Will Horner get a new contract for 2014

Richmond Racer

RichN95 wrote:

Crozza wrote:

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/09/news/vuelta-champion-horner-to-release-biological-passport-data_303994

The reactions to the data will be more interesting than the data itself

Quite

adr82

Crozza wrote:

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/09/news/vuelta-champion-horner-to-release-biological-passport-data_303994

“That’s the best I can do,” he said. “Clearly, that will show everyone and that will satisfy all the cynics and critics and press.

The sarcasm is strong with this one

mechanism

Now where did I put my copy of Haematology for Dummies.

Pross

Horner is bald - Pantani was bald, Armstrong was balding therefore this is proof that Horner dopes. Froome is also looking a bit follically challenged so draw your own conclusion (that could be a result of a Welsh / Saffa other half). However, please don't take this irrefutable proof of doping to mean anyone with a good head of hair does not dope - remember that Pozzatto has a fine head of hair so therefore people with flowing locks are also likely to be dopers.

Richmond Racer

I nominate Pross to be the head of the new independent AD body for cycling, proposed by Cookson

salsiccia1

Pross wrote:

Horner is bald - Pantani was bald, Armstrong was balding therefore this is proof that Horner dopes. Froome is also looking a bit follically challenged so draw your own conclusion (that could be a result of a Welsh / Saffa other half). However, please don't take this irrefutable proof of doping to mean anyone with a good head of hair does not dope - remember that Pozzatto has a fine head of hair so therefore people with flowing locks are also likely to be dopers.

Internet doping logic works like this:

When asked 'do you dope?'
Yes = doping
No = he would say that, so doping

'Have you ever doped?'
Yes, but no longer = still doping
No = he would say that, so doping

Winning races?
No = no longer doping, or only micro-dosing
Yes = doping

In any way associated with US Postal/Armstrong/Bruyneel?
No = probably doping
Yes = definitely doping

Associated with Sky?
No = probably doping
Yes = definitely 100% doping

morstar

Salsiccia1 wrote:

Pross wrote:

Horner is bald - Pantani was bald, Armstrong was balding therefore this is proof that Horner dopes. Froome is also looking a bit follically challenged so draw your own conclusion (that could be a result of a Welsh / Saffa other half). However, please don't take this irrefutable proof of doping to mean anyone with a good head of hair does not dope - remember that Pozzatto has a fine head of hair so therefore people with flowing locks are also likely to be dopers.

Internet doping logic works like this:

When asked 'do you dope?'
Yes = doping
No = he would say that, so doping

'Have you ever doped?'
Yes, but no longer = still doping
No = he would say that, so doping

Winning races?
No = no longer doping, or only micro-dosing
Yes = doping

In any way associated with US Postal/Armstrong/Bruyneel?
No = probably doping
Yes = definitely doping

Associated with Sky?
No = probably doping
Yes = definitely 100% doping

This is what I have a problem with. If I didn't have a life, I'd actually trawl the forum for some of the most cynical posters and actually find out who maintained consistent views and who took whatever 'evidence' suits their agenda regardless of hypocrisy quotient. I am certain there are posters who have used both the high cadence = doping and low cadence = doping arguments.
My personal favourite is how power calculations were generally ridiculed during the TdF but by the Vuelta these were cast iron evidence of doping.

blazing_saddles

He's now released his bio passport scores since 2008.
Preliminary analysis of which can be seen here:
http://veloclinic.tumblr.com/post/62253 ... sport-data
With a few of those coveted graphs that prove everything so conclusively.

gpreeves

Richmond Racer wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Crozza wrote:

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/09/news/vuelta-champion-horner-to-release-biological-passport-data_303994

The reactions to the data will be more interesting than the data itself

Quite

It's amazing how people suddenly reveal themselves to be amateur/secret haematologists as soon as passport data is available. Best left to the actual experts in my opinion.

Even still, fair play to Horner for releasing the data, it's good to see a rider recognise the need for transparency.

Edit: Just to clarify, my "actual experts" comment was not related to Blazing Saddles' post. As far as I gather Doc at Veloclinic is actually medically trained.

r0bh

gpreeves wrote:

Edit: Just to clarify, my "actual experts" comment was not related to Blazing Saddles' post. As far as I gather Doc at Veloclinic is actually medically trained.

Doesn't mean he knows how to interpret blood passport data. And until he writes his posts in a proper language rather than pirate/gangsta I will continue to ignore him.

gpreeves

r0bh wrote:

gpreeves wrote:

Edit: Just to clarify, my "actual experts" comment was not related to Blazing Saddles' post. As far as I gather Doc at Veloclinic is actually medically trained.

Doesn't mean he knows how to interpret blood passport data. And until he writes his posts in a proper language rather than pirate/gangsta I will continue to ignore him.

I'm inclined to agree with you there, just didn't want a pointless argument regarding his credentials. Completely agree with your comment regarding the pirate language, I don't really see what an argument gains by being poorly articulated. Does anybody know the reason for his writing style?

iainf72

r0bh wrote:

gpreeves wrote:

Edit: Just to clarify, my "actual experts" comment was not related to Blazing Saddles' post. As far as I gather Doc at Veloclinic is actually medically trained.

Doesn't mean he knows how to interpret blood passport data. And until he writes his posts in a proper language rather than pirate/gangsta I will continue to ignore him.

I've seen a few of his analysis in the past - Has he found anything not suspicious yet? Or is everything still not quite right?

tailwindhome

I've given Horner an 8.5 on the "Aye Right, Dead on!" Scale.

Yellow Peril

"Not Normal" as Lance used to say.

deejay

.
Horner's agent surprised his client has no team for 2014

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/horners ... m-for-2014

majormantra

Not sure if this has been covered already, but is there a precedent for a GT winner not having a team the following year?

Bo Duke

Forums like this have probably made him too hot to handle 'in case' something is discovered in 6-9 months.

That aside, teams are investing in young blood (pun?) not 42 year olds.

hstiles

It's October and 2 Worldtour teams have folded, one failed to materialise and at least 2 pro continental teams have called it quits too.

So, it's a buyers market. Would you invest millions bringing in a rider with maybe a year left of his career who spent most of the previous season sidelined due to injury - Vuelta winner or not - or would you buy up some younger riders, such as Brammeier, Wurf or DelaPlace who are likely to liven up a lot of the smaller races?

iainf72

hstiles wrote:

It's October and 2 Worldtour teams have folded, one failed to materialise and at least 2 pro continental teams have called it quits too.

So, it's a buyers market. Would you invest millions bringing in a rider with maybe a year left of his career who spent most of the previous season sidelined due to injury - Vuelta winner or not - or would you buy up some younger riders, such as Brammeier, Wurf or DelaPlace who are likely to liven up a lot of the smaller races?

I'd buy the person with the most WT point.

Crankbrother

I'm assuming Trek don't hold much stock in American GT winners at the moment ... and I can see why ... Better to pin your PR on a few classics wins 'til it/he gets forgotten about ...

Trouble is all the other American bike manufacturers have their poster boys so don't need another ... and surely BMC have learnt their lesson ...

RichN95.

iainf72 wrote:

hstiles wrote:

It's October and 2 Worldtour teams have folded, one failed to materialise and at least 2 pro continental teams have called it quits too.

So, it's a buyers market. Would you invest millions bringing in a rider with maybe a year left of his career who spent most of the previous season sidelined due to injury - Vuelta winner or not - or would you buy up some younger riders, such as Brammeier, Wurf or DelaPlace who are likely to liven up a lot of the smaller races?

I'd buy the person with the most WT point.

But this year there are enough WT licences to go around, so points aren't that important.

greasedscotsman

Horner kicking off on Twitter...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/horner- ... on-twitter

r0bh

At the least he learnt how to use hashtags halfway through so it wasn't an entirely pointless exercise!

Will.C

Not sure if this says more about the current state pro cycling that the most recent GT winner can't find a contract or is it that no pro team wants to go near him. Would be interesting to know why he's not getting it.

After writing that I realise that's probably what the last 6 pages discusses.

ad_snow

Don't know if this has been posted already but came across this fact today...

Chris Horner is older than every winner of La Vuelta since 1998.
And I'm not talking about the age they were when they won it.

Abraham Olano won it in 1998 and he is now 43. (Also an alleged ex-doper and recently fired from his position of 'technical director' at La Vuelta)

Paul 8v

Bloody hell, he's gone a bit Lance Armstrong on twitter. I wonder if he won't get a place due to the risk involved with re-employing him, his last win doesn't look "normal" and they may just avoid him just in case.

deejay

Paul 8v wrote:

I wonder if he won't get a place due to the risk involved with re-employing him, his last win doesn't look "normal" and they may just avoid him just in case.

Just goes to show how odd it appeared that he was able to imitate other "Out of the Saddle" Honkers who later had positive drug tests.
It is not just people on this forum who were Ill at ease with his performance but the Cycling World in general.

Crankbrother

Horner is struggling from GT winner's disease ...

Who was the last GT winner that gave VFM ... Contador (Trek/Spesh) then previously Armstrong (Trek) ... and we all know how that worked out ... (the other sponsors got what they wanted but didn't get the return of the bike manufacturers) ...

Wiggins, is a nuisance to the product rather than an ambassador ...

Nibs didn't shift any Italian gas or 'dales on the back of his win hence the shift to an oil rich country, Cobo/Ryder I'll leave you to make your own mind up ...

Froome seems to be a marketing bypass ...

So why would anyone invest?

tailwindhome

Dave (Dim) ‏@dimspace 15m
Europcar offered Chris Horner 750,000 Euro and he said no.. via @tourdejose Seriously Chris. Do one.

the Inner Ring ‏@inrng 1m
@dimspace @TourDeJose other way around, Horner is being offered to teams at €750k





José Been ‏@TourDeJose 13m
Europcar was offered Horner for €750.000 a year. They said NON http://www.sudouest.fr/2013/10/09/cycli ... 5-4596.php … (via the great @Biarnes72)

Yellow Peril

In these straightened times teams are not going to risk losing a sponsor when there is an abundance of riders looking for a team. Horner and LL Sanchez may not be the last to find themselves sans team