You are clean. What SHOULD you say in interviews?

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
armchairclimber said:
I was just struck by the thought that there isn't much for the clean cyclist to say that the dopers haven't already poisoned.
Good point.

I would add that the landscape was probably most poisoned by Floyd and Tyler. Those two stuck their necks out so far, after being nabbed, and used every excuse imaginable.

I never for one moment thought either of them rode their entire careers clean, but regarding the specifics of their respective cases that proved to be their downfall, I remember thinking on both accounts:

Would Floyd REALLY stage a public ceremony, in his home town, in front of his Mennonite parents, if he was at any time in the future going to change his tune?
http://lancasteronline.com/news/friends-of-floyd/article_44c15255-7fa2-543b-8fd4-147d47c77978.html


Would Tyler REALLY set his own father up to make a fool of himself to a reporter by stating confidently, and defiantly, "Wake up, Christie! Open your brain! Open. Your. Brain" in defense of his son if at any time in the future he was going to change his tune?
http://christieaschwanden.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/believe.pdf

And yet they both did exactly that. They changed course 180º after using their own parents to prop up their original defense.
Their own parents!

With that being said, why would anyone believe anything that comes out of the mouth of any pro cyclists regarding their "innocence"?


And this should just as quickly be applied to any athlete, just to be clear.
 
That, pretty much, sums up the point of the thread. I hope we get clean cycling, clean GT winners etc....but they are going to have to accept that nothing they can say will be above suspicion at best and ridicule at worst. It's the harsh reality.

As for Nibali... the first thing he should say is "I'm leaving Astana".
 
armchairclimber said:
That, pretty much, sums up the point of the thread. I hope we get clean cycling, clean GT winners etc....but they are going to have to accept that nothing they can say will be above suspicion at best and ridicule at worst. It's the harsh reality.

As for Nibali... the first thing he should say is "I'm leaving Astana".
Your first paragraph: true.

Your second paragraph: agree.

I would repeat, though that instead of SAYING something, maybe DOING something would work better. I don't know about you, but at my modest level in competitive cycling, I have always kept records of my training, I have been tested for VO2Max on several occasions, I knew my rest and maximum heart rate, and so forth. At their level, pro cyclists DO possess a lot more than an average Joe like me, lactate threshold measurements, and many other elements that can if not prove, at least suggest that they are clean. Putting it on the table would go a long way towards transparency.
 
westerner said:
Greg Henderson ‏@Greghenderson1 19h19 hours ago
@dimspace I started 2012 tdf at 46 and finished at 39. HTC. Would be nice to Inc haematocrit during a GT.

https://twitter.com/Greghenderson1/status/538812423030198274
Clearly this guys doesn't have the genetics to be a GT contender.

:rolleyes:

Like, those that do have the natural ability to finish the Tour with an HCT of 49.9.

And, when it comes to the subject of this thread, we have to separate wheat from chaff.

Dave.
 
Tonton said:
Your first paragraph: true.

Your second paragraph: agree.

I would repeat, though that instead of SAYING something, maybe DOING something would work better. I don't know about you, but at my modest level in competitive cycling, I have always kept records of my training, I have been tested for VO2Max on several occasions, I knew my rest and maximum heart rate, and so forth. At their level, pro cyclists DO possess a lot more than an average Joe like me, lactate threshold measurements, and many other elements that can if not prove, at least suggest that they are clean. Putting it on the table would go a long way towards transparency.
Could other teams use that information to their advantage at all? I'm not saying they shouldn't [post values], but would they see that as giving their opposition the inside running on each other?
On the flip side of that, is there anything stopping a rider from publishing furfee info/figures? In other words, how much of what's 'put on the table' would you believe?
 
westerner said:
Greg Henderson ‏@Greghenderson1 19h19 hours ago
@dimspace I started 2012 tdf at 46 and finished at 39. HTC. Would be nice to Inc haematocrit during a GT.

https://twitter.com/Greghenderson1/status/538812423030198274
Ah, but can we take him at his word? Let's not forget that apparently nobody likes Hendo ;):D:cool: Might go some way towards explaining his "unpopularity" at his previous team...

FWIW, he's one of the guys I'd stick my finger out for, if not my neck (not sure there's anyone I'd stick my neck out for)
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
42x16ss said:
Ah, but can we take him at his word? Let's not forget that apparently nobody likes Hendo ;):D:cool: Might go some way towards explaining his "unpopularity" at his previous team...

FWIW, he's one of the guys I'd stick my finger out for, if not my neck (not sure there's anyone I'd stick my neck out for)
Without checking results, I'd be very interested to know why he, as a dom, was tested at either end of the Tour to know his values.
 
Feb 15, 2011
1,306
0
0
Its all really simple- just deflect the question and quote a politician. Example:

Journalist: "You have just won stage 18 of the Giro by 5 minutes; did you do it clean?"

Cyclist: "I want to say one thing to the [Tifosi]; I want you to listen to me and I'm going to say this again. I did not have sexual relations with that woman"


Should work about 96% of the time.
 
''...the sport gets cleaner and we still ride faster.
It's also because of equipment, scientist stuff,
training, all this.'' Fabian 'Spartacus' Cancellara
as quoted from Velonews November 2014.
 
Jack Bobridge in 2012;

Bobridge, who at 23 has seen White leave the two professional teams he has ridden for due to doping matters, tweeted: ''As the old speak out, the young pay the price. Get rid of them, move on and do what we love, ride bikes!''
what he should have said?
verdict on his 'status' as an athlete?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Archibald said:
Jack Bobridge in 2012;



what he should have said?
verdict on his 'status' as an athlete?
Quicker than Wiggo's recorded times over 4km. Never won a GT. Riding for a (pro) conti team for 2015 as he focuses on 2016 Olympic games.
 
Archibald said:
Jack Bobridge in 2012;



what he should have said?
verdict on his 'status' as an athlete?
He's saying the right stuff, but Bobridge also has rheumatoid arthritis and on a bad day, pops Nurofen like they're M&Ms. Also rode for JV and the bastion of clean sport that is Neil Stephens, with Matt White at both teams.
 
Archibald said:
Jack Bobridge in 2012;



what he should have said?
verdict on his 'status' as an athlete?
I think criticizing riders for what they say is pointed mostly at certain gt winning riders who openly side with and praise dopers all day long, then make clearly dishonest arguments about training harder and doping having disapeared from the peloton.

Not every rider who ever says anything. Its become a bit common for everytime a rider says somehting, someone on here sarcastically asks whether they are doping based on that, but no one ever said there is some sort of ruler by which you can measure a doper based on what they say. But nevertheless, what some of the riders at the top say is absolutely ludicrous, often hypocritical, makes no sense and in many cases the things they say could not have been said by someone who is genuinly anti doping.

That said I think its a shame that riders can get away with simply saying that young riders dont dope. Its an easily refutable argument and a cop out. As is his second point which implies there is no such thing as doping in cycling and that the problem will go away by "riding bikes".

If there was any desire to fight doping in the media, a journo would respond with "excuse me Mr Bobridge, exactly based on what do you say young riders wouldn't dope". If he tried to say blood passport which a number have tried to use as an explanation for why cycling is suddenly clean, I would point to Ashenden's observations of the flaws in the blood passport, and also ask why guys like Lance and Contador weren't caught out.

The arguments are all on our side, so when rider say things that are clearly flawed, we here have every right to point out they don't know what they are talking about.
 
The Hitch said:
...

The Hitch: 3rd place week 43 2014 cq game. Winner 2013 Vuelta cq game. Winner, Velorooms prediction game 2012, 2013 (still undefeated:p). Currently 2nd all time cq rankings..
This part got my attention.

How do you explain yourself?

Are you tranquil?

How many times were you tested?

Dave.
 
D-Queued said:
This part got my attention.

How do you explain yourself?

Are you tranquil?

How many times were you tested?

Dave.
I'm afraid that part is as outdated as Lance's claim to be a 7 time TDF champion. I am no longer undefeated at prediction, I lost by a few points. Actually I was the winner originally but lost it in the courts like Contador.
 
Archibald said:
Could other teams use that information to their advantage at all? I'm not saying they shouldn't [post values], but would they see that as giving their opposition the inside running on each other?
On the flip side of that, is there anything stopping a rider from publishing furfee info/figures? In other words, how much of what's 'put on the table' would you believe?
I see your point, actually two points:

1. I believe that all cycling coaches know pretty much what works, what doesn't work, and how to train a rider. I think we all agree that those who claim having a revolutionary method are liars and are just trying to explain miracles. I don't think that knowing what the other guys do would really give an advantage. Maybe a kick in the rear, though :D.

2. Yes, anyone can come up with BS logs and muddy the waters. Having said that, the type of data that I'm referring to is the type of info that would show progress/performance over years, and put side by side, may show who is gifted, who went from mule to thoroughbred, and so forth. That is unless the guy started doping so early that all is data is "inflated".

I believe that the study of Pinot's data released a month or so ago is going in the right direction. However, it may have contained valuable info that didn't make it to print. A big explanation about VO2Max, but only one value. I'd like to see how it evolved overtime. Also, VO2Max is only one component: how about proportion of slow-twitch fibers? Lactate threshold measurements?
 
Mar 11, 2009
1,005
0
0
Tonton said:
I see your point, actually two points:

1. I believe that all cycling coaches know pretty much what works, what doesn't work, and how to train a rider. I think we all agree that those who claim having a revolutionary method are liars and are just trying to explain miracles. I don't think that knowing what the other guys do would really give an advantage. Maybe a kick in the rear, though :D.

2. Yes, anyone can come up with BS logs and muddy the waters. Having said that, the type of data that I'm referring to is the type of info that would show progress/performance over years, and put side by side, may show who is gifted, who went from mule to thoroughbred, and so forth. That is unless the guy started doping so early that all is data is "inflated".

I believe that the study of Pinot's data released a month or so ago is going in the right direction. However, it may have contained valuable info that didn't make it to print. A big explanation about VO2Max, but only one value. I'd like to see how it evolved overtime. Also, VO2Max is only one component: how about proportion of slow-twitch fibers? Lactate threshold measurements?
You think there would be any use in finding that a certain rider can sustain (say 400 to pick a number) for 40 minutes but maybe is not so good at 1-2 minute or shorter intervals or that someone can put up repeated 1-2 minute efforts or info along those lines or what they are working on such as repeated short max intervals or longer threshold type intervals. (or does everyone do that and that information is obvious if you have been paying attention). In other words are they giving away "state secrets" as to what rider x can and can't do and the blueprint for how to beat him or her.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
1
0
Big Doopie said:
"You are clean. What SHOULD you say in interviews?"

Well, presumably you would be wearing a Garmin kit, so there would be no necessity to say anything.
No need for some Garmin riders to say anything as it will be in a book by another doper :)
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Nick C. said:
You think there would be any use in finding that a certain rider can sustain (say 400 to pick a number) for 40 minutes but maybe is not so good at 1-2 minute or shorter intervals or that someone can put up repeated 1-2 minute efforts or info along those lines or what they are working on such as repeated short max intervals or longer threshold type intervals. (or does everyone do that and that information is obvious if you have been paying attention). In other words are they giving away "state secrets" as to what rider x can and can't do and the blueprint for how to beat him or her.
If there were 2 riders in each race, it might work like that. But in pro road racing it's rarely the case - until the very end.

But how would knowing a weakness via a data release differ any more than what we have now - where riders test one another with efforts or accelerations and the smart rider who can't follow simply TTs it either back to them or limits their losses?

ie for the riders that matter, all this "state secret" stuff is determined often on the road already.

So what's the loss? I don't see any.
 
Mar 11, 2009
1,005
0
0
That's why I put the question out there. My impression was some teams were not releasing the info with the explanation along the lines of "this is competition"
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Nick C. said:
That's why I put the question out there. My impression was some teams were not releasing the info with the explanation along the lines of "this is competition"
Competitive advantage theatre, imo.

I'd like anyone to provide a single example where knowing someone's power profile would help in a race.

Again, road races are not between 2 people. So many other factors involved, that knowing max values for 10, 30, 60, 300 and 3600 seconds would almost be irrelevant, imo and ime. All the external factors that have an impact play far greater roles in the performance of an individual on any given day.
 
May 8, 2009
837
0
0
Maybe this should go in the Kreuziger thread but I think we can all agree that claiming Dr. Ferrari in 2007 was one of the first people to tell you that cycling has changed and that you don't need drugs anymore (especially considering the 1-in-a-million comments on LA's 2009 blood values in the USADA report) is not what you say as a clean rider
 
Apr 20, 2009
376
0
0
Yeah, that part stuck out as a sore thumb to me too. It is so ridiculous given that we know that Ferrari is the Energizer Bunny. He just keeps doping and doping.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M The Clinic 34
Similar threads
Tour de Cleans?

ASK THE COMMUNITY