How much could you benefit from a doped teamate?

dinyull
dinyull Posts: 2,979
edited November 2014 in Pro race
I'm sorry if this has been discussed before.

Reading the news on the 3rd Astana rider to test positive this year got me thinking about how much a team leader would benefit from a doped teamate. For eg, if Iglinsky was doping during the tour (not saying he was, just an example) how much benefit would that have been to Nibali? Thinking of all the work Astana did at the front of the peloton, chasing down attacks, bottle collecting etc.

Should the results of teamates also be disregarded? Would this help cut down on doping?

Comments

  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,689
    10%.

    Next question.
    _
  • dinyull
    dinyull Posts: 2,979
    Should the results of teamates also be disregarded?
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,689
    Nope.
    _
  • dinyull
    dinyull Posts: 2,979
    Even with that unfair 10% advantage?

    If this has been covered before please just tell me to feck off.
  • cougie
    cougie Posts: 22,512
    Its not gonna be anything like 10%. You'd think some advantage - but its going to be miniscule. Anyone got the tv coverage fancy going back and seeing how much work Iglinsky did on the front ?

    Nibs won it fair and square I reckon.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,689
    cougie wrote:
    Its not gonna be anything like 10%. .


    :|
    _
  • okgo
    okgo Posts: 4,368
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    cougie wrote:
    Its not gonna be anything like 10%. .


    :|

    He's right. 10% is silly.
    Blog on my first and now second season of proper riding/racing - www.firstseasonracing.com
  • ozzzyosborn206
    ozzzyosborn206 Posts: 1,340
    I would say lots, especially if you had several team mates juiced up, they could ride hard all day and everyone else team mates would cook themselves. I know you are looking at it from a Astana perspective but imagine a sprinters team being full of dopers, I'm not saying they were but think back to HTC when they controlled the whole peloton and dropped Cav off in the perfect position for the sprint, there is no doubt having a few domestics doped who could bring breaks back day after day and still pull in the finale would help massively
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,153
    Of course it depends what the domestique is doing. Iglinsky, for example, could easily be replaced by another rider - he was largely only there to make up the Kazakh quota.

    But having said that, it's 10%
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,689
    okgo wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    cougie wrote:
    Its not gonna be anything like 10%. .


    :|

    He's right. 10% is silly.

    :|:|
    _
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,689
    Fine.

    I give in.

    55%.
    _
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,153
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Fine.

    I give in.

    55%.
    I disagree. It's 10%
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • DeVlaeminck
    DeVlaeminck Posts: 8,744
    OK I'm gonna take the OP at face value and give them the obvious answer - it could be not at all or it could be the difference between winning the Tour and finishing several places lower - it all depends how the race plays out. In the hypothetical about Nibali - I'd have to watch the whole Tour again and I'm not going to - can't remember him doing anything crucial though so I'm going to have to go with "a very small amount".
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    cougie wrote:
    Its not gonna be anything like 10%. You'd think some advantage - but its going to be miniscule. Anyone got the tv coverage fancy going back and seeing how much work Iglinsky did on the front ?

    Nibs won it fair and square I reckon.

    MOD EDIT: Removed as potential for Libel!
  • Anonymous
    Anonymous Posts: 79,667
    Isn't that considered libel?
  • inseine
    inseine Posts: 5,786
    coriordan wrote:
    Isn't that considered libel?

    From the Bikeradar website guidelines....

    If you post material about doping or other cheating, please do not make allegations in your post. Please do not quote allegations from other sources. Every repetition of a libel is itself a fresh libel.
    http://cyclinganddesign.blogspot.fr/
  • Anonymous
    Anonymous Posts: 79,667
    So yes?
  • okgo
    okgo Posts: 4,368
    yes
    Blog on my first and now second season of proper riding/racing - www.firstseasonracing.com
  • salsiccia1
    salsiccia1 Posts: 3,725
    Joelsim wrote:
    cougie wrote:
    Its not gonna be anything like 10%. You'd think some advantage - but its going to be miniscule. Anyone got the tv coverage fancy going back and seeing how much work Iglinsky did on the front ?

    Nibs won it fair and square I reckon.

    MOD EDIT: Removed as potential for Libel!

    Again, I ask the question, why watch it then?
    It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.
  • salsiccia1
    salsiccia1 Posts: 3,725
    Back to the original question and the thought of penalising all the riders on the team, I think that's a really interesting point.

    Might retrospectively penalising every rider who rode the same race with a doper on their team 10 minutes overall and 3 places on every stage (or 3 places in single day races) for each race they competed in together be effective? Would it be fair? Might it focus teams' attention on making sure all the riders on their team stop being stupid?
    It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.
  • Lanterne_Rogue
    Lanterne_Rogue Posts: 4,091
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    10%.

    Next question.

    Have you learnt nothing from Veyer? Even if you're pulling a figure out your arse, pull it out to as many significant figures as you think you can get away with to make it look more 'real'.

    9.9739%
    Twitter: @canocola @thedreadships

Categories