse

 

[RownhamHill]

I have a bridge I want to sell you

(if your post is serious, which I have real trouble believing)

I don't know if you realize this but you are basically saying drugs don't work. At all. And then you defend this argument which is based around an astounding ignorance of recent sporting history and is barely less ridiculous than creationism with " oh but its just my opinion".

Ermmm. My post is very serious.

I don't know if you realise this but I'm basically saying I don't know what drugs he is taking. And because I recognise that rather large gap in my knowledge, I have an open mind on what the answer might be.

Kind of the diametric opposite of creationism I would have thought, which always appears to me as being a case of people passing off strong belief as knowledge.

I'm not in the market for any bridges.

 

[peloton]

The drugs dont work they just make you worse

Or turn a donkey into a racehorse...

Tinkoff has hired all the good ol' Sky staff, I expect the team to have a 10 month winning streak

Bring it on 2015

 

[The Hitch]

Ermmm. My post is very serious.

I don't know if you realise this but I'm basically saying I don't know what drugs he is taking. And because I recognise that rather large gap in my knowledge, I have an open mind on what the answer might be.

Kind of the diametric opposite of creationism I would have thought, which always appears to me as being a case of people passing off strong belief as knowledge.

I'm not in the market for any bridges.

It is a known fact that Contador was heavily heavily doped in his time at Discovery and Astana.

Now he is riding as fast as those days if not faster and you say you think he's clean.

Then you are saying drugs do not work. No ammount of EPO could make Contador better than he is right now riding clean. All the money and effort spent on doping, the millions it cost him, was all totally worthless

What you are saying is absolutely like creationism. You ignore all the evidence, the history, the scientific investigations into drugs, the simple fact that for 20 years riders have risked their careers and lives to take these drugs, and claim it is all false. If Contador is clean the drugs don't work and never did and all the last 20 years in sport, never really happened.

 

[the sceptic]

If I know my botism correctly I believe the logic here is that if Contador is clean it means Froome is clean too. Thus, Contador is clean.

 

[laurel1969]

Its not just Contador, though, is it. Its his whole team.

 

[Netserk]

Its not just Contador, though, is it. Its his whole team.

The whole team?

 

[laurel1969]

The whole team?

Oh here we go. Another Contador fanboi about to try and nitpick to divert attention away from his man's team wide doping.

 

[glassmoon]

It is a known fact that Contador was heavily heavily doped in his time at Discovery and Astana.

Now he is riding as fast as those days if not faster and you say you think he's clean.

Then you are saying drugs do not work. No ammount of EPO could make Contador better than he is right now riding clean. All the money and effort spent on doping, the millions it cost him, was all totally worthless

What you are saying is absolutely like creationism. You ignore all the evidence, the history, the scientific investigations into drugs, the simple fact that for 20 years riders have risked their careers and lives to take these drugs, and claim it is all false. If Contador is clean the drugs don't work and never did and all the last 20 years in sport, never really happened.

quoted for truth.

 

[RownhamHill]

Good grief you're hilarious at times.

It is a known fact that Contador was heavily heavily doped in his time at Discovery and Astana.

Don't want to be too pedantic, the underlying sentiment is probably true, but is this a 'known fact' or is just a widely accepted belief based on inductive reasoning? There is a difference. . .

Now he is riding as fast as those days if not faster

Perhaps (though if anyone has the analysis in one place it would be great to see rather than just asserting this to be true. . .)

and you say you think he's clean.

Ermm no. This is transparently untrue. I would take time to explain the difference between might and is, but you clearly have no interest in discussing in good faith, and you know the difference anyway, so I won't bother.

Then you are saying drugs do not work. No ammount of EPO could make Contador better than he is right now riding clean. All the money and effort spent on doping, the millions it cost him, was all totally worthless

What are you chatting about? Really this makes no sense at all. So if something works, but you find an alternative that is equally effective (or more so) then that means the original doesn't work anymore? Clearly epo still has an effect, clearly blood doping still works.

So the question is are they the only way of boosting performance? Or could there be other approaches? I don't know the answer to that, but I'm open to the possibility, and I can see if an alternative has been found it could involve doping or not - put this another way: what exactly did contador learn from De jongh last winter? Lol if you think he only just found about this revolutionary drug called epo and blood doping.

What you are saying is absolutely like creationism. You ignore all the evidence, the history, the scientific investigations into drugs, the simple fact that for 20 years riders have risked their careers and lives to take these drugs, and claim it is all false. If Contador is clean the drugs don't work and never did and all the last 20 years in sport, never really happened.

What a crock. If Contador is clean I think he's doing something different to riders (clean or dirty) in the last twenty years. The thing is, if Contador is dirty I think he's doing something different to riders in the last twenty years too. Long and the short, I think Contador (and Sky for that matter) is doing something different this year. I just don't know what.

And the possibility that riders would change and innovate and gain competitive advantage from doing so is hardly novel in cycling (ermm, what happened in the early nineties?). But trying to claim that any change in approach somehow retrospectively invalidates what came before is just silly. Did EPO coming in mean that Eddie Mercx's doping didn't work and was all false?

What I'm saying has nothing to do with a monolithic world view that sees only one possible explanation for anything, regardless of history or current context, and that aggressively tries to shout down 'non-believers' using dishonest rhetoric, intellectually vacuous arguments, and beliefs passed as facts. So there's no need for you to continue attacking me as a creationist.

 

[Netserk]

Oh here we go. Another Contador fanboi about to try and nitpick to divert attention away from his man's team wide doping.

You wrote two sentences. I responded to the second. That's half your post, hardly 'nitpicking'. I asked a question and I see you have refused to answer it, but instead chose to deflect with an ad hominem.

Do you think the whole of Tinkoff-Saxo is dirty?

A simple 'yes' or 'no' will do.