"…the initial search of Fuentes. He calls it the biggest lie in the history of sports. "
Yeah right. Not even close. Even it if is a lie, he’d have to keep it up for 6 more years and 6 more victories just to tie for that title.
Just one more positive test to go and we will have another American victory… ; )
In completly unsupported and inconclusive andecdotes I put the completely doped at 7% above the completely clean.
I wonder who is the last Tour winner *not *to be accused of doping? Any idea?
Fignon, Hinault 
.
sounds like a case for mulder and scully…
It would be interesting if someone could do some testing on that.
My big thing is that there are just so many factors involved that I have a real hard time just saying “Well if you’re a doper you’re going to win”. Unless the drugs somehow give you a MAJOR advantage I don’t see it being and exclusive club. In fact from a mental aspect I see it as a disadvantage as I’m guessing it’s easy to fall back and say “Well the drugs will do it for me”.
~Matt
Let’s turn that around a bit. I’m just playing devil’s advocate, but what about a theory where there is more doping at the back of the peloton than in the front of it? Hear me out. Every pro cyclist dreams of riding in the TdF but only a small few have the natural ability to make it. There are a lot of wannabes that want to make their dream come true but they know that they are genetically limited. I think these people are more inclined to dope to make it into the main pack versus winning the race.
I know this in anecdotal evidence, but it’s still a data point. I had a buddy in college that lived with someone from the track team. His track team roommate actually kept anabolic steroids in the fridge. This guy wasn’t that good but he was taking them to get better. Like I said, it’s just one data point, but some of these guys are taking steroids and other banned substances just to be a mediocre pro cyclist.
Maybe I am naive and simple, or just really new to cycling, but why not base Contador’s dirty/clean status on the drug tests taken during the 2007 Tour De France? I am all for stopping the doping in cycling, but it needs to be based on scientific tests, not a bunch of political he said/she said from a few years ago. To me, the clusterfuck nature of the enforcement is hurting cycling more than anything. It opens things up for “journalists” and other “experts” to speculate every good performance. Either your were helped along by a PED at the TdF or you didn’t. By the way, when are they going to take the yellow jersey away from that Floyd boy? He tested positive, right?
Maybe I am naive and simple, or just really new to cycling, but why not base Contador’s dirty/clean status on the drug tests taken during the 2007 Tour De France? I am all for stopping the doping in cycling, but it needs to be based on scientific tests, not a bunch of political he said/she said from a few years ago. To me, the clusterfuck nature of the enforcement is hurting cycling more than anything. It opens things up for “journalists” and other “experts” to speculate every good performance. Either your were helped along by a PED at the TdF or you didn’t. By the way, when are they going to take the yellow jersey away from that Floyd boy? He tested positive, right?
That would be great if you vould catch every possible PED in the testing 100% of the time. But they can’t, so things like this are going to go on.
I wonder who is the last Tour winner *not *to be accused of doping? Any idea?
Pedro Delgado
"The only thing that perplexes me is that many people still hold onto the notion that he could be innocent. I know it goes against conventional wisdom, but I am more inclined to feel any top pro cyclist is guilty until proven innocent (and that comes before a positive drug test). The recovery that these athletes are displaying in an intense stage race is not human! "
I understand your point-- but in fairness to the clean riders-- How exactly do you prove your innocence? Finish last in a race? I’m confused as to how they are suppose to prove a negative test? any ideas?
It would be interesting if someone could do some testing on that.
Actually there is some testing:
I posed this question on the wattage forum recently and one clever fellow worked it out: increasing hematocrit from 42 to 49 increases power by a little over 9%. That’s huge.
– jens
Maybe I am naive and simple, or just really new to cycling, but why not base Contador’s dirty/clean status on the drug tests taken during the 2007 Tour De France? I am all for stopping the doping in cycling, but it needs to be based on scientific tests, not a bunch of political he said/she said from a few years ago. To me, the clusterfuck nature of the enforcement is hurting cycling more than anything. It opens things up for “journalists” and other “experts” to speculate every good performance. Either your were helped along by a PED at the TdF or you didn’t. By the way, when are they going to take the yellow jersey away from that Floyd boy? He tested positive, right?
That would be great if you vould catch every possible PED in the testing 100% of the time. But they can’t, so things like this are going to go on.
It would be my guess that most riders are at their cleanest during the tour. They tinker with blood doping between stages and top off testosterone occasionally to aid recovery, but they have cycled off stuff like EPO, HGH and anabolics.
You can juice yourself to the gills for several months, train like a maniac, and show up cleanish to your goal race in amazing shape. If you pick and choose the races during the year with loose doping controls, come in 4th a lot, your chances of getting busted in an out of competition test are minimal…or you can just skip them like Rasmussen…and remember he wasn’t booted for skipping the test, just lying about his whereabouts. If he’d skipped the test and gone to Mexico as he claimed, Rabobank would probably not have thrown him out and he probably would have won the Tour.
The dumbest thing you hear in relation to drug cheats is that…“Bob can’t be cheating, he trains reallllllly reallllly hard every day”…well duh, than you steroids. The drugs allow you to train hard every day with little or no recovery.
Anyone in the sport who is claiming that the controls are now working and all the cheats are being caught is either delusional or has a vested interest in protecting certain people, teams or interests. Sherwin Liggett et al have been playing the same record for the past few years every time someone gets busted…NOW we’re clean…oops…NOW we’re clean…DAMN…OK, NOW we’re clean.
I just saw Stephen Roche on Sky News babbling the same nonsense that the dopers have been chased out of the sport…meanwhile we’re all still waiting for him to sue Paul Kimmage.
I don’t know if you were serious or not, but I’m pretty sure Delgado actually tested positive during the tour for a masking substance for testosterone - Probenicid or something like that. I forget what the reason it didn’t stick was, but his was in question as well. That would mean Roche in '87.
But how are you including LeMond? Other than all of the Lance Lovers who beat up on Lemond because he dares speak the truth about their hero, has he ever been
accused of doping?
There’s a list of riders that were mentioned in Operation Puerto, then they were hired by Discovery and then were taken out of the list. Go check the cyclingnews.com and you’ll see this chain of events. Contador is just one of them, Basso was another one, I guess he was in it too deep to be “saved”.
Sorry Paulo, but Basso was cleared only by the Italians and his name was never taken off the Puerto list. Another fact you have wrong is that he was cleared by CONI before he ever signed for Disco. If you want to make this claim about Contador and Davis (though I doubt they were signed before being cleared like you say) go ahead, but at least get your facts straight about Basso.
On a general note, I believe Franke has claimed he has evidence but has yet to actually show anyone. At least that’s what I have read.
Taken out of the list or cleared is the same thing, but I know how you like technicalities.
How’s Tyler doing these days? What’s he up to? I know you know!
.
I think Franke needs to make his evidence public, so that we all can evaluate it. It’s kind of chickenshit of him to proclaim that he has the proof but not let anyone else see it.
I wonder who is the last Tour winner not to be accused of doping? Any idea?
Pedro Delgado
Delgado actually tested positive for probenecide, which was a known steroid masking agent. He got off because it was on the IOC’s list of banned substances at the time and not the UCI. They still love Perico to pieces in Spain to this day but his '88 victory was definitely stuck in the fog of dope.
Taken out of the list or cleared is the same thing, but I know how you like technicalities.
Perhaps this got by you but CONI clearing Basso has zero to do with the official Puerto list. It simply means the Italians thought he was innocent due to the Spanish authorities not releasing information. If you bothered to do research to the point of getting the whole story, not just your side you would see that well after he was cleared his name was brought up in connection with Puerto.
How’s Tyler doing these days? What’s he up to? I know you know!
It’s kind of sad that the only thing you can do whenever I shoot your pathetic posts down is to make some comments about a case that was from more then two years ago.
.