jamsque wrote:

Does this mean that Daamsgaard's methods are invalid, or worse (and much more unlikely), that he's a stooge? If his tests aren't catching dopers in Astana, they could also be not catching dopers in CSC, and Garmin and Colombia's methods might be missing people too. Am I being naive in trusting these riders? I am pretty cynical about cycling, but it would upset me a lot if Cav turned out to be dirty, or if all Millar's talk over these last years has been bullshit. As for CSC, it would just be a damn shame if their show at the Tour this year that I found so captivating and gripping was all a sham. And if Jens Voigt is dirty, there is no hope for the world.

Aquarius wrote:
Sastre ? His performances in mountains (in terms of Watts) are not credible from a clean man. He was at Once, then went to CSC, teams with a very bad reputation regarding doping habits.

The Schleck brothers and Cancellara ? They've been targeted by all cycling/doping authorities, there's something wrong with them. Cancellara and Voigt performances in the Tourmalet make no sense... 75 kg dudes dropping climbers ? Yeah, right... I thought I was watching sport, not science-fiction.
The Schleck brothers were considered like decent amateurs in France. Nothing like the world finest talents. Potential UCI top 100 riders maybe ?
O'Grady ? Decent sprinter, decent pursuiter, but a guy who, like Cancellara, could hang with the best hilly riders in Zurich, then win Paris-Roubaix ? That's too much of a progression for his old age.

Stairs wrote:
To beat a doper doesn't mean you're doping - but yes, I get your point and I've had the same thoughts. It is important to remember that Contadors performances in the Giro were close to 10% lower than in the Tour less than a year before. He was dropped on several occasions and, thankfully, couldn't respond to any of Ricco or Sellas attacks. He won the Giro in the ITT's but almost lost it in the mountains - not quite the Contador we're used to

Stairs wrote:
You seem to be a nice guy, sometimes, but some of those arguments just seem to be the good ol' jealous Frenchie talkin'

No, seriously, you can't look at the one performance and then make your own conclusions. I think we can all agree that Voigt is a man who can very well make an all-out performance, we've seen that several times. If Voigt and Cancellara had kept on going, making the US Postal-train riding up Hautacam, it would just have been too much. No, instead they lost 15 minutes riding those last 17 km.

I'll agree that Frank Schleck didn't seem that talented in his youth years, although he made some good results. Andy Schleck, on the other hand, won the Fleche du Sud and got 3rd in the GP Tell as a first-year senior, 19 years old. He went pro the year after.

Yes, the GP Zürich-performance was a bit... well - not extraterrestrial but it was certainly, let's just say, better than expected. The Paris - Roubaix 2007 was generally a strange race. Suddenly, all the usual favourites just were gone. Lars Michaelsen told after the race that he had had diamonds in his legs that day - I think the same goes for O'Grady. You can do more than you'd ever think if you've got the day - with that said, I can of course understand your suspicion.

it's supposed to be random controls, but I doubt it

Aquarius wrote:
I think that's where Dammsgard interveins.
It's a bit like in Festina's time at them, it's team doping most likely. Riders are injected with stuff, knowing when they'll be controlled by Daamsgard & co (it's supposed to be random controls, but I doubt it), and when they need to take dope in order to never be caught. Some products can only be detected for a very short amount of time (a couple of hours) whereas their effects last months. I see those programs as "perfect doping schedules".

At Saunier it's most likely that the team directors close their eyes on doping (Gianetti could not not know that Ricco was heavily doped). But if a rider gets caught it becomes his own business.

The only chance that an Astana or a CSC rider will ever get caught is that he takes a stupid product on his own (like Fofonov), otherwise it will never happen.

Aquarius wrote:
I think that's where Dammsgard interveins.
It's a bit like in Festina's time at them, it's team doping most likely. Riders are injected with stuff, knowing when they'll be controlled by Daamsgard & co (it's supposed to be random controls, but I doubt it), and when they need to take dope in order to never be caught. Some products can only be detected for a very short amount of time (a couple of hours) whereas their effects last months. I see those programs as "perfect doping schedules".

At Saunier it's most likely that the team directors close their eyes on doping (Gianetti could not not know that Ricco was heavily doped). But if a rider gets caught it becomes his own business.

The only chance that an Astana or a CSC rider will ever get caught is that he takes a stupid product on his own (like Fofonov), otherwise it will never happen.

Stairs wrote:
Okay, then, you don't believe in anything - how are we supposed to clean this mess called Cycling up?

Aquarius wrote:
Well, I might be wrong about Daamsgard then. Still, it seems obvious CSC and Kazakhsatanas are bunches of dopeheads, and that those programs are used to show they're (supposed to be) clean.