La Vuelta 2013 (24 Aug - 15 Sept) **SPOILERS**

[Pedrosanchezo]

Well he hasn't been caught doping yet many on here, and elsewhere, already have him as a doper. So he's guilty regardless.
How could he ever prove his innocence and silence the doubters? Simple, he can't.

Just watched the ITV highlights and a similar explanation was given in that you simply cannot, in this day and age, ride 2 or 3 grands tours and expect to win them all. A clean rider simply cannot recover in time to be at their best for the next - considering the conditioning and training required to be at peak for the duration. Horner was the freshest of the GC bunch.

Froome focussed his entire season solely on the Tour and dominated. IMO this makes the likes of Rodriguez just as suspicious as he consistently rides 2 GT's a season and still manages to podium on most. Or then there is Nico Roche who has managed a rather fantastic leap in form to finish top 5.
Or even Niballi, last season he was by no means as good as this season, especially time trialling - a sure sign of doping right? How about the way Valverde bonked and then all of a sudden started climbing like a man possessed? He also has previous and is another one who contests 2 or 3 GT's a season.
Then there is Quintana, well that must have raised a few eyebrows. His TDF performance was near unbelievable, he must have been on the juice. It just isn't possible to be that young and inexperienced and perform for 3 weeks at that level. He even beat Froome on the final mountain stage. Then there's Froome, many believe he is on some super undetectable drug which allows him to pull his scrawny body up the toughest of climbs with the craziest of cadence.

I am sure all of the riders i have mentioned have been talked about in this forum with regards to doping. Is this because the riders are likely doping or the mindset of many on forums is set to think this way as default?

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

Perhaps a sign of the times but wouldn't it be nice if people were innocent until proven otherwise.

 

[rich p]

Perhaps a sign of the times but wouldn't it be nice if people were innocent until proven otherwise.

I take it you missed the Armstrong years?

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

I take it you missed the Armstrong years?

Haha, no that didn't elude me.

Should the present and future of the sport be tarnished with the same brush?

If a mans wife is to cheat on him would that mean that any future wives should be accused of the same?

At some point we are going to have to trust the system in place.

 

[rich p]

Haha, no that didn't elude me.

Should the present and future of the sport be tarnished with the same brush?

If a mans wife is to cheat on him would that mean that any future wives should be accused of the same?

At some point we are going to have to trust the system in place.

It just means that you don't need court standard proof to 'know'. Some of us were convinced that LA was guilty for many, many years while others, even on this forum, were using the very same arguments that you're using to defend Horner.
That said, there's a slight difference in that the weight of evidence was more compelling against Armstrong but it's veering towards that end of the spectrum.
I won't give anyone the benefit of the doubt now if there's enough circumstantial evidence to build a case even without a positive result. If you recall, it wasn't even a positive that forced Armstrong to be exposed.

 

[ColinJ]

Perhaps a sign of the times but wouldn't it be nice if people were innocent until proven otherwise.

I think the strong suspicion is that Horner isn't really au fait with these times, and is still riding as if it were the 1990s!

If a man'wife is to cheat on him would that mean that any future wives should be accused of the same?

It's more a case of suspecting a man of cheating on his first wife, and then suspecting that he would probably cheat on any future wives too!

 

[Basil.B]

As Jens Voigt said - it's only a cycle race!

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

If you recall, it wasn't even a positive that forced Armstrong to be exposed.

I still think though that at some point we are going to have to trust the system in place to weed out the cheats and dopers. Do we not trust the bio passport? There have been instances of doping this season and we know this because of the measures in place to prevent it. Previously these cheats would likely have gone unnoticed or unpunished. Isn't this evidence that the system is working and worth trusting?

I think the strong suspicion is that Horner isn't really au fait with these times, and is still riding as if it were the 1990s!

It's more a case of suspecting a man of cheating on his first wife, and then suspecting that he would probably cheat on any future wives too!

I still feel that those who have a good knowledge of the history of the sport bring the history and all it's baggage into the modern era of cycling. Almost as if Armstrong and his era have damaged the reputation for good, with zero chance of recovery.
Truth is though that most of the greats have used drugs to enhance their performance. Even back to Coppi where he would openly talk about it as if it was the norm.

I just find it slightly depressing that every single thread on a race this season has been plagued by the "is he clean?" type comments.

 

[Basil.B]

Even the great Eddy Merckx failed a dope test in the 60's.

 

[threebikesmcginty]

I've all the proof I need, I saw him on the telly.

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

Even the great Eddy Merckx failed a dope test in the 60's.

Yeh like 3 times and those weren't exactly the most stringent of tests. Like so many others in the sport, he denied it always.

 

[thom]

This from the Science of Sport guy posting The Clinic

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1339454&postcount=1351

Sorry but it's hard not to discuss this, nor do I think we shouldn't.

I agree on this - for most people, the Science of Sport & InnrRng blogs are amongst the best informed comment out there, doing so on the basis of best attempts at obtaining the best available data.
The comments on personality are rather bewildering to me for such a serious accusation in my opinion.

 

[rich p]

I just find it slightly depressing that every single thread on a race this season has been plagued by the "is he clean?" type comments.

I can only recall serious doubts being voiced about Sayer in the Tour of Turkey until this Vuelta and we were soon vindicated on that one.

 

[gavroche]

Isn't it strange that cycling is always targeted for doping? It happens in probably most sports but no much is said about that, except maybe for athletics. I believe cycling is probably cleaner now than it has ever been, can the same be said for running, swimming, football etc....?

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

I can only recall serious doubts being voiced about Sayer in the Tour of Turkey until this Vuelta and we were soon vindicated on that one.

Niballi was questioned in the Giro as was Froome in the TDF.