BritPCMFan wrote:
As for the drug debates, I look at it this way as I find its the way that's most enjoyable. In all likelyhood, they are all at it.
Well, no. The burden of the proof is on you.
BritPCMFan wrote:
Lets face it, we know that Contador (and others, but his the easiest example to use) dopes. We know that when he was definately on dope, he was definately able to beat other guys that were definately on dope. Other guys can beat him now, which means its incredible likely that they are also on dope.
Though both your points are true (Contador winning, then being beaten), I don't see the logical connection between them that shows others are on dope.
BritPCMFan wrote:
However. all the cyclists say that its all different now. So maybe, we give the benifit of the doubt. Its unlikely, but its more fun. There are a few logical things that do seem slightly different that could suggest everyone is mainly clean.
BritPCMFan wrote:
Contador is not as dominate. This could be because he is not on dope anymore. He is still at the top however, so its unlikely that the others are on dope. Obviously, some guys dope, those that suddenly improve beyond all expectation at a later stage of their and there is absolutely no explaination for it.
"dominate" as in "dominant" ? Maybe he's on less drugs than say between 2006 and 2010.
Maybe he's forced to micro-dose more than before, so he gets lesser benefits, but so would his opponents, so ? That doesn't prove anything about his opponents.
BritPCMFan wrote:
Evans got much better this year, but he was formally strong and was said to have a virus for a long period. Its an logical reasons. Froome had a massive jump in improvement, but had an undiagnosed condition that was discovered around the time he improved. Its logical. JTL has a similar situation, in that his development got stunted due to 2 years of illness and that if you knock a couple years off him it doesn't look so suprising. Dennis is young, so the fact he is throwing out WTF results is also logical.
I don't know Dennis more than that, so I won't include him in my thinking for now.
The condition the other guys have suffered have harmed them as much as you're ready to believe it.
If I was a pro, in a set of mind that'd make me a potential PED user, and that my team management would reinforce the team staff with some shabby doctor such as (I could literally insert a dozen of names here), with certain guarantees that I wouldn't get caught, maybe all of a sudden I'd claim I've just gotten rid of an undiagnosed condition so that everything is logical and there'd be no need to dig any further.
BritPCMFan wrote:
Santambrogio was an average helped for his entire career with really no real results or standout performances. He joined a new team as leader, so you might expect him to pick up some results in weak fields. But he climbs with the best climbers in the world. Thats not logical at all.
Too bad he didn't have a condition before.
BritPCMFan wrote:
Di Luca has a history of getting good results when he takes drugs. His been caught multiple times, and each time has taken drugs again. He comes back with basically no racing and rides like one the worlds best. I dont really need to go on here XD
I think his case doesn't justify much debate, indeed.
BritPCMFan wrote:
So basically, I think, if there is a logical explaination for it, even if its a little unlikely, you have to give them the benifit of the doubt.
I never bought the "cancer made me lighter" explanation that didn't show on a weight balance. Neither did the "I beat the shit out of cancer made me able to take more pain on the bike". That was credible for gullible people though. Guess who was right...
BritPCMFan wrote:
Or accept that they are all dirty
Why "all" ? Abusive generalization.
BritPCMFan wrote:
and so it doesn't really matter
It'd still matter because it'd give professionals an edge over amateurs, etc.
It matters because they don't have access to the same dope. They don't all have the same health security when they take it (if Ricco had had a doctor at hand when he tried to transfuse himself he wouldn't have ended at the closest hospital), they don't all respond to PED the same way. So yes, it does matter, because thankfully there are guys doing their job honestly.
BritPCMFan wrote:
The whole "he dopes she dopes" thing just ends up being more fanboyism then anything else.
Ok, so I'm a fanboy of ?
Sometimes obvious cheats are obvious, no problem to call them cheats even if they've not been caught. Sometimes it's more subtle, but as long as there's a bit of sense behind the accusations and that they're more or less balanced, I don't mind people accusing.
BritPCMFan wrote:
I know i'll dig at Contador occasionally, but that's only because he still insists he was clean. I really don't think he has doped this season (if most everyone else is clean).
I don't get the logic of Contador doping or not doping this season, nor what it'd imply for others. Meh...
BritPCMFan wrote:
Its been a good dauph so far tho I think. I'd really like to see Dennis hang onto that Podium, but i kinda have a feeling Rogers might steal it. He was strong here last year and I think he will fancy another strong showing.
Most likely, Dennis being young, he has a worst recuperation than Rogers, especially at WT level. He hung up to death today and will pay that in the coming days. I definitely see Rogers in front Dennis, come Sunday evening.
issoisso wrote:
Anyway, changing the subject. Boy that Rogers sure is flying for Saxo Bank, eh?
Must've forgotten how to train
I'm pretty sure you've mentioned before you think he is a lot worse than last year. but I don't really see it? He was pretty crap in the spring, but was good in California and looks to be as good in the mountains in Dauphine as last year.
His time trial is pretty poor compared to last year though, but it seems no Saxo rider is able to time trial this year.
It makes sense as I failed to see any NetApp rider in the peloton at one point, with one rather suddenly appearing afterwards (not one of those in the break).
ppanther wrote:
Its not so much about Froome not giving Busche the win. For me its more concerning that Froome pre Vuelta 2011 was a rider, who Contador, for example, could have rode circles around and still would have finished in front of him on an uphill finish. Now Froome wins every fucking Mountain finish, if he wants to. Nobody could say that this is happening clean. When Santambrogio had his ridiculous good year, everybody knew he was doping, why should Sky be other?
Yet the diff is Froome as been good since late 2011 and not failed a test, yet santa has his best year and he is caught 5 mnths in to the season thats the diff.
Froome was a worse climber pre-2011 than Santambrogio ever was and still now he wins uphill finishes with ease. The reason Santambrogio was caught is more that smaller teams / less known riders have less money to do the "good" program.
Anyhow, really impressive by König and Navarro, showing Rolland and Rodriguez how to come back from one minute behind.
pcm2009fan wrote:
[Most of whom are known dopers throughout their career ie not reliable resources to judge natural talent with, right? I mean look at Ricco, who doped his whole life and burst on to the scene as something of a wonderkid.
Valverde beat 15 year olds when he was 8. Is that enough prove of natural talent. Or do you think his father was a lunatic who gave him hgh? Plus where did I mention Ricco? And he didn't 'burst' onto the scene
Same stories can be heard about Sagan, how he beated the older kids while riding ordinary supermarket bike, shorts and T-shirt. (this stories can be created to help the "legendary" status, but still it is based on truth,as it comes from various sources).
König lost quite a time in the end of the stage, i hope he can bounce back and hold the top10 spot, but it will be hard, there are so many riders that are level above him still.
Edited by Avin Wargunnson on 07-06-2013 06:49
It makes sense as I failed to see any NetApp rider in the peloton at one point, with one rather suddenly appearing afterwards (not one of those in the break).
Far more impressive effort then.
Now that would change what i wrote in post above. If it is true, impressive ride there from Leo!
wogsrus wrote:
So happy for Rohan Dennis. Next Aussie GT winner possilby? Give him 5-7 years. 3 Aussies inside the top 4, love it.
Teklahaminot rode very well.
Hmm, I can't see him winning a GT. Is he really such a good climber? He can go over hills fine, but he's not a climber enough to win a GT. Only Top 20 mountain result I could find of him in the last 3 years was yesterday. Although of course you never exactly know how someone really develops.
His TT ability won't stop him, that's for sure. Edited by Jesleyh on 07-06-2013 10:12
wogsrus wrote:
So happy for Rohan Dennis. Next Aussie GT winner possilby? Give him 5-7 years. 3 Aussies inside the top 4, love it.
Teklahaminot rode very well.
Hmm, I can't see him winning a GT. Is he really such a good climber? He can go over hills fine, but he's not a climber enough to win a GT. Only Top 20 mountain result I could find of him in the last 3 years was yesterday. Although of course you never exactly know how someone really develops.
His TT ability won't stop him, that's for sure.
Its kinda pointless looking at a 23 year olds results and discounting any sort of potential because yesterday was his best. Too soon to say GT winner, but also too soon to believe there is 0 chance.
Especially since Dennis was a track rider up until the Olympics. So road results are few and far between, and the climbing stages aren't exactly the sort he will have been focusing on. Now he appears to be following Cam Meyer in attempting the Wiggins-move from track to climber.
Besides, he had a Top 20 at a California Mountain stages last month! Edited by SportingNonsense on 07-06-2013 10:31
wogsrus wrote:
So happy for Rohan Dennis. Next Aussie GT winner possilby? Give him 5-7 years. 3 Aussies inside the top 4, love it.
Teklahaminot rode very well.
Hmm, I can't see him winning a GT. Is he really such a good climber? He can go over hills fine, but he's not a climber enough to win a GT. Only Top 20 mountain result I could find of him in the last 3 years was yesterday. Although of course you never exactly know how someone really develops.
His TT ability won't stop him, that's for sure.
Its kinda pointless looking at a 23 year olds results and discounting any sort of potential because yesterday was his best. Too soon to say GT winner, but also too soon to believe there is 0 chance.
Especially since Dennis was a track rider up until the Olympics. So road results are few and far between, and the climbing stages aren't exactly the sort he will have been focusing on. Now he appears to be following Cam Meyer in attempting the Wiggins-move from track to climber.
Besides, he had a Top 20 at a California Mountain stages last month!
I didn't say there was 0 chance, I said that 'you never exactly know how someone really develops', so there is a chance
And yeah, overlooked the Mt. Diablo stage, sorry for that
