Astana
Comments
-
Well, that's quite a postulate.0
-
surely we all know every rider dopes anywaySupermurph09 wrote:Putting the ruling to one side, why is nobody asking the question as to why "clean" teams are beating a "doped" Astana?
Oh no this isn't the asylum
0 -
ThomThom wrote:Well, that's quite a postulate.
Think the Welsh wizard is referring to the marginal gains available from doping within the limits allowed by the biological passport. JTL, perhaps, showing what's possible without the passport handicap.
If there's an Aru passport case in the pipeline, does this violate Astana's probation?...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
RichN95 wrote:'Calling out' another rider is all well and good if you are sure of your information. But if that's the case then it will become public in due time. So why get involved? If it doesn't then that's when you speak out.
Two words of warning to those tweeting damaging rumours: Lord McAlpine.
We shall see what happens, but I wouldn't recommend others following Henderson's lead.
Might be a stupid question (if so apologies), but is there some sort of anonymous whistleblowing line for this kind of thing?0 -
There used to be a (much mocked) UCI doping hotline, but I don't know if this is still around. In reality it's not hard to set up an anonymous e-mail account and e-mail the UCI, WADA etc.bobmcstuff wrote:RichN95 wrote:'Calling out' another rider is all well and good if you are sure of your information. But if that's the case then it will become public in due time. So why get involved? If it doesn't then that's when you speak out.
Two words of warning to those tweeting damaging rumours: Lord McAlpine.
We shall see what happens, but I wouldn't recommend others following Henderson's lead.
Might be a stupid question (if so apologies), but is there some sort of anonymous whistleblowing line for this kind of thing?
Really it's the sort of thing that the MPCC would be doing if they were of any use, but they're to busy building rickity pedestals to put themselves on (and are not really there to serve the interests of cyclists anyway).Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
Because the doped riders at Astana are actually very average riders and Astana are a bit of a shambles as a team. Doping doesn't make you automatically better than all the clean riders.The gains available these days are pretty small.Supermurph09 wrote:Putting the ruling to one side, why is nobody asking the question as to why "clean" teams are beating a "doped" Astana?
In the past doping may have taken a rider from 20th place to the podium. Now it will take them the 18th place.
Froome's final position on GC in Grand Tours until his transformation: 83-34-DSQ-2
Wiggins": 123-121-Abandon-134-69-3
Cobo scored a grand total of 0 CQ points in 2010 before going on to win the Vuelta in 2011.
Sayar's CQ ranking in 2012 was 1501st before he came 2nd at the Tour d'Algerie and won the Tour of Turkey in 2013.
Horner won the Vuelta at the age of the 41 (record) even though his previous best GT finish was 9th.0 -
didn't some American have a bad record before suddenly winning the TdF0
-
And all those improvements are down to doping are they? Maybe some were.CCalculus wrote:
Froome's final position on GC in Grand Tours until his transformation: 83-34-DSQ-2
Wiggins": 123-121-Abandon-134-69-3
Cobo scored a grand total of 0 CQ points in 2010 before going on to win the Vuelta in 2011.
Sayar's CQ ranking in 2012 was 1501st before he came 2nd at the Tour d'Algerie and won the Tour of Turkey in 2013.
Horner won the Vuelta at the age of the 41 (record) even though his previous best GT finish was 9th.
Let's take look at them individually.
Froome: His first two GTs were in his two seasons as a pro. Adam Yates is tipped a GC contender of the future yet he came 82nd in his first GT. Froome was actually similarly tipped for big things in his debut year.
Wiggins: Basically a part time roadie before 2009.
Cobo: Suffered from serious mental health issues in 2010. He was top ten in the Vuelta in 2009. 2010 was the out of place year, not 2011. (But as he was part of the 2008 Saunier Duval tour team I'm not going to put up too much of a fight for him)
Sayar: Yeah, he doped. But the's a continental rider - no bio passport.
Horner: May well have doped. But if it's just dope where are all the other 41 year old contenders?
So here's the question. If these transformations (and let's focus on Froome and Wiggins) are down to doping, then why are they the only ones? Shouldn't there be lots of them? Or have they, in actual fact, had more unique changes due to more unique circumstances.
Where are the similarly dramatic changes amongst those we have know to have doped (in the bio passport era)?Twitter: @RichN950 -
-
i'm sure there are others with ust as good a CV. Wasn't his first year pro in the states anyway with less competition.RichN95 wrote:
Here's something about Armstrong that people won't say these days as it's not PC. But in my nearly 30 years of watching this sport, he was probably the best first year pro I've seen.sherer wrote:didn't some American have a bad record before suddenly winning the TdF
Sagan and Kwiatkowski both had pretty decent first years as well0 -
First full year - 1993. (He did the last couple of months of 1992, post Olympics)sherer wrote:
i'm sure there are others with ust as good a CV. Wasn't his first year pro in the states anyway with less competition.RichN95 wrote:
Here's something about Armstrong that people won't say these days as it's not PC. But in my nearly 30 years of watching this sport, he was probably the best first year pro I've seen.sherer wrote:didn't some American have a bad record before suddenly winning the TdF
Sagan and Kwiatkowski both had pretty decent first years as well
He was World Champion, US Champion, Tour stage winner, winner of a pile of races in America. Even a top ten in Paris-Nice.
Sagan won some stages in Paris-Nice and California. No-one even remembers Kwiatkowski's year at Radioshack (won nothing).Twitter: @RichN950
