Cadel Evans, a winner we can trust.

[Smokin Joe]

And then you lose your entire team and not just one rider.

But the point is that domestiques don't get tested as much as top finishers. And I believe mangaman's entirely ficticious

team would have such a sophisticated doping programme that they would be able to avoid detection.

 

[Telemark]

To spin this tale further ... the leader of that hypothetical super-charged team would be able to cycle entirely clean himself, and if any or all of the domestiques were busted for doping, the leader could get away with "woe me, I never knew anything, I won it fair & square" ....


T

P.S. It would be a shame if he couldn't keep up with the domestiques, though

 

[beastie]

I used to think that great natural talents like Usain Bolt had no need for doping. He has always won, he has always been great, so he doesn't need find that extra percent.The athletes whom thought most likely to dope were the ones who having tried and trained to the best of their ability still came just short of their ambitions.
.In cycling terms I thought that Contador and Andy Schleck were both so good so young that there was little chance of them using peds. Not so sure now, in fact I am sure about Bertie - ever since his TT performance in winning tour in 2009. Hhmmm

 

[tigger]

I like to think the Schlecks are clean,

Would that be the same Schlecks who paid money into Dr Ferrari's bank account?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Anyone might be clean once they got to the top, but were they clean on the way up, all the way, every day?

 

[mangaman]

But the point is that domestiques don't get tested as much as top finishers. And I believe mangaman's entirely ficticious

team would have such a sophisticated doping programme that they would be able to avoid detection.

My hypothetical team

concentrate on masking doping / doping all domestiques for one race for 3 weeks of the year and more or less ignore the rest of the year.

Money can buy anything - my hypothetical team leader (let's call him Vince) even gave a large sum of money to the UCI "to tackle doping".

The team, by not competing seriously in the classics/other grand tours - can pay for the best dopage-evasion at the TDF.

And - as Joe says, domestiques relatively rarely get tested.

 

[festival]

They are all dopers

Would you like to expand on your comment.
Frankly, I don't have any heroes but my view is, at this time, many have doped if only occasionally and a minority who can afford it systematically do it through out their careers.
I think I understand your point but its sad, you may as well just watch a video game.

 

[festival]

Why Cadel Evans festival?

I can't see he's any different from anyone else

I have no heroes, but Evans works hard at what talent he has and seems genuine, I could be wrong.

 

[fungus]

Would that be the same Schlecks who paid money into Dr Ferrari's bank account?

I thank you!!! Tigger

I'm clean unless Banks's bitter or Marston's pedigree has crept on to the band list

 

[Dave_1]

he's been a pro since what..2000? or 2001 and not one bad story re drugs...so my hunch is he is clean. Perfect TDF progress trajectory, never mentioned in the T mobile drug regimen Sinkewitz blew lid off. basso, Contador, Ullrich, they all get caught at some point by the law of averages...so the fact he hasn't must mean something.

 

[iAmiAdam]

Would that be the same Schlecks who paid money into Dr Ferrari's bank account?

They're not silly, they'd of known it'd be suspicious so obviously not for doping imo.

 

[dellzeqq]

I think it was the video that Dave1 posted a couple of weeks ago that did it. I found it very creepy, even deeply disturbing.

http://www.youtube.c...eature=youtu.be

I've just watched the video (for which many thanks) and came to the opposite conclusion. It confirms my thought that the Schlecks are some kind of throwback to the 50s, or even the 30s in a Swallows and Amazons kind of way

 

[Dave5N]

I like to think the Schlecks are clean, as is Cav, Wiggo, Evans, Cancellara etc. and I trust the hundreds of domestiques.

Hahahahahahahahaha



ha

 

[PaulB]

Until fairly recently, I was naive on the doping in cycling issue. Different now, though. I've just finished my fifth consecutive book specifically on doping, or touching on doping in cycling and have to say that I trust very few of the current pros on the circuit, having availed myself of the available information on the subject in the sport. Examining the rationale for the existence of the books I've read shows differing reasons for their publication and most certainly no concerted effort to expose the pharmaceutical abuse issue in the sport.

From what I've read, I'd say the last TdF winner we KNOW to be clean was....Greg LeMond. Yes, it was pretty much that far back and we absolutely know that even prior to him there were many doped winners.

One known clean rider who comes out as being vociferously anti-drugs from the 'golden age' was Charlie Mottet and I'd like to see an award named after him. I'd like to see more riders strive to attain outstanding results on natural ability allied only to training regimes and nutritional intake like Charlie did.

I care nothing any more for those 'golden boys' who leave you full of admiration and wonderment at their performances only to be later revealed as being more successful at beating the testers than the terrain. In future, I'll watch the big three tours as travelogs showing magnificent scenery and revealing the history of the places en-route.

 

[raindog]

How do "we KNOW" LeMond was clean? Alot of people would disagree with you there.