Will Horner get a new contract for 2014

ddraver

Doping only matters if it's Sky

jerry3571

ddraver wrote:

Doping only matters if it's Sky

The new conflict of interest now is Brian Cookson of UK Cycling/Sky being the President of the UCI. Now i would say that puts Sky and Cookson in a friendly position but I digress.

No one can ever say someone is doping or not when it's not been proven. We can look at the figures and squabble but a better way to judge "the present" is by the past and cycling has a long past. At a particular time, does anyone watching think that the present crop of riders is doping. I think most people don't because they will feel fooled and stupid but each generation of top cyclist have doped; the 1950's, 60's 70's 80's to the present; all the way through for over a Century. Just because there are passports and blood analysis only means that Cyclists have had to curb their behaviour but not to stop doping all together. For us to discuss watts per kilo over a certain distance is bull. These are discussions for people who know a lot more than us. Freak results, like I have mentioned, are for the Muppets who go overboard (Schumacher and Landis et al) and have a greater chance of getting caught. This is what Horner is up against. I think Sponsors are afraid that he's pulled a fast one and, in time, he'll get a 2 year ban which will mean retirement but also Bad Publicity for his new Sponsor. Usually a Grand Tour win means big bucks and a few years of job security; not with Horner though and I think Sponsors smell a rat.
I must say that the people on here are the only people who think that "THEIR" top Cyclists don't dope; everyone else in the population thinks that Cycle Racing stinks. I think you can only love cycling when you embrace the sport for all it's good and all it's bad. Saying that Sky or whoever is clean is a total joke and in time, if we're lucky, we may find out.
In years to come we "may" know what "OUR" present crop of riders are really up to.

PS- Anyone who watches Cycling and only watch because it's clean must be a newbie or are be deluded. My first Tour on telly had Delgado in trouble and Gert Jan Theunisse in the dog house for naughties.

PPS- This is all a bit like me and you sat in a pub seeing your Mrs cop off with a bloke and then you go home and think she's bees knees. She's a bad one; just admit it!!!
It's all looney tunes on here!

ddraver

jerry3571 wrote:

a better way to judge "the present" is by the past and cycling has a long past.

You'd make a terrible geologist...

chrisday

Macaloon wrote:

Maybe we need an off-season doping latrine where the incontinent can relieve themselves.

Not just a "coffee out of nose" moment, but I think winner of "line of the year". For me, even beats "ECHELONS - THIS IS NOT A DRILL"

Richmond Racer

Macaloon wrote:

I've followed this thread fairly closely, yet I fail to understand how Froome's time up Ax 3 has a bearing on Horner's 2014 contract. Are some of you people Republican Congressmen? Maybe we need an off-season doping latrine where the incontinent can relieve themselves.

Nice one, Maca

Paul 8v

chrisday wrote:

Macaloon wrote:

Maybe we need an off-season doping latrine where the incontinent can relieve themselves.

Not just a "coffee out of nose" moment, but I think winner of "line of the year". For me, even beats "ECHELONS - THIS IS NOT A DRILL"

That was great

mechanism

The latest news is that there is no news

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/15653/Trek-still-leaves-possibility-open-that-Horner-could-join-team.aspx

andyp

Horner has just tweeted this;

"Thanks to the staff, riders, and sponsors at @RSLT for a great four years. I'll be going somewhere else for 2014."

morstar

andyp wrote:

Horner has just tweeted this;

"Thanks to the staff, riders, and sponsors at @RSLT for a great four years. I'll be going somewhere else for 2014."

Well if he hasn't got pen on paper then that's a bold move.

Crankbrother

Trek is starting to look like an 'eggs all in one basket' team much like Cannondale ...

Macaloon

I don't get the incredulity greeting the rumour that Horner's camp values his services at $1m.

If you're one of the many who think he robbed his Vuelta win, why would you give him a contract in the first place. If you're filling-out your super-dom roster, you'd hardly look at a 42 yo. Again no contract. The only reason to hire him at all is you think he'll give your team a competitive Tour GC podium story.

Discounting for the risk of past indiscretions coming to light, how is this not worth $1m to a brand like Trek?

RichN95.

Macaloon wrote:

I don't get the incredulity greeting the rumour that Horner's camp values his services at $1m.

If you're one of the many who think he robbed his Vuelta win, why would you give him a contract in the first place. If you're filling-out your super-dom roster, you'd hardly look at a 42 yo. Again no contract. The only reason to hire him at all is you think he'll give your team a competitive Tour GC podium story.

Discounting for the risk of past indiscretions coming to light, how is this not worth $1m to a brand like Trek?

The problem is that most of the wheeling and dealing is done at the Tour de France and back then Horner was a 41 year old who could get a decent result here and there - not a Grand Tour winner. By the time he became one, most of the rosters had been filled so no-one had a spare $1m knocking about. To get that sort of money he would need to bring some sponsorship to the team himself.

Macaloon

RichN95 wrote:

The problem is that most of the wheeling and dealing is done at the Tour de France and back then Horner was a 41 year old who could get a decent result here and there - not a Grand Tour winner. By the time he became one, most of the rosters had been filled so no-one had a spare $1m knocking about. To get that sort of money he would need to bring some sponsorship to the team himself.

I get that it makes no sense for an established team. When you're forming a 'new' one, and assuming Trek aren't operating a shoestring budget, I don't see it as a ludicrous sum if you're going to take him on at all.

Richmond Racer

Macaloon wrote:

I don't get the incredulity greeting the rumour that Horner's camp values his services at $1m.

If you're one of the many who think he robbed his Vuelta win, why would you give him a contract in the first place. If you're filling-out your super-dom roster, you'd hardly look at a 42 yo. Again no contract. The only reason to hire him at all is you think he'll give your team a competitive Tour GC podium story.

Discounting for the risk of past indiscretions coming to light, how is this not worth $1m to a brand like Trek?

Well, it seems that the Schlecks have had to take a pay cut. I dont think Trek are chucking the money around for any of their riders tbh (except Fabs no doubt). And day by day, with it being so heavily a buyer's market, un-signed riders values are plummeting. INRNG tweeted last night that riders who'd been offered contracts for 200k in the summer but had hesitated, are now snapping up 40k contracts.

I'd also hazard a guess that there are some doubts in the Trek camp about Horner. Never mind the Vuelta performance, the rider 15 thing aint gonna go away, and USADA have a number of cases still open and pending.

Lets face it, Trek have already backed one big US GT winner who's been exposed. I think they'd be thinking twice about another big US GT winner - from that same vintage. On the risk scale...pretty high.

Macaloon

Richmond Racer wrote:

Well, it seems that the Schlecks have had to take a pay cut. I dont think Trek are chucking the money around for any of their riders tbh (except Fabs no doubt). And day by day, with it being so heavily a buyer's market, un-signed riders values are plummeting. INRNG tweeted last night that riders who'd been offered contracts for 200k in the summer but had hesitated, are now snapping up 40k contracts.

I'd also hazard a guess that there are some doubts in the Trek camp about Horner. Never mind the Vuelta performance, the rider 15 thing aint gonna go away, and USADA have a number of cases still open and pending.

Lets face it, Trek have already backed one big US GT winner who's been exposed. I think they'd be thinking twice about another big US GT winner - from that same vintage. On the risk scale...pretty high.

I completely get this too. But...
- how many genuine (on 2012 form) Tour podium contenders are on the market?
- if you're genuinely concerned about rider 15, why hire him at any price?

Richmond Racer

Macaloon wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

Well, it seems that the Schlecks have had to take a pay cut. I dont think Trek are chucking the money around for any of their riders tbh (except Fabs no doubt). And day by day, with it being so heavily a buyer's market, un-signed riders values are plummeting. INRNG tweeted last night that riders who'd been offered contracts for 200k in the summer but had hesitated, are now snapping up 40k contracts.

I'd also hazard a guess that there are some doubts in the Trek camp about Horner. Never mind the Vuelta performance, the rider 15 thing aint gonna go away, and USADA have a number of cases still open and pending.

Lets face it, Trek have already backed one big US GT winner who's been exposed. I think they'd be thinking twice about another big US GT winner - from that same vintage. On the risk scale...pretty high.

I completely get this too. But...
- how many genuine (on 2012 form) Tour podium contenders are on the market?
- if you're genuinely concerned about rider 15, why hire him at any price?

We dont know for sure that Trek were serious about re-signing him, at any price. The language in their quotes in articles about being in discussion/negotiation, is a bit vague, no?

I reckon that for Trek for next year, for all the guff about Frandy, its about backing Fabs for a repeat of 2013, developing talents like Jungels, and seeing if the likes of Bakelants can build on his performance this year.

Macaloon

Richmond Racer wrote:

We dont know for sure that Trek were serious about re-signing him, at any price. The language in their quotes in articles about being in discussion/negotiation, is a bit vague, no?

I reckon that for Trek for next year, for all the guff about Frandy, its about backing Fabs for a repeat of 2013, developing talents like Jungels, and seeing if the likes of Bakelants can build on his performance this year.

If "the contract is on the table" in the same sense that "the numbers have never been better" then it all makes sense.

Richmond Racer

Macaloon wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

We dont know for sure that Trek were serious about re-signing him, at any price. The language in their quotes in articles about being in discussion/negotiation, is a bit vague, no?

I reckon that for Trek for next year, for all the guff about Frandy, its about backing Fabs for a repeat of 2013, developing talents like Jungels, and seeing if the likes of Bakelants can build on his performance this year.

If "the contract is on the table" in the same sense that "the numbers have never been better" then it all makes sense.

Arf!

andyp

Richmond Racer wrote:

I reckon that for Trek for next year, for all the guff about Frandy, its about backing Fabs for a repeat of 2013, developing talents like Jungels, and seeing if the likes of Bakelants can build on his performance this year.

Let's hope they aren't hoping for that from Bakelants, as they'll be very disappointed.

Richmond Racer

andyp wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

I reckon that for Trek for next year, for all the guff about Frandy, its about backing Fabs for a repeat of 2013, developing talents like Jungels, and seeing if the likes of Bakelants can build on his performance this year.

Let's hope they aren't hoping for that from Bakelants, as they'll be very disappointed.

You think he's a single purple patch wonder?

andyp

Not at all. I think he'll be a big hit at OPQS next season.

Richmond Racer

andyp wrote:

Not at all. I think he'll be a big hit at OPQS next season.

OH THE SHAME OF IT :oops: :oops:

jimmythecuckoo

So Horner then... The ageing possible doper without a team.

There are a whole host of factors as to why he finds himself where he is at.

Perversely, if he had ridden strongly in the Vuelta but not had the cheek to win it, we might have seen more interested parties and a better deal for him.

He has been too good whilst being too old and on Radioshack. Most sensible people wont touch him.

andyp

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

So Horner then... The ageing possible doper without a team.

There are a whole host of factors as to why he finds himself where he is at.

Perversely, if he had ridden strongly in the Vuelta but not had the cheek to win it, we might have seen more interested parties and a better deal for him.

He has been too good whilst being too old and on Radioshack. Most sensible people wont touch him.

How do we know he is without a team?

As for your last comment, how many sensible people are there running pro cycling teams? You could count them on the fingers of one hand, that's for sure.

Macaloon

"Bio passport expert raises concerns about Horner’s published biological passport values"

Leaving aside whether this analysis is accurate or not, how the hell does an actual member of the expert panel going off the reservation, dissecting your profile in public, encourage teams to be transparent and open with any of their data which may be open to interpretation? Bonkers.

Wonder if this guys has heard of David Walsh?

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/15660/Bio-passport-expert-raises-concerns-about-Horners-published-biological-passport-values.aspx

'Given the data release was public and thus open to verification, VeloNation contacted Parisotto for his opinion. He is part of the nine-member anti-doping expert panel which previously worked with the UCI – and now works with the Athlete Passport Management Unit [APMU] in Lausanne – to examine the blood profiles of riders.

"His response was in an individual capacity rather than as a member of that panel. “My position is that if this data is on the public record, then as a member of the public I think I have a right to comment on it,” he said.'

jimmythecuckoo

andyp wrote:

How do we know he is without a team?

As for your last comment, how many sensible people are there running pro cycling teams? You could count them on the fingers of one hand, that's for sure.

I read earlier in the thread there was going to be an announcement but if there has, I missed it.

My sensible nature must be the exception in cycling. You would imagine a Vuelta winner wanting more than a 1 year contract, but his age would count against that.

IMO.

iainf72

Macaloon wrote:

"Bio passport expert raises concerns about Horner’s published biological passport values"

Leaving aside whether this analysis is accurate or not, how the hell does an actual member of the expert panel going off the reservation, dissecting your profile in public, encourage teams to be transparent and open with any of their data which may be open to interpretation? Bonkers.

Do you think Velonation would have published it if Robin has said "nothing to see here, move along"?

But it's very unprofessional. Imagine if someone was on jury during a trial, and they commented publicly on something involving their case which was in the newspaper.

frisbee

iainf72 wrote:

Macaloon wrote:

"Bio passport expert raises concerns about Horner’s published biological passport values"

Leaving aside whether this analysis is accurate or not, how the hell does an actual member of the expert panel going off the reservation, dissecting your profile in public, encourage teams to be transparent and open with any of their data which may be open to interpretation? Bonkers.

Do you think Velonation would have published it if Robin has said "nothing to see here, move along"?

But it's very unprofessional. Imagine if someone was on jury during a trial, and they commented publicly on something involving their case which was in the newspaper.

He's an idiot, he's not a member of the public in this matter. From his comments he also suggests that his analysis of biological passport data is qualitative rather than quantitative, by making his personal opinion public Horner's lawyer would have a field day.

RichN95.

iainf72 wrote:

Do you think Velonation would have published it if Robin has said "nothing to see here, move along"?

But it's very unprofessional. Imagine if someone was on jury during a trial, and they commented publicly on something involving their case which was in the newspaper.

Also, how many experts did Velonation have to go through before finding one who said enough to formulate a negative story? I mean, it's been four weeks since Horner did this and it's not one of the media's usual go-to experts. But I guess that's data that won't be released.

r0bh

This just adds to the weight of evidence that making blood profile data public is a terrible idea.