Forum home Road cycling forum Pro race

Peter Sagan

MartingaleMartingale Posts: 71
edited March 2013 in Pro race
In light of his current dominance in the sport, should we just assume that Peter Sagan is not doping and that he is just this extremely talented and hard working cyclist, which makes him that much better than everybody else?
Martingale
"Don't buy upgrades, ride up grades " - Eddy Merckx

Posts

  • philbar72philbar72 Posts: 2,228
    i don't know what Dopping is. he appears to be bluddy good though.
  • mallinovmallinov Posts: 140
    Seriously?? This deserves a thread?
  • mallinov wrote:
    Seriously?? This deserves a thread?

    I obviously think it does.
    Martingale
    "Don't buy upgrades, ride up grades " - Eddy Merckx
  • mallinovmallinov Posts: 140
    Why? Do you have any proof he's doping?
  • iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    He's good - very good, but is he doing anything unbelievable. I don't think so.

    I don't know if he's doping or not but I've not seen anything in his performances which would lead me to believe he is
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • amaferangaamaferanga Posts: 6,789
    This is the kind of sh!te speculation that's commonplace at the Clinic - you should go post it over there and enjoy the nonsense and petty bitching that follows.
    More problems but still living....
  • afx237viafx237vi Posts: 12,630
    Bike races should be organised like school sports days where no-one is allowed to come 1st and everyone who enters gets the same prize. That way no-one will be suspicious.
  • mallinov wrote:
    Why? Do you have any proof he's doping?

    I don't have any proof either way, hence my question. Ok so, sounds like the consensus so far is that yes, he is that much better that everybody else currently. Just checking.
    Martingale
    "Don't buy upgrades, ride up grades " - Eddy Merckx
  • Ed_tronEd_tron Posts: 23
    I do think Sagan is pretty impressive. Back in the last TdF, it was easy to put him in the same group as Cav and Greipel as a sprinter. But this year we've seen that he is much more well rounded than that, and can win from a variety of positions, and on many different types of courses, with the field often against him
  • deejaydeejay Posts: 3,138
    Martingale wrote:
    mallinov wrote:
    Why? Do you have any proof he's doping?

    I don't have any proof either way, hence my question. Ok so, sounds like the consensus so far is that yes, he is that much better that everybody else currently. Just checking.
    I watched the 1994 Gewiss team and was suspicious but I knew censored all about doping but something seemed odd.
    I even won real money on the Berzin win at Liege but that years Giro was unbelievable as others have been.
    The Bjarne Riss and Armstrong were so obvious anyway, followed by others.

    Then all the who ha and maybe the passport works until I stand in a bar above Liege and see Philippe Gilbert win his third big race (+2 smaller ones) like Davide Rebellon had done and my suspicions are aroused.
    I just shook my head in disbelief with two Dutchmen (who I chatted to earlier)at the other end of the bar were also shaking their heads while around us the locals celebrated.
    Now someone else seems to be too good to be true, well maybe he is but I remain suspicious and just hope they both are genuine for the good of the sport.
    Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 1972
  • ProssPross Posts: 29,569
    Martingale wrote:
    mallinov wrote:
    Why? Do you have any proof he's doping?

    I don't have any proof either way, hence my question. Ok so, sounds like the consensus so far is that yes, he is that much better that everybody else currently. Just checking.

    He's not that much better than everyone else though. Cancellara has beaten him, Ciolek has beaten him and Demare came within millimetres. He's a very good young rider and with experience may go on to be a great.

    Someone has to win each race and there have always been riders better than most. Let's at least wait until there's at least a rumour before throwing manure everywhere, it seems to be the first thing cycling 'fans' want to do these days and, whilst I can understand healthy scepticism, it's in danger of ruining the sport. It's already ruining this forum. As someone else said, take it to the Clinic and at least leave us with one forum where we can discuss cycling and not doping.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,479
    In almost every sport the same people/teams/horses tend to win (or get close) over and over again fairly regularly . Cycling is no different.
    So if you think a rider winning a race one week and then winning a very similar race a few days later is 'too good to be true' then you're a fool to yourself.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Tom ButcherTom Butcher Posts: 3,830
    In bike racing the strongest rider rarely wins though - so one rider or one team dominating quite rightly makes people wonder. Fwiw I don't think Sagan has dominated - his biggest win to date is probably G-W and arguably if they'd organised a chase they'd have caught him - what he's won and the way he's won them don' t stand out in the way the the wins of some other riders have in recent years.

    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,479
    edited March 2013
    In bike racing the strongest rider rarely wins though
    But that's just a myth though. The best rider (on past performance) frequently wins (strongest is a largely meaningless concept - how do you know who is 'strongest'?).
    For example, look at the list of winners of cobbled classics - big and small - over the last decade and see how many times you see the word Boonen*. Cavendish has won about 80% of Tour sprints he's contested, Contador has only ever been beaten (on the road) once in 8 proper goes at GTs. When not injured, Tony Martin wins TTs all year round.

    *With Boonen, in the last 9 years when he has done the Ronde, Roubaix, E3, and G-Wevelgem he has won 43% of the time.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • MacaloonMacaloon Posts: 5,545
    Pross wrote:
    Martingale wrote:
    mallinov wrote:
    Why? Do you have any proof he's doping?

    I don't have any proof either way, hence my question. Ok so, sounds like the consensus so far is that yes, he is that much better that everybody else currently. Just checking.

    He's not that much better than everyone else though. Cancellara has beaten him, Ciolek has beaten him and Demare came within millimetres. He's a very good young rider and with experience may go on to be a great.

    Someone has to win each race and there have always been riders better than most. Let's at least wait until there's at least a rumour before throwing manure everywhere, it seems to be the first thing cycling 'fans' want to do these days and, whilst I can understand healthy scepticism, it's in danger of ruining the sport. It's already ruining this forum. As someone else said, take it to the Clinic and at least leave us with one forum where we can discuss cycling and not doping.

    Very good post. The instant there's a reputable issue to discuss about a rider's character we should be all over it. But I find it massively disrespectful to indulge in this baseless speculation.
    ...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.
Sign In or Register to comment.