You could argue Nicholas Roche has used the genetic advantage thing all his career.

I’ve heard his dad be very evasive when asked about doping – but being evasive is no evidence that you’ve doped only evidence that you know people have but may not want to name names. At Horners age we all know he must have been aware of doping but that’s not evidence of having taken part.

Perhaps what Horners win shows is that the competition aren’t what we thought they were now everything’s clean. 🙂

It matters because the same rules apply at all levels of the sport, not just to pros, and I don’t want to compete in a sport where doping is accepted or expected. The pros can’t get away with setting the wrong example for non pro racing, because you will end up with more Dan Staites.

Like WWF?

What have pandas got to do with this? 🙂

but being evasive is no evidence that you’ve doped only evidence that you know people have but may not want to name names. At Horners age we all know he must have been aware of doping but that’s not evidence of having taken part

I agree, but Rendell’s question was directly about Horner’s performance in this tour. Looking someone in the eye and saying you didnt dope might not convince everybody, but completely dodging the question won’t convince anybody. Whatever you think of Froome’s performance, he stuck his neck out by referencing being clean (“this jersey will stand the test of time”) in his winning speech.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/sep/16/chris-horner-vuelta-doping-test

Oh **** me. The Clinic Forum must be going mental.

The thing is, not a single one of the STW doping cynics has a clue whether Horner doped or not, you won’t until he fails a test or there is overwhelming evidence against him ( he hasn’t and there isn’t). But you go on and on about how he must have because blah, blah, blah. The same thing over and over again. Give the man credit and if in the future its shown that he was using PED’s criticise then. for the moment enjoy pro cycling for what it is or walk away.

just out of interest – no axe to grind either way

This was Monday evening. I’m guessing that any drug that would’ve benefited him in the GC would have to have been working on or before Sunday dinnertime (unless they were preparing him for a teamTT against Nibali into Madrid)

What drug would have still been detectable by Monday evening ?

Oh, just seen it was Monday morning 😳 – question stands, I guess

re-edit: Duuuuh, I’m a day out. He needed the benefit on Saturday dinnertime and missed a test Monday am

Oh, and IMO the answer to doping is to insist that all samples can be kept and tested indefintely into the future, with known clean controls taken at the same times and stored under the same conditions – or have they adopted this already ? (that x years rule was always kack)

Yep, they’re storing samples now. Problem is that Lance has shown that it’s more profitable to have doped and been caught than to never have doped.

A great ride from a man in his 40’s us old boys still have plenty of juice,if you know how to look after your body! How many of you can still wear the same jeans size you wore 20yrs ago?

Problem is that Lance has shown that it’s more profitable to have doped and been caught than to never have doped

Yeah, but LA is a major exception in financial terms and I suspect he really wanted to be sen to win rather than get rich (of course he was seen to win repeatedly but to now be formally recognised as a cheat must really hurt – god, I hope so)

UCI should ratify a form of words to be added to the record books when a name is expunged – a separate list just showing “disqualified, DOPER” or “DRUG CHEAT” with no hint of where they finished maybe ? (they can add an asterisk to some small print lower down that says some mealy-mouthed disclaimer but that would be good)

I still wear the jeans I wore 26 years ago. The style is a little dated but the belt is on the same hole.

1936 vertical metres/hour. That says more than a test ever will.

How many of you can still wear the same jeans size you wore 20yrs ago?

30 years for me, in fact I may be a little lighter at 48 than I was at 18.

Problem is that Lance has shown that it’s more profitable to have doped and been caught than to never have doped

Yeah, but LA is a major exception in financial terms and I suspect he really wanted to be sen to win rather than get rich

I’m not sure any of his doping cohorts, hincapie, leipheimer et al suffered financially from fessing up

Armstrong has over 125 million dollars in assets and about 127 million in law suits to fend off according to a TV programme I saw recently.

How many of you can still wear the same jeans size you wore 20yrs ago?

I can but I cannot ride as fast. I am older and less fit as that is simply what happens with age.

It’s just not credible what he did given his past form and the analysis of some of the climbs, he’s not just been quicker than the best of the peloton in this year’s race, he’s been significantly better than some of the best riders going off previous year’s times

Here a few thoughts Passed performance

He was 9 th in a grand tour riding for some else

Indurain was 10 th in the 1990 tour. If you watch it really looks like he would have one if he had not been ridding for Delgado. Also Horner needed a Tour with next to no time trialing

What the doubters really saying

Are you saying that Valverde and Rodriguz doped last year and not this year

Are you saying Chris use to dope but now dopes less and got faster. Which would seem odd. Or are you saying he was always clean and just started doping this year? He seems to have been used twice in the past as a bench mark for plausible power out put

Or are you just saying I’ll randomly fling mud about as he annoyed me

Annoyed final thought

I suppose the solution is to tell riders to finish in the order of the world rankings or something. That would save shutting all the roads as well.

I’m not sure Big Mig should be used as an example of why someone else didn’t dope.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-indurain-and-banesto-were-conconi-clients

And didn’t Delgado effectively get caught, then let off for taking a masking agent?

I’m not sure Big Mig should be used as an example of why someone else didn’t dope.

Just to beat that with a completely daft example:

(granted he had an injury but) The amount of time Horner had to prepare for this single long tour only really compares to a couple of riders, and Lance in particular. Maybe that’s what made the difference, assuming a level playing field in the actual race (all on or all off the juice) ?

Who knows whether either or both was off his tits on epo for all that training or if just the length of time was the key, or of course there could be no parallel to draw at all

Clean or not clean, it was still a brilliant vuelta and gives me hope as I’m 35!

Cycling is seen as a drug sport because the agencies are looking for it. Football is seen as clean but they don’t do the same level of testing.

It would be interesting if all footballers had to give their whereabouts every day and submit to the amount of tests as cycling.

There’s not a lot more the authorities can do in cycling to make it cleaner but when he misses a drug test it does raise my suspicions. I find it strange his team manager couldn’t get him on the phone and arrange a blood test at short notice, Madrid isn’t that big.

Does Dr Fuentes own a hotel in Madrid by any chance? Lol

Or are you just saying I’ll randomly fling mud about as he annoyed me

I am fairly sure the reasons have been articulated. Its rather ironic that you are the one flinging the mud here with that very weak point/claim 😕

The amount of time Horner had to prepare for this single long tour only really compares to a couple of riders,

So i could take a 56 year old then and with enough time they could win it?

I dont think we will know for sure but it is a remarkable achievement by and elder statesmen with little previous so it is bound to raise the suspicions. Its not conclusive though i think you would need to be a bit naive to not consider it.

Oh, I’m considering it – riding for his professional life, near enough to retirement that being caught might not really hurt him (esp as you can always write a book 🙄 ), major step up in results (though I don’t suppose he’s had a team really work for him before)

It just seems so blatant that it can’t be true, or else he’s on something brand new that they have no idea about and knows he won’t be found out for ages, if at all

Hmm, so blatant it can’t be true. The double bluff.

It would be interesting if all footballers had to give their whereabouts every day and submit to the amount of tests as cycling.

Why only soccer? Any professional sport.

I think 41 is quite young !!!

Looks like USADA has cleared Horner of the missed test and confirmed that the Spanish official went to the wrong hotel.

(granted he had an injury but) The amount of time Horner had to prepare for this single long tour only really compares to a couple of riders, and Lance in particular. Maybe that’s what made the difference, assuming a level playing field in the actual race (all on or all off the juice) ?

Did you read that link up there? The one which mentioned he’s only really had 4 weeks of proper training after getting the injury fixed. You can’t just ignore that.

Under what circumstances would someone have to win for the STW experts not think they are doping? .

American
Ex team mate of Armstrong
Ridden for Bruyneel
Rides for a team that has its roots in an Armstrong owned team
Never saw nuffing and not one of those who fessed up
Nearly 42 years old and in the form of his life beating off big hitters still in nappies when he turned pro.
.
.
.
Stinks to high heaven!

So….. my money is on him being clean! Only a complete and utter imbecile would put enough drugs in a 42 year old engine to make it perform like that, with that suspect a past, in this present suspicious climate and think it was a good idea that no one would doubt. And if you are that moronic I doubt you would have the wherewithal to dope cleverly enough not to get caught.

Did you read that link up there? The one which mentioned he’s only really had 4 weeks of proper training after getting the injury fixed. You can’t just ignore that

maybe it’s the “not racing” that matters most – and who knows what “not really training” involved in terms of level of effort

The bloke is also skinny as a rake; they say noticeably more than before

Never saw nuffing

that’s the bit I like least of all in this

Under what circumstances would someone have to win for the STW experts not think they are doping? .

less suspicious than this I would say – you?
FWIW I am usually saying what you are but these results are suspicious. As in out the norm for him , his training/rest/injury and a person of his age,

maybe it’s the “not racing” that matters most – and who knows what “not really training” involved in terms of level of effort

right so it s no longer the training he did for the tour but the rest he had oh and being skinny
I fear you may be clutching at straws a tad here.

taxi25 – Member
The thing is, not a single one of the STW doping cynics has a clue whether Horner doped or not, you won’t until he fails a test or there is overwhelming evidence against him ( he hasn’t and there isn’t). But you go on and on about how he must have because blah, blah, blah

Ive never understood why people join a thread to say they disagree with the point of the thread. Why read 5 pages to post you dont like the point of the conversation? I’m on the fence, have posted why I might believe and why I might not, and have returned to the thread because I’ve appreciated peoples points and counterpoints which have given me something to think about.

Cycling is seen as a drug sport because the agencies are looking for it.

interesting when 100m sprinters positive tests are reported in the media its almost apologetic in tone, and when tennis players fail the press and everybody accepts its accidental. If its a cyclist the assumption is they are a cheat and its indicative of the whole sport.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/10313784/Marin-Cilic-given-nine-month-ban-for-positive-drugs-test-after-taking-glucose-tablet.html

The bloke is also skinny as a rake

Like this?

convert – it’s a double bluff.

Cycling is seen as a drug sport because the agencies are looking for it.

I’m not sure that’s entirely true. The fact that there are plentiful records of drugs use in cycling stretching back to the 19th century might have something to do with it.

Ive never understood why people join a thread to say they disagree with the point of the thread

A public spirited need to help the hard of thinking?

I’m not sure that’s entirely true. The fact that there are plentiful records of drugs use in cycling stretching back to the 19th century might have something to do with it.

But I think the point he’s making is that all sports have the same history, particularly sports where endurance and recovery are key. The biggest thing is that cycling is far more visible. For example on the current violations list in the UK there are (not exhaustive list BTW):

46 athletes total
8 rugby
6 athletics
2 bobsleigh
2 football
1 cycling
1 wheelchair basketball

The cyclist is Marcel Six who refused to take a test due to a domestic “emergency”. Whether this was doping test avoidance is irrelevant, he got a ban anyway.

It shows that in the UK at least, there’s no large doping problem in cycling. Even in France there have been 400 investigations in total for doping since 2010, and only 35 resulted in any action against cyclists. Australia has 45 sanctioned athletes and 2 are cyclists.

Cycling being the sport of dopers is a populist myth created by a press that has an easy target and isn’t interested in looking at other sports when the lazy story is easily written.

So 400 investigations and 35 actions in France. How many investigations in the UK?

Doping isn’t a criminal offence in the UK as far as I know but it is in every country serious about drugs repression. The British police never investigate, the French police/gendarmes do; in the Uk it’s left to British Cycling officials who keep everything hush hush. Remember the Hayles >50% and the offical’s comment? Given the official didn’t follow Hayles 24/7 he had no idea if Hayles was doping or not but was very keen to say he was certain Hayles wasn’t. The medals tables for the Olympics are a good proxy for the countries where athletes dope most if you compare known historic practices with medals. I don’t think London was any different.

The BBC did a programme on the Atlanta games where there were only 2 positives because an IOC official “accidentally” shredded the rest of the results which would have been embarrassing for the host nation.

A rider in a European team told me Horner weighs 60kg, therefore he has great power to weight…a key part of his success.

I think that he has always been good, but now its a (more) level playing field and the real talent shines through.