So, seeing as any results are unlikely to be released before October, who's your money on?
Already hearing whispers about Contador…

Contador

Armstrong, the Shreks, Wiggins, Kloeden…all of them in fact.

Who has been doping or who will be caught? Only the stupid ones get caught.

I doubt there will be many caught ths year – they have the procedures so tight

Well Astarloza is already standing in the firing line – http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/aug/04/tour-de-france-mikel-astarloza-drugs

Sorry, but I just don't think Wiggins is a doper. He's been brought up in what I think is a clean system, rides for a team that does all it can to show it's clean and is very clear on his views on doping.

If that's right then it realistically opens up the possibility that at least some of the other contenders aren't cheating either (though I'm not commenting on whether they did in the past or not).

As to who the cheats are, well, who can say. Personally I've never trusted Contador but that's because of his links to Manolo Saiz though with all the failed tests after leaving the team, I suppose you could logically say the same about Bruyneel…

Whispers are just that – no one knows any facts.

Armstrong has always frustrated me – as a fan (and I know that sounds hopelessly sad), I want to believe the myth, but as far as I'm aware, the furthest he seems to go is saying he has never tested positive. Now is it just me, or is that a huge distance from saying 'I've never doped'?
Until there is more transparency in pro cycling, there are always going to be doubts,

Any rider from Spain.

Contador.

Sir Wiggo and King Lance have never let so much as a fruit pastille pass their lips nor have experienced more skin breakage than a nettle sting (drugs testers excluded). And if they have then I won't hear of it.

I think the Shreks just enjoy hurting an awful lot. I expect they're into severely heavy MS, especially Andy. Look at his face when he's climbing, he's in heaven!

I expect they're into severely heavy MS,

Marks and Spencers ??

Only the stupid ones get caught.

Don't agree with you on that now. I think in the past that was definitely true but with the targeted testing, I think it's changed from having to be stupid to simply having to be unlucky and with the number of tests they're doing now, you are likely to eventually be unlucky at least using the drugs of choice in the past.

I suspect that those that are still cheating are having to use less effective methods of doping that improve your chances of being unlucky though – eg microdosing EPO or small autologous blood injections.

Agreed with Clubber. I do trust Wiggins (and I'm sticking with that!), and using him as a benchmark it's by no means inconceivable that a fairly close race in the top 10 places was actually clean.

I do worry about Contador. The attacks at Arcalis and Verbier reminded me horribly of Ricco last year.

BD true about Contador and as I've said, I have my suspicions BUT the margin from Wiggo to AC wasn't that great really. When you consider that Wiggins is world class at 4 min efforts (eg track) it's unlikely that he's ever going to be the number 1 at riding 3 week tour type efforts. As such, the margin from him to Contador (let's say that he is naturally the best) isn't unreasonable. Of course, Contador's TTing ability does raise some questions but both ITTs included reasonable climbs in them.

When you consider that Wiggins is world class at 4 min efforts (eg track) it's unlikely that he's ever going to be the number 1 at riding 3 week tour type efforts

Yes but he has more or less dropped track completely to concentrate on stage racing, lost 7kg since Beijing, put in a good showing at the Giro – I reckon he'll be on the podium within 2 years.

As for the OP…
Difficult one really, procedures have been tightened dramatically but Contador's last TT where he beat Cancellara by a convincing margin seemed too good to be true.

but as far as I'm aware, the furthest he seems to go is saying he has never tested positive

Armstrong chooses his words carefully – he's said "I have never taken any illegal substances" which is a bit like Bill Clinton saying he never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky…
Of course, exactly where your definition of illegal substances falls is a slightly grey area. I'd like to believe that he has never doped but I DO believe he's maximised every possible grey area to it's fullest extent within the rules.

Yes but he has more or less dropped track completely to concentrate on stage racing, lost 7kg since Beijing, put in a good showing at the Giro – I reckon he'll be on the podium within 2 years.

True enough, I'm not suggesting that he's still trained for the track, but only that that's where he really was at his best and as such, IMO it's unlikely that he's also going to be the absolute best at 3 week tours (and especially the mountain stages) even if he's clearly damn good at them.

where he beat Cancellara by a convincing margin seemed too good to be true.

3 seconds isn't really convincing… anyway, there was a big (for an ITT) hill in the middle of it… if he'd been that close in a flat TT, well that would be quite different.

Wiggo is clean…deffo! he's looking into getting his blood profiles published back to 1999! not checked yet but 2009 figures will be on G-Slipstream site soon if not already…how many others will have the balls to match that

EDIT yep link was there…anybody question these?

http://www.slipstreamsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/brad-wiggins-blood-profile-3.pdf?

Contador does raise questions…interesting to see if he publishes anything!

Schlek brothers are mad…anyone who enjoys climbing that much should be sectioned!…not sure about the M&S connection though!

This is not just cycling … this is M&S cycling.

Does speculation like this help in anyway?

Cycling has a history of a drug problem going back many decades. The authorities are currently making an effort to clean the sport up. Given the history, a bit of healthy suspicion is no bad thing but to start casting doubt on individuals without good cause just degrades the efforts of the authorities and hence the whole event to my mind.

Surely we either have faith in the authorites to catch any cheats, or we assume the whole thing is a sham and don't follow the race as it isn't a fair competition?

I hope that the testing regime catches no-one and that this is considered PROOF that the competitors were clean and the race was fair. If that happens then this year's tour will go down as a great competition. I fear that even if no-one is caught the spevculation will remain. That's a shame.

Armstrong was on EPO, it was fairly conclusively proven a few years back. But as the test is more cicumstancial, it looks for a trend in EPO use rather than ourtight looking for EPO which is in the body anyway, it was fairly clear that he was injecting himself once every three days, not outright proof though, so his results will stand.

where he beat Cancellara by a convincing margin seemed too good to be true.

3 seconds isn't really convincing… anyway, there was a big (for an ITT) hill in the middle of it… if he'd been that close in a flat TT, well that would be quite different.

Even with a hill in it to beat Cancellara is a hell of a feat, the guy is an animal !!

I had my suspicions about Contador on the climb to Verbier and agree he had that look of Ricco about him.

Lemond and his cronies have some intereseting facts and figures on the VO2max that would be needed to make the climb, i cant find the article with the figures in it, but:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j4QybEAuuqMa6K4hxLocuLa6QQmQ

Yeah but Cancellara isn't really suited to 3 week tours BECAUSE he's such an animal – too solid – so he's always going to be relatively slower in the TT towards the end.

Lemond's article may well prove correct but the figures are a load of rubbish – assumptions of rider weight, altitude and so on make it inaccurate.

thisisnotaspoon – Member
Armstrong was on EPO, it was fairly conclusively proven a few years back……not outright proof though,

So, fair to say that it wasn't conclusively proven a few years back then?

Thisisnotaspoon – do you have a link to anything about that? I missed that concclusive proof completely.

Armstrong – lots of evidence – no proof. He also it would appear took stuff that was not banned when he took it but banned afterwards.

Never proven tho – but there is an awful lot of evidence from witness testimony, to circumstantial to flawed positive testing

He also it would appear took stuff that was not banned when he took it but banned afterwards.

Interested to hear what that is TJ – Can't think of anything myself – EPO was always banned (in the Armstrong era at least) as was HGH and the suggestions above are that if he did dope it was with EPO, not anything else.

He also it would appear took stuff that was not banned when he took it but banned afterwards.

World records have been tumbling in the pool at the worlds in Rome. Those records were broken in a suit which is not yet banned, but will be.

If he took something which was not banned at the time, so what? It wasn't banned. As long as he stopped taking it when it was banned, there's no foul.

What about riders who rode previous races with Spinnaci (spl?) bars? These are now banned, but does that mean when they rode with them and they were not banned, they were cheating?

Surely we either have faith in the authorites to catch any cheats, or we assume the whole thing is a sham and don't follow the race as it isn't a fair competition?

There is a third option, which many of us adopt I think. We watch and enjoy the race, and we are disappointed in the cheats who allow the drug-testing bores to wreck it.

I have no problem with watching bicycle races where some or all of the competitors are on drugs. They appear to be very entertaining. I dislike having the racing spoilt by the exposure of drug cheats by anti-doping officials. I don't care whether the dopers give up or the anti-dopers give up, but the current practice of having what are pretty much provisional results based on who crossed the line first, which are clarified weeks later when the tests are in won't do at all. Given that the anti-dopers show no signs of pissing off and shutting up I've a strong preference for the riders to stop doping.

🙂

Clubber – Not sure now what it was. Perhaps it was he was taking EPO when there was no test for it I think as shown in the retrospective ( and therefore invalid) testing in France.

I seem to remember something else as well but have no references One of the synthetic steriods?

Just really pisses me off when my heroes turn out to be cheats – there's always been a question mark about Armstrong, and despite wanting to beleve otherwise, there's no denying that he's an extremely paranoid and unpleasant individual at times. Ivan Basso – that one left me feeling really let down. Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis – far too obvious, and both resorted to desperate measures to try and clear their names. Gert-Jan Theunisse (that shows my age) – my hero for years, why didnt I realise at the time?
And still, we continue to follow the pro scene, trying to maintain our faith that our sporting heroes arent as flawed or corrupt as the media would have us believe.

World records have been tumbling in the pool at the worlds in Rome. Those records were broken in a suit which is not yet banned, but will be.

aye, it's all down to the suit. doping is only prevalent in cycling…;)

(I know that wasn't the point of your post – just annoying that in a certain sport quite unbelievable performance is attributed to an item of clothing, and no question marks raised at all in the press…)

BigDummy, yeah I agree. It is unfortunate that things have got so out of hand that the UCI had to resort to this 'provisional' results system. Like you, I watched and enjoyed theraceas it unfolded, and will be sorely dissapointed if subsequent tests reveal that some riders cheated.

AndyP, I completely agree with you – Operation Puerto threw up suspicion and speculation about a lot of other athletes, but for whatever reason, (as far as I'm aware), it was mainly the pro cyclists that were named – why is that?

As I recall, Lance had a positive test in his first come back tour. The test was from the prologue and was a type of steroid in a very very small amount. After investigation it was said to be from bottom boil cream.

The thing is I can't properly enjoy racing if I know there's cheating. For me, sport is about amazing performances that come from the people – more often the mental than physical actually but to me, any idiot can cheat, very few people can pull out amazing performances on their own.

Good point AndyP …operation Puerto sp? identified dopers from a range of sports including footie, tennis etc can't recall any repurcussions from those.

Barnsleymitch don't read Matt Rendells The Death of Marco Pantani then, pretty damning evidence of whole teams of riders implicating Roche etc.

Armstrongs blood data was criticised by some Aussie guy who related Heamatocrit levels to EPO usage, on examination the looked conclusive, ie very difficult to tamper with the samples to fake a positive result but again the only "positive sample" he's allegedly produced was a Bsample that had been tested without his consent, by a French lab with a vested interest (flogging the story to L'Equipe) in finding a positive result!

Innocent until PROVEN guilty has to give him the benefit of the doubt for me!

whytetrash – got it and read it – try 'bad blood' by Jeremy Whittle, that a sobering read as well. I'm always amazed by the way that doping is seen as almost a 'tradition' in pro cycling, and you only have to look at Armstrong's reaction to Filippo Simeoni in the 2004 tour to understand that 'spitting in the soup' is still not tolerated.

When Delgado won in '88 he tested positive (for a masking agent for steroids) that was not illegal until a week after the tour ended. He kept the race of course.

Think Lance used EPO, certainly banned drugs, as part of his receovery from cancer – used for their proper purpose. I am no medic and no idea how long traces or effects would remain in the body. STill want to believe in him. And sure as I can be that Wiggo is clean.

lance was up to his old tricks at the giro too, trying to bully Cunego like he did with Simeoni

Reading the posts on here, and in doing so rethinking my own position on this, makes me wonder why I remain a fan of Armstrong – maybe the naive part of me just wants to believe that someone could survive cancer and come back to dominate the sport as a great champion. I just wish he didnt come across as such a paranoid control freak all the time, though having said that, he did allow some human frailty to show through this year, when admitting that he just hadnt been strong enough to keep up with Contador.