Worlds warm up poll

Alejandro Alejandro...

  • Let him burn in Hell!

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Mar 11, 2009
3,274
1
0
Valverde would have been a great addition to this race.
What are the feelings here?
 
Yep i miss Val Piti. No other rider can win a sprint on days 1 and 2 of a stage race. COme 2nd on the mountain stage on day 4. 3rd on the hilly stage 5 then 2nd in the itt on stage 6,

roundabout said:
wrong forum?
Not neccesarily if it becomes about whether he just wheelsucks all the time or not.
 
It obviously sucks he's gone.

He deserves to spend some time in the sin bin for past misdeeds... But that doesn't stop me missing him. I missed Vino and Ricco too (and the former is already back to ATTACKing and kicking ***).
 
Mar 11, 2009
3,274
1
0
roundabout said:
wrong forum?
Not really.

It's not about the ban, just that Valverde was always a contender in races like this (I don't care how), and I kinda miss the guy.

It shouldn't all go to The Clinic straight away, there is some middleground.
The Clinic is frightening ;)
 
Aug 4, 2009
1,056
0
0
The absence of the Australian team was dissapointing whn I asked where was O'Grady i was told he still had a hangover fron his big night out in Spain
 
Jul 30, 2009
1,735
0
0
A good course for him and a very exciting rider but he got popped then took the pi55 (even if must have been pretty clean while fighting his ban and still winning) he must do his time.

I hope he trains hard while he is banned and comes back with style like Vino. And is clean - or as clean as anyone else - he has the ability and tactical nous
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,657
1
0
Moondance said:
It obviously sucks he's gone.

He deserves to spend some time in the sin bin for past misdeeds... But that doesn't stop me missing him. I missed Vino and Ricco too (and the former is already back to ATTACKing and kicking ***).
You miss dopers! You definetly want the sport to be clean then!:rolleyes:
armstrong's attacking on climbs was entertaining but people seem to dislike him because he has cheated and lied. Valverde's punishment was far too soft.
 
auscyclefan94 said:
You miss dopers! You definetly want the sport to be clean then!:rolleyes:
armstrong's attacking on climbs was entertaining but people seem to dislike him because he has cheated and lied. Valverde's punishment was far too soft.
Yep way to soft. They should have hanged him from the lighthouse (or whatever that is) on Mont Ventoux while he was there in the Dauphine, for all to see.:rolleyes:
 
ak-zaaf said:
Valverde would have been a great addition to this race.
What are the feelings here?
Valverde makes a great addition to almost any race. How many other GT winners do you know who'd be off the front doing echelon work in the first, pancake flat stage of a major stage race?

Also, we can argue about his ban all we like, let's face it, Basso, Riccò, Vino, they'd all have done the same in his position. His case was contentious and he exploited that for all he could. He'd be foolish not to. He would surely get the extra years for 'aggravating circumstances', but that clause wasn't brought in until well after the crimes in question so they couldn't apply retroactive justice.

I'd rather see Valverde race than pretty much anybody on HTC, Garmin or Radioshack, that's for certain.
 
I don't have a HUGE problem with Piti that I never want to see him race again.

But, I think this course would have been perfect for him, and there would be no way to stop him. The race will be more open for his non-attendance.
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,657
1
0
Libertine Seguros said:
Valverde makes a great addition to almost any race. How many other GT winners do you know who'd be off the front doing echelon work in the first, pancake flat stage of a major stage race?

Also, we can argue about his ban all we like, let's face it, Basso, Riccò, Vino, they'd all have done the same in his position. His case was contentious and he exploited that for all he could. He'd be foolish not to. He would surely get the extra years for 'aggravating circumstances', but that clause wasn't brought in until well after the crimes in question so they couldn't apply retroactive justice.

I'd rather see Valverde race than pretty much anybody on HTC, Garmin or Radioshack, that's for certain.
Doesn't change the fact he is a doper. He maybe fun to watch but I will never knowingly support a doper or someone who has doped in the past.
 
auscyclefan94 said:
Doesn't change the fact he is a doper. He maybe fun to watch but I will never knowingly support a doper or someone who has been doping in the past.
The problem is you can not possibly know what anyone hasnt done in the past. So you cant say you will not support anyone who has doped in the past, while being a fan of everything Australian and BMC. THis is especially true in a sport like our thing, where there is no real correlation between not getting caught and doping.

Ak Zaf did specify he wanted this to be about whether Val piti makes races interesting rather than doping. If you want to ressurect, or even create another Valverde thread in the clinic, that is where your comments belong.

Also i find it ironic that you vow dramatically, with god as your witness, to never support a doper, ever, ever. while both your avatar and signature express undying love for a AFL team :rolleyes:
 
I'm just going to state this: the same crowd that hated Vino when he came back and got silenced after his great performances, is the same wishing Val-piti an early retirement....
mark my worlds: When he'll get back to racing- he'll win big again-perhaps not the tour, but I hope he gives himself a chance to ride the Giro-win it-and rub it to all the haters out there...:D

and yes!! what a pity that Val-piti couldn't be rinding in the World's
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgPKbCt1DOk
 
May 25, 2010
3,371
0
0
Don't you guys have The Clinic for this sort of logorrhea?

If a rider has been found to be doping and cheating why would you want the "doping" rider back? I'd wait and see if he's the same when he comes back and races "clean".
 
Mar 9, 2010
551
0
0
val was always one of my favorite riders. he's got some amazing wins in his palmares. that uphill sprint in the first week of the tour last year? incredible.

outsprinting armstrong in that mtf in the tour? one of my favorite cycling photos of all time. i love contrasting the looks on both riders faces. pictures really are worth a thousand words.

and yes, azkaaf, this course is (seems, if we could get a straight answer about it) uniquely suited for him.

val and gilbert sprinting from a small selection? priceless.
 
Mar 9, 2010
551
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
Valverde makes a great addition to almost any race. How many other GT winners do you know who'd be off the front doing echelon work in the first, pancake flat stage of a major stage race?

Also, we can argue about his ban all we like, let's face it, Basso, Riccò, Vino, they'd all have done the same in his position. His case was contentious and he exploited that for all he could. He'd be foolish not to. He would surely get the extra years for 'aggravating circumstances', but that clause wasn't brought in until well after the crimes in question so they couldn't apply retroactive justice.

I'd rather see Valverde race than pretty much anybody on HTC, Garmin or Radioshack, that's for certain.
libertine,

you are an amazing writer. as a connoisseur of finely crafted prose, i find myself consistently impressed with your knowledge, analysis and style.

but your constant blackballing of anything american is a little over the top, don't you think? your irrationality in this regard undermines your incredibly lucid, critical thinking in other places, which makes me sad.:(

unlike some others on here, you are at your best when you write about the things you love, not the things you despise.

best,

spanky w

ok, back on topic. we were talking about how mark cavendish is going to win the worlds, right?:rolleyes:
 
Jun 10, 2009
606
0
0
"Enjoying" watching him race has for years taken far more suspension of disbelief than I have been able to muster.

Yes, he's an aggressive rider that can force decisive moments and win races, but ever since Puerto broke watching him has only made me grind my teeth and wonder "why is this cheat still allowed to race?".

All that time protesting his "innocence" on technicalities only proved yet again that you can't polish a turd.

And I say this as someone who is half Spanish.
 
Jun 10, 2009
606
0
0
The Hitch said:
The problem is you can not possibly know what anyone hasnt done in the past. So you cant say you will not support anyone who has doped in the past, while being a fan of everything Australian and BMC. THis is especially true in a sport like our thing, where there is no real correlation between not getting caught and doping.
[Oh dear, I somehow find myself arguing against someone criticising ACF...strange times...:eek:]

You're getting yourself caught in a logical fallacy. We can know what somebody has done. And we can not know what they have done.
ACF only said he could not support someone he knew had doped, he did not say he could only support someone who he knew had not doped.

I agree we can't know what somebody hasn't done in the past, which does cause a problem at the next level, which is "can I support anyone?", but this is a separate issue.

I also agree that there is no good correlation between not getting caught, and not doping [which is I think what you meant to say?]. But there is a good correlation between getting caught doping, and having doped.

So on to the Valverde case:

What should we do when we know that someone has cheated?

Should we really say "stuff it, I don't care anyway, he makes races interesting", as Ak Zaaf seems to advocate in an earlier post?

There is a lot to be said about different riding styles, and Valverde's certainly won him many fans. But how many of those fans would he have, if he had the same style, but failed to win?

I simply don't find it possible, once his doping is known, to separate the doping from the racing, because the doping changes how riders race.

Watching a known cheat, who still protests their innocence on specious technicalities, 'animate' a race only irritates me:(
 
May 5, 2009
296
0
0
spanky wanderlust said:
That uphill sprint in the first week of the tour last year? Incredible. Outsprinting armstrong on that MTF in the tour? One of my favorite cycling photos of all time... Pictures really are worth a thousand words. Valverde and Gilbert sprinting from a small selection? Priceless.
Quite agree!

hfer07 said:
What a pity that Val-piti couldn't be rinding in the World's
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgPKbCt1DOk
Nice! Thanks!

Libertine Seguros said:
How many other GT winners do you know who'd be off the front doing echelon work in the first, pancake flat stage of a major stage race?... I'd rather see Valverde race than pretty much anybody on HTC, Garmin or Radioshack, that's for certain.
Ah, yes!...

Willy_Voet said:
There are plenty of other riders to animate the race.
Nah, not quite the same way as Valverde and Vino, not for me...

spanky wanderlust said:
Libertine, you are an amazing writer. as a connoisseur of finely crafted prose, I find myself consistently impressed with your knowledge, analysis and style.
That was sweet! :)
 
dsut4392 said:
[Oh dear, I somehow find myself arguing against someone criticising ACF...strange times...:eek:]

You're getting yourself caught in a logical fallacy. We can know what somebody has done. And we can not know what they have done.
ACF only said he could not support someone he knew had doped, he did not say he could only support someone who he knew had not doped.

I agree we can't know what somebody hasn't done in the past, which does cause a problem at the next level, which is "can I support anyone?", but this is a separate issue.

I also agree that there is no good correlation between not getting caught, and not doping [which is I think what you meant to say?]. But there is a good correlation between getting caught doping, and having doped.

So on to the Valverde case:

What should we do when we know that someone has cheated?

Should we really say "stuff it, I don't care anyway, he makes races interesting", as Ak Zaaf seems to advocate in an earlier post?

There is a lot to be said about different riding styles, and Valverde's certainly won him many fans. But how many of those fans would he have, if he had the same style, but failed to win?

I simply don't find it possible, once his doping is known, to separate the doping from the racing, because the doping changes how riders race.

Watching a known cheat, who still protests their innocence on specious technicalities, 'animate' a race only irritates me:(
Yep i did misread ACFs comment. Even though i checked 3 times i somehow totaly missed the "knowingly" in his post, which changes everything, so I apologise for that. I guess the mind reads what it wants to read.

The point with Valverde is that he got caught years years ago. I dont know what the situation is like with _ in the peloton today though many say it has improved. What i do know is that back in 2006 it was rife and likely, everyone who was anyone was doing it. Valverde got caught because his doctor Fuentes was caught. What about the riders werent clients of Fuentes and didnt have their clinics raided. What about the riders who werent doing it at the time but are now. What about Frank Schleck who got away with it. Yes Valverde is a liar and its painful to watch. Im no fan of his personality. I read an interview with him in a Spanish paper and he claimed total innocense and the interviewer agreed with him.

But i learned long ago not to expect much from sports stars. With 1 or 2 exceptions every athlete ever caught pleads innocense until he cant no more. THe lengths they go to are incredible sometimes. Valverde is unfortunately doing the same. However he got a 2 year punishment while others get zilch. Im not saying he shouldnt get a sentence. Of course he should. And if the world was fairer he would get his 2 year sentence along with everyone else. But it does seem to me a bit crappy that the UCI is holding him up as a sign of success against doping, and he isnt allowed to race for 2 years, when the evidence points to so many others during this time slipping through the net.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY