# So, are we just going to ignore Horner's amazing performance at the Vuelta?



## eyebob

It's been kinda quiet around here (unless I missed it) that there has been little Horner talk. 42 and climbing like that? Against known cheats?

Dunno.

BT


----------



## den bakker

eyebob said:


> It's been kinda quiet around here (unless I missed it) that there has been little Horner talk. 42 and climbing like that? Against known cheats?
> 
> Dunno.
> 
> BT


in miracles you don't believe?


----------



## jspharmd

Eyebob. You really have to ask this?

We all want to believe that none of the pros cheat...except the ones we hate. 

It's easy to see why people could hate Lance, or Contador, or Ricco, but who could hate Chris Horner? Everywhere I look I see stories about how nice he is to everyone. He is a genuinely good person (at least based on the stories I read/hear). So, nobody wants to believe he could be cheating. Thus, no postings on here when Chris Horner looks fantastic in a hard race at 42 years old.

This must mean you don't like Horner.


----------



## Slartibartfast

Few care about Horner; and those who do, like him. A lot of us probably aren't paying much attention to the Vuelta, either. When I heard about his wins in the Vuelta, I assumed he was doping. I've always assumed he was doping.

Simple as that.


----------



## Local Hero

Why would Horner cheat after the message USADA sent to cycling?


----------



## spade2you

eyebob said:


> It's been kinda quiet around here (unless I missed it) that there has been little Horner talk. 42 and climbing like that? Against known cheats?
> 
> Dunno.
> 
> BT


What are you talking about? His competition is clean. :idea:


----------



## terzo rene

Would love to see his biopassport data - it's rumored to be thrill ride - but it's hard to care about anyone at this point. When no race result is permanent it's hard to root for or against anyone. Sports need to have winners and losers to be engaging and that element has been removed in the current environment.

Horner's wattage numbers aren't that inhuman but he certainly appears to be the most blatant in the Vuelta but he also has nothing to lose at his age so it's a sensible risk on his part. Even a lifetime ban would be meaningless and if not caught, which is fairly likely if he does the blood bags/epo properly, he's a champion at a record age. Almost as good of a story as Lance post cancer, so from a UCI marketing perspective he's probably hands off too. 

It's going to be interesting to see what excuses are trotted out for not going retro with the blood bag test when it's finally approved because there would be a lot of empty spots or asterisks in the current "clean" era.


----------



## bikerjulio

I can't find it now, but I'm sure I remember a magazine article sometime this year where he said that he'd never failed a drug test. So that should settle it - right?


----------



## The Tedinator

Bah. Even if he did dope, we *know* he stopped along with everybody else in 2006.


----------



## cyclesport45

He must eat a lot of that Spanish beef.


----------



## Dave Cutter

spade2you said:


> What are you talking about? His competition is clean.


I am in complete agreement! The cheater was caught... he even confessed on TV. The goddess (of daytime TV) forgave him... and now it's over. The sport is once again completely clean.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

cyclesport45 said:


> He must eat a lot of that Spanish beef.


And beetroot juice, lots of it


----------



## rcharrette

I'm pretty pessimistic as to the cleanliness of riders for sure. However I will say in Horners defense that the other top contenders (Nebali, Valverde, etc) don't seem to take him to seriously and do not seem to want to expend the energy to chase him down. They seem to wait when he attacks and look at each other and no one reacts until it's too late.


----------



## Atty

Of course it will be ignored. He isn't British and doesn't ride for Sky.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

Well the whole time I'm watching I'm thinking either he is doping or he had the most natural talent of anyone and spent the last 20 years in relative obscurity getting beat by doped riders whenever he went to the big leagues.

Those aren't the only options but they're the ones that come to mind.


----------



## Opus51569

terzo rene said:


> but it's hard to care about anyone at this point. When no race result is permanent it's hard to root for or against anyone. Sports need to have winners and losers to be engaging and that element has been removed in the current environment.


Good point. Sadly, races aren't over anymore until the test results are in.


----------



## irish

To steal Race Radio's tag line on Twitter:

Pro Cycling is like sausage, I love it but I don't want to know how it is made.


----------



## sir duke

He's as clean as Froome...whatever that means.


----------



## love4himies

sir duke said:


> He's as clean as Froome...whatever that means.


Funny you should say that. My impression while watching him was the same as when I was watching Froome in the Tour. Either they are both having fantastic seasons and are on top of their game and their stars are perfectly aligned giving them a super human year or ...


----------



## sir duke

love4himies said:


> Funny you should say that. My impression while watching him was the same as when I was watching Froome in the Tour. Either they are both having fantastic seasons and are on top of their game and their stars are perfectly aligned giving them a super human year or ...


I haven't seen any of the Vuelta so I don't really know how Horner has approached the race but for a man of his age to find himself dropping people like Nibali and Rodriguez on mountain stages is stretching it. Plenty of people cried 'not normal' on this forum when 28 year old Froome was dropping Contador day in day out. So to see Horner come from nowhere to perform like this? You gotta be fecking kiddin' me!


----------



## Dwayne Barry

sir duke said:


> I haven't seen any of the Vuelta so I don't really know how Horner has approached the race but for a man of his age to find himself dropping people like Nibali and Rodriguez on mountain stages is stretching it. Plenty of people cried 'not normal' on this forum when 28 year old Froome was dropping Contador day in day out. So to see Horner come from nowhere to perform like this? You gotta be fecking kiddin' me!


In fairness they let him go as they marked one another but when Nibali did go and the others chased they made little if any impression on the lead Horner had established. I imagine if it weren't for this tactical advantage he would have finished there or there abouts with the front group.


----------



## Local Hero

winning = doping


----------



## coldash

As mentioned by someone in the Pro cycling section, when Nibali attacked full gas, he was 45 seconds behind Horner. At the finish Horner had increased his lead to 48 seconds!

No es possible, you might think.


----------



## mpre53

No one's ignoring it, everyone's thinking it, but I think we're at the point where we realize that arguing about it is pointless. UCI has no desire to clean things up, and only morons get caught nowadays. It's like any other test---you fail because you're a dumbass. What more needs to be said?

Hey, I'm sorry I don't believe in miracles.


----------



## sir duke

Dwayne Barry said:


> In fairness they let him go as they marked one another but when Nibali did go and the others chased they made little if any impression on the lead Horner had established. I imagine if it weren't for this tactical advantage he would have finished there or there abouts with the front group.


I had heard that Nibali and the other contenders didn't seem too concerned with Horner. My guess is they feel he is no realistic GC threat and are more concerned with marking each other. Fair enough. But how is Horner even in a position to _contest_ stages in a Grand Tour? (I'm not talking the kind of Quixotic breakaway that Jens has made his trademark). Isn't this Vuelta parcours supposed to make this year's TDF look like a cakewalk?


----------



## mpre53

If it looks, walks, and quacks like a duck.........:wink:


----------



## Dwayne Barry

sir duke said:


> I had heard that Nibali and the other contenders didn't seem too concerned with Horner. My guess is they feel he is no realistic GC threat and are more concerned with marking each other. Fair enough. But how is Horner even in a position to _contest_ stages in a Grand Tour? (I'm not talking the kind of Quixotic breakaway that Jens has made his trademark). Isn't this Vuelta parcours supposed to make this year's TDF look like a cakewalk?


Like I said, he's either doping or could have had a really good career in Europe if it weren't for the rampant doping of the last 20 years.


----------



## eyebob

OK, to sum up.

He's doping and we don't care because we don't believe what we see anymore because the race isn't won until the testing is done. Got it.


----------



## brinntache

This is the same Chris Horner who claims to have never seen doping on any team he road for. It is one thing to claim innocence, another thing to claim blind naivete. Really? Not once in all those piddling years?
In his favor, he did piss off Johann Bruyneel and get chucked from Radio shack.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

brinntache said:


> This is the same Chris Horner who claims to have never seen doping on any team he road for. It is one thing to claim innocence, another thing to claim blind naivete. Really? Not once in all those piddling years?
> In his favor, he did piss off Johann Bruyneel and get chucked from Radio shack.


I wasn't going to bring that into the equation but certainly his supposed ignorance about doping doesn't go down in his favor.


----------



## foto

Reminds me of the old joke:

How to keep a blonde busy...

Horner dropped Nibali and Rodriguez and Valverde. Since when have these guys been serious GT threats? Horner's somewhat pedestrian success could just as easily be evidence of a cleaner sport as it is of cheating.


----------



## skinewmexico

Fresher legs. It's still April for Horner.


----------



## Cableguy

Also not watching the Vuelta, but it sounds about par for the course for Horner. He is a very talented rider. With that said, of course he's doping. Like others have pointed out the reason he's not getting more heat is because he's actually likeable, like Jens Voigt.


----------



## DrSmile

Only weaklings get out of breath riding up 18% grades.


----------



## foto

What about Nicholas Roche? He sucked for year after year on a french team, now he rides for Riis and he is 2nd in the Vuelta after 1.5 weeks of racing? He is even now ahead of that suspected doper Horner.


----------



## sir duke

foto said:


> What about Nicholas Roche? He sucked for year after year on a french team, now he rides for Riis and he is 2nd in the Vuelta after 1.5 weeks of racing? He is even now ahead of that suspected doper Horner.


Like father, like son. David Walsh had plenty to say about Roche senior. Looked at another way, riding for Riis is never going to help your credibility. Hopefully when Fat Pat is voted out of office Riis will be history.


----------



## davidka

foto said:


> Horner dropped Nibali and Rodriguez and Valverde. Since when have these guys been serious GT threats? Horner's somewhat pedestrian success could just as easily be evidence of a cleaner sport as it is of cheating.


Sarcasm? These guys have been GT threats since the beginnings of their careers. Valverde is one of the most successful riders of his generation. Horner beat him at Pais Vasco (said to be the hardest 1-week race in the world) two years ago.

Horner winning should be no surprise. He has been damn good for a long time. The race is still far from over. Let's see how he does in the last week against the younger guys..


----------



## foto

davidka said:


> Sarcasm? These guys have been GT threats since the beginnings of their careers. Valverde is one of the most successful riders of his generation. Horner beat him at Pais Vasco (said to be the hardest 1-week race in the world) two years ago.
> 
> Horner winning should be no surprise. He has been damn good for a long time. The race is still far from over. Let's see how he does in the last week against the younger guys..


Nibali is one of the new generation, Valverde is a busted cheat, and Rodriguez is a puncheur classics specialist. These guys have become serious GC contenders only after some other riders came clean. Riders with names that sound like Pontador, Fleck, Spasso, Marmstrong, etc.


----------



## Bluenote

mpre53 said:


> No one's ignoring it, everyone's thinking it, but I think we're at the point where we realize that arguing about it is pointless. UCI has no desire to clean things up, and only morons get caught nowadays. It's like any other test---you fail because you're a dumbass. What more needs to be said?
> 
> Hey, I'm sorry I don't believe in miracles.


Ymssra


----------



## spade2you

foto said:


> Nibali is one of the new generation


So, a guy who used to ride with Basso and Pellizoti is the new generation?


----------



## foto

spade2you said:


> So, a guy who used to ride with Basso and Pellizoti is the new generation?


OK so he turned pro in 2005 whatever my point stands.


----------



## spade2you

foto said:


> OK so he turned pro in 2005 whatever my point stands.


Fortunately doping stopped in 2006, so he's probably ok.


----------



## c_h_i_n_a_m_a_n

If they had legalised doping, we would have less to discuss about?


----------



## kmak

Every reply he gives to doping is completely old school - never saw it, never heard of it from teammates, never heard of it from others and - he never failed a drug test.

Quacks like a duck.....


----------



## davidka

foto said:


> Nibali is one of the new generation, Valverde is a busted cheat, and Rodriguez is a puncheur classics specialist. These guys have become serious GC contenders only after some other riders came clean. Riders with names that sound like Pontador, Fleck, Spasso, Marmstrong, etc.


For better or worse, these are the guys at the top. Unfortunately it's easier to make a case for ANY rider doping than it is to make a case for them being clean. Competitive = doping. We can either accept and watch or tune into a clean sport, like American football or baseball (that is sarcasm).

Rodriguez is a multi-time GT podium finisher and he's on Katusha, a team that nearly lost their place in the pro-tour. While he's not likely to beat Froome, anyone who has stood on a GT's finishing podium is a credible contender.


----------



## jms

Actually I have been watching the Vuelta. It's been great! Horner's hasn't looked 
superhuman to me, especially in the individual time trial. Doping? Anyone care to present tangible evidence to support their heretofore baseless accusations?

Actually, if anything I find Horner's performance quite credible, I believe the peloton in it's current incarnation is coming back to him and other clean riders like Horner, Roche, Hesjedal and Dan Martin. Read between the lines in "Lance Armstrong's War", and how the hierarchy of USAC [Armstrong sycophants] treated him over the last decade, ask yourself "why", and it's pretty clear to me he's clean.


----------



## thechriswebb

sir duke said:


> So to see Horner come from nowhere to perform like this? You gotta be fecking kiddin' me!


I don't know about the doping and can no longer believe anyone 100%. I do have to address the "come from nowhere" assessment though. There are many who have seen Horner as a tremendously underrated rider all the way back into the 90's. He was the victim of USAC and team politics and I remember thinking years ago that had he been given the support through his career that was given to some others, he would have been remembered as one of the truly great climbers of his generation and would have probably won several European stage races, climbing classics, and maybe a GT or two. The support was never there though so he spent a decade trapped in the domestic circuit, where he won races at will. Unfortunately, he was in his late 30's before he got any real support behind him. I believe that this is actually the first time that he has ever gone into a Grand Tour as the protected rider with a real team behind him. A few years ago, someone who rode with him on FDJ (I forgot his name) told me that he has always thought that Chris was one of the most underrated riders in professional cycling. Whether or not Horner is getting illegal "help," I don't think that it has suddenly turned an old man into a Grand Tour contender. The talent, enhanced or not, has always been there and he is just now getting a proper chance to use it on this sort of stage.


----------



## JohnStonebarger

thechriswebb said:


> ...Whether or not Horner is getting illegal "help," I don't think that it has suddenly turned an old man into a Grand Tour contender. The talent, enhanced or not, has always been there and he is just now getting a proper chance to use it on this sort of stage.


+1.

Horner? Come from nowhere? Please!


----------



## badge118

I don't really see anything odd. This type of terrain has always been where he does best. Steep stuff where he can dig hard. It's similar to the year he won the Basque Country tbh. Now if he would have put in some killer TT al la Sastre the year he won the Tour I could see it...Horner has never been the best TTer. I could also see it if he had just come off racing an entire season...TTs and LONG seasons are where you see age kick in. 

If you look at a guy who has basically had the "luxury" of a shorter season, having Utah to race into proper form and is in a race with terrain that basically suits him perfectly...you have the recepie for a one off...which is exactly what I see this as being. Also when was he racing EVER on a team where he was going to be THE protected rider. There was always someone else there. Now thanks to a lack of great white hype contenders on the team (Schlecks I am looking at you...wastes of talent you both have proven to be) for this GT...he has been allowed to go for it. He is indeed one of the most over looked riders in the pro-peleton. He dominated the US scene...went to Europe but had issues when he ended up on a French team in an era where many of them had an attitude of "you become French or get hung out to dry". He then returned to the US and dominated again...hell the last team he was on basically was half made up of cat 1/2s and he still won at will...when he could stay upright. That has always been his problem...he has insane talent when it comes to climbing BUT hits the deck A LOT. A guy that prone to hospital stays will have issues getting support.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Here is Rasmussen's take



> I don't think Horner is doping now, anymore than he used to do


----------



## spade2you

JohnStonebarger said:


> +1.
> 
> Horner? Come from nowhere? Please!


IDK, hard to place if you're crashing out all the time. Makes ya wonder how he could have done if he stayed upright more.


----------



## sir duke

JohnStonebarger said:


> +1.
> 
> Horner? Come from nowhere? Please!


'Nowhere' in relative terms. As in, 'never had a sniff of a podium placing in a GT'. Perhaps I should have made that clearer. No doubting he's a talented guy. But at this level 'talented' gets you a start somewhere above bottle carrier. You can't rely on a decade of 'if onlys' to explain away his lack of palmares in the big time. By 'big time' I mean winning stuff in Europe.


----------



## spade2you

sir duke said:


> 'Nowhere' in relative terms. As in, 'never had a sniff of a podium placing in a GT'. Perhaps I should have made that clearer. No doubting he's a talented guy. But at this level 'talented' gets you a start somewhere above bottle carrier. You can't rely on a decade of 'if onlys' to explain away his lack of palmares in the big time. By 'big time' I mean winning stuff in Europe.


Didn't Froome come from nowhere?


----------



## burgrat

Horner is definitely a talented rider, but his performance definitely deserves scrutiny. He has ridden for some shady teams in the past, associated with Armstrong/Brunyeel, and his responses to questions regarding Lance and doping right out of the LA playbook. (Chris Horner: I Don?t Believe Armstrong Cheated | Cyclingnews.com)

Those things aside, how is it now possible for a 41 year old guy to be on the brink of the top position? Cycling has been around a long time and now, all of a sudden, it is possible for athletes to be on top of their game into their 40's? He is the oldest guy to win a stage and lead in a grand tour by several years. Why wasn't this happening in the past? Why wasn't there Tour winners in the 50's or 60's, for example, that were in their late 30's or early 40's? Has human physiology changed that rapidly to allow recuperation and recovery to make it possible to win a grand tour? Sure there have been old guys that have won big races before, such as Gilbert Duclos-Lassalle or Joop Zoetemelk, but not a grand tour. Zoetemelk won the WC at 38. He also had a great record in the Tour de France (won in '80, second 6 times, etc.) but like everyone else, his contention for the overall in those races faded as he hit his 30's. 

I know Horner hasn't won and there is still very difficult week ahead, but I'm not convinced he's riding clean. Hell, I don't think Nibali is clean. And Valverde? Please...

I think we all are justified in observing the pro peloton with a jaundiced eye. It is a shady sport, but lovely to watch. I like Horner, but no more than the other riders that may or may not be doping. It will be interesting to watch this coming week. I can already see the growing support of middle-aged weekend warriors cheering on Horner and the new marketing campaign for Trek coming if he wins.


----------



## foto

burgrat said:


> Horner is definitely a talented rider, but his performance definitely deserves scrutiny. He has ridden for some shady teams in the past, associated with Armstrong/Brunyeel, and his responses to questions regarding Lance and doping right out of the LA playbook. (Chris Horner: I Don?t Believe Armstrong Cheated | Cyclingnews.com)
> 
> Those things aside, how is it now possible for a 41 year old guy to be on the brink of the top position? Cycling has been around a long time and now, all of a sudden, it is possible for athletes to be on top of their game into their 40's? He is the oldest guy to win a stage and lead in a grand tour by several years. Why wasn't this happening in the past? Why wasn't there Tour winners in the 50's or 60's, for example, that were in their late 30's or early 40's? Has human physiology changed that rapidly to allow recuperation and recovery to make it possible to win a grand tour? Sure there have been old guys that have won big races before, such as Gilbert Duclos-Lassalle or Joop Zoetemelk, but not a grand tour. Zoetemelk won the WC at 38. He also had a great record in the Tour de France (won in '80, second 6 times, etc.) but like everyone else, his contention for the overall in those races faded as he hit his 30's.
> 
> I know Horner hasn't won and there is still very difficult week ahead, but I'm not convinced he's riding clean. Hell, I don't think Nibali is clean. And Valverde? Please...
> 
> I think we all are justified in observing the pro peloton with a jaundiced eye. It is a shady sport, but lovely to watch. I like Horner, but no more than the other riders that may or may not be doping. It will be interesting to watch this coming week. I can already see the growing support of middle-aged weekend warriors cheering on Horner and the new marketing campaign for Trek coming if he wins.


I didn't realize the 1960s were the pinnacal of civilization. In the developed world, training and nutrition has come a long way since the 60s. So has overall life expectancy, infant mortality, education, technology, etc.

Oh, and the stages are shorter too.


----------



## foto

In the past couple of years, the racing has become more and more pedestrian. Has anyone noticed? There aren't anymore big attacks from the bottom of the climb, heads of state trading huge haymakers, attack-counter attack type duels between two guys. Just riding at threshold and keeping the powder dry for one big move at a hopefully critical point.

That is as much evidence that things are cleaner as the random speculation that everyone is still cheating.


----------



## burgrat

foto said:


> I didn't realize the 1960s were the pinnacal of civilization. In the developed world, training and nutrition has come a long way since the 60s. So has overall life expectancy, infant mortality, education, technology, etc.
> 
> Oh, and the stages are shorter too.


This wasn't happening in the 1990's or the last decade, but I understand your point. There have certainly been improvements in all the things you've mentioned, but my point is that Horner is an anomaly based on his age.
Do you think in 2025 we can legitimately expect 50 year old guys to be competing athletically on the same level as 20 years old guys based solely on improved training and nutrition? Maybe by other means, but certainly not within the rules of clean sport. That's what I'm saying. It is not normal. Maybe not impossible, but not normal. That is all. He deserves the scrutiny. Hopefully he's clean because I want to believe that it's possible to still be so athletic at his age. It gives me hope at 43 that I'm not completely ready to be put out to pasture!


----------



## foto

burgrat said:


> This wasn't happening in the 1990's or the last decade, but I understand your point. There have certainly been improvements in all the things you've mentioned, but my point is that Horner is an anomaly based on his age.
> Do you think in 2025 we can legitimately expect 50 year old guys to be competing athletically on the same level as 20 years old guys based solely on improved training and nutrition? Maybe by other means, but certainly not within the rules of clean sport. That's what I'm saying. It is not normal. Maybe not impossible, but not normal. That is all. He deserves the scrutiny. Hopefully he's clean because I want to believe that it's possible to still be so athletic at his age. It gives me hope at 43 that I'm not completely ready to be put out to pasture!


Fair enough, he make your point well. Of course, any winning performace, by definition, is not normal. Normal people don't win, that's what makes them normal. It is the exceptions that are exceptional. I'd like to maintain that Horner was always talented, but the front of the peloton had to return to natural methods for him to be at the top.


----------



## sir duke

spade2you said:


> Didn't Froome come from nowhere?


There's a difference between 'coming from nowhere' and staying there (relatively speaking). Everybody comes from 'nowhere'.


----------



## den bakker

foto said:


> I didn't realize the 1960s were the pinnacal of civilization. In the developed world, training and nutrition has come a long way since the 60s. So has overall life expectancy, infant mortality, education, technology, etc.
> 
> Oh, and the stages are shorter too.


funny that this should happen to exactly the guy known for his crap diet in the early years. well I guess all others don't train as smart, they are not as focused and are basically just goof balls. sounds familiar.


----------



## foto

den bakker said:


> funny that this should happen to exactly the guy known for his crap diet in the early years. well I guess all others don't train as smart, they are not as focused and are basically just goof balls. sounds familiar.


Remind me, what has horner done that is so remarkable? Eek out 40 seconds in the last 5 k of a stage a few weeks back? Not get dropped?

What a convincing show of DOMINATION!


----------



## den bakker

foto said:


> Remind me, what has horner done that is so remarkable? Eek out 40 seconds in the last 5 k of a stage a few weeks back? Not get dropped?
> 
> What a convincing show of DOMINATION!


read through the tread and collect the arguments.


----------



## asgelle

burgrat said:


> Those things aside, how is it now possible for a 41 year old guy to be on the brink of the top position? Cycling has been around a long time and now, all of a sudden, it is possible for athletes to be on top of their game into their 40's?


Without going into the specifics of Horner, I'd like to point out that there were lots or articles trying to explain the age related factors to account for why female swimmers peaked in their teens while men didn't peak until their twenties. Then Title IX came in and women started getting college scholarships and the age disparity between the sexes disappeared. Then everyone decided early twenties was the optimum age until sponsorship rules were relaxed and the peak moved out to mid to late twenties.

There are many possible non-physiological or PED reasons why we're seeing older athletes performing at or near the top.


----------



## foto

den bakker said:


> read through the tread and collect the arguments.


That's easy:

"horner is old must be cheating"
"horner hasn't won much in Europe at GTs before, must be cheating"
"horner didn't call out armstrong and commit career suicide, must be cheating"

Done. Or did I miss any?


----------



## JohnStonebarger

No, that pretty much sums it up.


----------



## den bakker

foto said:


> That's easy:
> 
> "horner is old must be cheating"
> "horner hasn't won much in Europe at GTs before, must be cheating"
> "horner didn't call out armstrong and commit career suicide, must be cheating"
> 
> Done. Or did I miss any?


yes older than anyone else pulling that off. 
and (that means the following should be combined with the statement above) 
not having been close to that before in 20 years or so 
and (to combine again)
the spanish armada spread out on three different teams have now decided that doping is bad mmmkay and are now riding clean 
and 
apparently one does not need any racing in the legs, just do a week and you're good to go. Coincidentally that would also reduce the risks of having to spend some quality bathroom time with a stranger while taking a piss. 

Sometimes things just work out perfectly.


----------



## JohnStonebarger

So if Horner doesn't have the talent, is older than god, and has only a week of training in his legs, what PED got him where he is now? Must be a lot better than anything the others have found, huh?


----------



## foto

JohnStonebarger said:


> So if Horner doesn't have the talent, is older than god, and has only a week of training in his legs, what PED got him where he is now? Must be a lot better than anything the others have found, huh?


Considering he must have been cheating on all his old teams, kinda weird he is only successful now that he's 42. Since it's impossible for the institution to change...


----------



## badge118

foto said:


> Considering he must have been cheating on all his old teams, kinda weird he is only successful now that he's 42. Since it's impossible for the institution to change...


And of course the logical response to this is that everyone in the top 5 is also doping...so wth bother watching anymore? Just sayin


----------



## foto

badge118 said:


> And of course the logical response to this is that everyone in the top 5 is also doping...so wth bother watching anymore? Just sayin


Or that the whole scene is actually indeed cleaner than it was...


----------



## masi85

Exactly! Witness Contador's recent results since he stopped blood doping.


----------



## davidka

sir duke said:


> 'Nowhere' in relative terms. As in, 'never had a sniff of a podium placing in a GT'...
> 
> By 'big time' I mean winning stuff in Europe.


There are many great riders that don't get within a sniff of a GT podium. Many.

If you think CH hasn't been successful in Europe then you're not paying attention. He's been top 10 a few times in the big Ardennes classics, the last man standing for Cadel Evans @ TdF in groups that were well above his pay grade, and beat Valverde heads up at the toughest 1-week in Europe, 2nd to Nibali @ Tirreno not to mention ripping 1:15 out of 2nd place in 3.5 miles @ Tour of Ca. I'm sure I'm forgetting a lot of stuff but he's an excellent rider, by any measure.


----------



## thechriswebb

davidka said:


> There are many great riders that don't get within a sniff of a GT podium. Many.
> 
> If you think CH hasn't been successful in Europe then you're not paying attention. He's been top 10 a few times in the big Ardennes classics, the last man standing for Cadel Evans @ TdF in groups that were well above his pay grade, and beat Valverde heads up at the toughest 1-week in Europe, 2nd to Nibali @ Tirreno not to mention ripping 1:15 out of 2nd place in 3.5 miles @ Tour of Ca. I'm sure I'm forgetting a lot of stuff but he's an excellent rider, by any measure.


Truth is being spoken here ^^^^^^

Doping or not, what he is doing is still remarkable, if not ethical...... This is not the same as the "yeah he was doping but so was everybody else so he would have won anyway" argument: I understand that different people respond to PED's differently and that the doped people who win aren't necessarily the people who would have won with everyone being clean. However, unless Horner is doping and is the only person in the Nibali/Purito/Valverde/Roche group that is doping, he is riding in that group with the other people that respond better to PED's than anyone else in the world and must be an incredible kind of a pharmacological freak if his body is simply responding to PED's that much better than everyone else (at the age of 41). 

Either way, this is very far from a "donkey to a racehorse" kind of situation and I know that there are many people who are not surprised. There have been hints of greatness in the past and I have been hearing people say for _years_ that if Chris Horner was given the proper opportunity and was given a strong team to support him, that he could win the big European stage races and even GT's. Having heard such speculation over the years about this particular person, it doesn't seem that shocking to me in any sense other than him riding so well for his age. This isn't the same as if Danilo Hondo or Bert Grabsch were to suddenly be leading a Grand Tour.


----------



## spade2you

masi85 said:


> Exactly! Witness Contador's recent results since he stopped blood doping.


I highly doubt he stopped.


----------



## sir duke

davidka said:


> There are many great riders that don't get within a sniff of a GT podium. Many.
> 
> If you think CH hasn't been successful in Europe then you're not paying attention. He's been top 10 a few times in the big Ardennes classics, the last man standing for Cadel Evans @ TdF in groups that were well above his pay grade, and beat Valverde heads up at the toughest 1-week in Europe, 2nd to Nibali @ Tirreno not to mention ripping 1:15 out of 2nd place in 3.5 miles @ Tour of Ca. I'm sure I'm forgetting a lot of stuff but he's an excellent rider, by any measure.


You missed the bit where I mentioned 'winning stuff'. Top 10 a few times, nearly man to Nibali, superhuman efforts at the Tour of California does not a GT winner make. If you want to measure greatness you have to compare him to the very best.


----------



## JohnStonebarger

sir duke said:


> If you want to measure greatness you have to compare him to the very best.


How about comparing him to his competition in Spain?

You underestimate Horner's talent. That's your choice. But doping? Yes, no, maybe, they all do... whatever your personal take on doping, this is a huge accomplishment for Horner, possibly the ride of his life. Unless he discovered the next EPO *and* the fountain of youth, pretending that the real story to this Vuelta is whether or not Horner dopes seems ridiculous at this point.


----------



## sir duke

JohnStonebarger said:


> How about comparing him to his competition in Spain?
> 
> You underestimate Horner's talent. That's your choice. But doping? Yes, no, maybe, they all do... whatever your personal take on doping, this is a huge accomplishment for Horner, possibly the ride of his life. Unless he discovered the next EPO *and* the fountain of youth, pretending that the real story to this Vuelta is whether or not Horner dopes seems ridiculous at this point.


So we are to remain silent on Horner's methods (or abscence thereof), because this is a 'huge accomplishment' and saying otherwise is ridiculous? You do realise this is a forum where people are allowed to speculate on who is doping?
As for Horner's talent, I haven't said that he is lacking, merely pointing out his inability to convert that talent into results at the highest level. Others around here have been falling over themselves to explain his lack of success: crashes, team politics, a cavalier attitude to diet, being an American on a French team and failing to fit in (that didn't seem to be a problem for Lemond or Vaughters to name two). He's just about the most unfortunate man who ever sat on a bike!

In his defence he hasn't blown the peloton to pieces, is lightly raced compared to the other GC men, has nothing to lose and has probably performed out of his skin on a course that suits him. But face facts, he's the same age as Armstrong and Voigt. In the current climate of suspicion to protest that scrutinising a 42 year old who hasn't raced much in Europe at this level in a long time is 'ridiculous', well that's being naive in the extreme.


----------



## JohnStonebarger

So Horner has found a PED that reverses aging? Or he never used to dope but he is now? Or everyone else suddenly isn't? What?

I realize that this is a forum where people are absolutely obsessed with speculation about doping. But other than the fact that Horner is suddenly in the limelight, why is he suddenly of interest? Please enlighten me on his methods -- speculating at will -- how does any scenario about PEDs explain his "sudden" success?

Horner is riding out of his skin, you're right. And he's finally getting a shot at the GT he's wanted for so long. And he's 42. Unless you want to speculate on how he's done that using the same PEDs that every other rider has access to, I think Horner's ride itself is the better story.


----------



## foto

sir duke said:


> So we are to remain silent on Horner's methods (or abscence thereof), because this is a 'huge accomplishment' and saying otherwise is ridiculous? ...


Feel free to discuss the methods then.


----------



## Local Hero

clenbutomicrogenedosing, of course


----------



## cmdrpiffle

Local Hero said:


> clenbutomicrogenedosing, of course


You know about that?!!

Better PM me and....shushhhhhhhh


----------



## sir duke

foto said:


> Feel free to discuss the methods then.


It's way back in my first post. Feel free to dispute it.


----------



## STBW

Doctor Falsetti said:


> And beetroot juice, lots of it



Don't knock the beetroot juice! That stuff works wonders!


----------



## STBW

All of my cycling buddies all think he is doping. I would love to believe a 42 year old can hang with these guys, but it is kind of tough to accept his performance. Maybe he figures he will go out with a bang and hope he doesn't test positive for this one race, who knows...


----------



## mpre53

STBW said:


> All of my cycling buddies all think he is doping. I would love to believe a 42 year old can hang with these guys, but it is kind of tough to accept his performance. Maybe he figures he will go out with a bang and hope he doesn't test positive for this one race, who knows...


He really has very little to lose, even with the remote chance of getting popped. He doesn't have a ride for next year as yet. And people like him, and likeable dopers get forgiven. Hincapie is still well liked. Levi came out of the USADA thing as a likeable doofus who was worried about his ears getting bigger---many people felt sorry for the guy.


----------



## STBW

mpre53 said:


> He really has very little to lose, even with the remote chance of getting popped. He doesn't have a ride for next year as yet. And people like him, and likeable dopers get forgiven. Hincapie is still well liked. Levi came out of the USADA thing as a likeable doofus who was worried about his ears getting bigger---many people felt sorry for the guy.


I totally agree with you. If Lance had not been such a douche to everyone for all of those years, he would already have been forgiven. When his viciousness was exposed, it turned quite a few people away from him. Had he only doped and been as nice in real life as many people thought he was, he would already be back on top of the world.


----------



## chuckice

Peaking at age 41. lol.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

On his way to winning the Vuelta. Just doesn't seem believable. Then again, the Vuelta seems to have a long history of one-hit wonders.


----------



## spade2you

Dwayne Barry said:


> On his way to winning the Vuelta. Just doesn't seem believable. Then again, the Vuelta seems to have a long history of one-hit wonders.


And dopers.


----------



## Ventruck

Chris Horner was struck with the lightning called "greatness". 

Unlike Froomerella, he didn't become an overnight sensation. 41 years of hard work, to get to the top.


----------



## jerm182

UCI's Suspicious List Leaked From 2010 Tour De France | Cyclingnews.com

Remember this? Finished 10th. Only top 10 rider with a 0 on the UCI doping suspicion scale in that leaked list.

I'm not saying he's not doping now, but he's been racing well for a long time...and he smiles when he climbs. That's class.


----------



## mpre53

jerm182 said:


> UCI's Suspicious List Leaked From 2010 Tour De France | Cyclingnews.com
> 
> Remember this? Finished 10th. Only top 10 rider with a 0 on the UCI doping suspicion scale in that leaked list.
> 
> I'm not saying he's not doping now, but he's been racing well for a long time...and he smiles when he climbs. That's class.


Zabriskie got a zero, too. So much for that.

Interesting to see Sir Bradley checking in with a nice fat five, though.


----------



## Local Hero

Armstrong rated 4 on that scale.


----------



## badge118

Rona6VDoll said:


> It's easy to see why people could hate Lance, or Contador, or Ricco, but who could hate Chris Horner?


Well some people see him as another "ugly american.". He has never been a soft spoken person and has always said what he thinks. Many cycling fans like their riders being like Big Mig....doesn't matter that he is an all but proven doper he was quiet with a big smile. Horner on the other hand is on the cover of Velonews saying "no one can out climb me but Contador" back in 2011.

Also some people just have an issue with people who are in anyway affiliated with Armstrong. The fact that Horner was only a team mate for like 2 years is missed. Since he was Armstrong's team for a whopping 2 years and did not say "omg he was a doping sob I saw him taking epo through his colon" people will get on his case.

Now that is why people don't like him. Add in there that people (including me) like Nibali and Roche...you have more motive to go after Horner since you don't like him anyway.


----------



## badge118

mpre53 said:


> Zabriskie got a zero, too. So much for that.
> 
> Interesting to see Sir Bradley checking in with a nice fat five, though.


Your point? Zabriske doped before yeah. He admitted to it. And if you Google his name with "admits to doping" you will see he states he stopped doping in 2006...so this bio-passport result supports this statement...<gasp> a sworn statement support by scientific evidence...who would have thunk it?


----------



## mpre53

badge118 said:


> Your point? Zabriske doped before yeah. He admitted to it. And if you Google his name with "admits to doping" you will see he states he stopped doping in 2006...so this bio-passport result supports this statement...<gasp> a sworn statement support by scientific evidence...who would have thunk it?


As far as I can see from limited research, a grand total of 8 riders have been sanctioned by UCI for irregularities in their bio-passport. The most prominent seeming to be Thomas Dekker, after his positive test for EPO caused UCI to take a closer look at it. I will say that his zero in that 2010 report does give his claim that he stopped in 2006 more weight than Hincapie's (but he only rated a 1), and Levi and CVV, who both scored a 4.


----------



## BassNBrew

Horner pushes the power numbers at the Vuelta - VeloNews.com



> A Bend, Oregon native, Horner blasted up the 5.9-kilometer Peña Cabarga climb in record time on Thursday. His time on the ascent, which went from 20 to 565 meters above sea level, ranged from 16:40 to 16:44, depending on who you ask. The VAM, or meters climbing per hour, calculates to somewhere between 1,961 to 1,972 — again, according to different sources.
> 
> La Gazzetta dello Sport ran with the headline, “Esagerato! Un Horner mai visto.” That translates to, “Exaggerated! A Horner like never before.” The paper reported that his VAM broke all records at 2,034. According to the Italian daily, he would have averaged 437 watts or around 6.83 watts/kg.
> 
> In comparison, Alberto Contador rode up the 8.5km Verbier climb at the 2009 Tour de France with a VAM of 1,864. Chris Froome (Sky) is said to have recorded a 1,722 VAM on Mont Ventoux at the Tour this year.


----------



## spade2you

Perhaps Americans should just quit cycling. If you don't win like Farrar, time to retire. If you win, might be a doper.


----------



## jaggrin

I feel that unless he tests positive or someone comes forward to say otherwise he is clean. Anything else is just speculation and nothing more.


----------



## spade2you

jaggrin said:


> I feel that unless he tests positive or someone comes forward to say otherwise he is clean. Anything else is just speculation and nothing more.


Yeah, but he's 'Merican!


----------



## grandprix

badge118 said:


> so this bio-passport result supports this statement...<gasp> a sworn statement support by scientific evidence...who would have thunk it?


Are you referring to the UCI's list as 'scientific evidence'?

If so that is delicious.


----------



## BassNBrew

jaggrin said:


> I feel that unless he tests positive or someone comes forward to say otherwise he is clean. Anything else is just speculation and nothing more.


He's perfroming at a level where he'd drop a doped up Contrador like a rock and make Froome look like domestique.

If he's clean, this performance could be the greatest of all time.


----------



## bruin11

BassNBrew said:


> He's perfroming at a level where he'd drop a doped up Contrador like a rock and make Froome look like domestique.
> 
> If he's clean, this performance could be the greatest of all time.


This doesn't make much sense. It's not like he is leaving people at the bottom of climbs and winning stages by minutes. He is leaving it til late and taking small chunks of time. So if his times are suspect, so basically is everyone else's.


----------



## tom_h

BassNBrew said:


> Horner pushes the power numbers at the Vuelta - VeloNews.com


Exactly, Horner's performances are simply not believable unless he is doped to the gills.

I cannot believe he is outclimbing the top climbers (Contador & Froome) who are some 13 yrs younger. Even outclimbing Nibali is hard to believe, although Nibali has been showing some fatigue and is not at his peak Giro form.

Past the age of 35 or so, physiological parameters (eg, vO2max) start inexorably dropping. Even 4-5 yrs age difference is a big deal.


----------



## spade2you

tom_h said:


> Exactly, Horner's performances are simply not believable unless he is doped to the gills.
> 
> I cannot believe he is outclimbing the top climbers (Contador & Froome) who are some 13 yrs younger. Even outclimbing Nibali is hard to believe, although Nibali has been showing some fatigue and is not at his peak Giro form.
> 
> Past the age of 35 or so, physiological parameters (eg, vO2max) start inexorably dropping. Even 4-5 yrs age difference is a big deal.


He's outclimbing Contador and Froome? I wasn't aware that they were at the Vuelta.


----------



## den bakker

tom_h said:


> I cannot believe he is outclimbing the top climbers (Contador & Froome) who are some 13 yrs younger.


ehm I believe they are on a different continent.


----------



## tom_h

spade2you said:


> He's outclimbing Contador and Froome? I wasn't aware that they were at the Vuelta.


The Velonews article compared the VAM (vertical climbing rate) of Horner vs Contador & Froome:

_Horner: somewhere between 1,961 to 1,972 
Alberto Contador rode up the 8.5km Verbier climb at the 2009 Tour de France with a VAM of 1,864. 
Chris Froome recorded 1,722 VAM on Mont Ventoux at the Tour this year.

_And Horner is some 13 yrs older? No freakin' way is that believable unless Horner is at 55-60% Hct or something .


----------



## den bakker

tom_h said:


> The Velonews article compared the VAM (vertical climbing rate) of Horner vs Contador & Froome:
> 
> _Horner: somewhere between 1,961 to 1,972
> Alberto Contador rode up the 8.5km Verbier climb at the 2009 Tour de France with a VAM of 1,864.
> Chris Froome recorded 1,722 VAM on Mont Ventoux at the Tour this year.
> 
> _And Horner is some 13 yrs older? No freakin' way is that believable unless Horner is at 55-60% Hct or something .


don't compare vams from different climbs or races on the same climb for that matter. it does not make much sense.


----------



## anotherguy

I have just adopted the view that they all dope and I will be pleasantly surprised in a decade when the testing catches up and a few of the miracle performances are exonerated. It just seems easier that way.


----------



## c_h_i_n_a_m_a_n

anotherguy said:


> I have just adopted the view that they all dope ...


EXACTLY what I have been saying all this while and nobody listens :mad2: ... man!!! Even before the USADA-LA-Confidential ...

They all dope and may the best doper win.

_If they over-dose and hit 6" under? ... well ... _

*man enough to make that decision ... man enough to accept the risk and consequences.*


----------



## bahueh

Dwayne Barry said:


> Well the whole time I'm watching I'm thinking either he is doping or he had the most natural talent of anyone and spent the last 20 years in relative obscurity getting beat by doped riders whenever he went to the big leagues.
> 
> Those aren't the only options but they're the ones that come to mind.


from the pictures, the man is as skinny as he's ever been...on the other hand...it is odd he's come back from an early season knee injury to perform so well. on the other hand, his age and lack of current contract are huge driving forces to win at all costs currently....
a lot of variables to consider....


----------



## thechriswebb

den bakker said:


> don't compare vams from different climbs or races on the same climb for that matter. it does not make much sense.



This is the truth. I'm not asserting Horner's innocence but let's look at the big picture here. Thus far, he isn't launching Pantani-like attacks that put minutes into his rivals in one mountain finish. Unlike Armstrong and co., he isn't dominating in the mountains and then dominating in the time trial as well. Nibali spanked him in the ITT. Nibali is also averaging 20 watts less than he did in the Giro. The Horner VAM here is an estimate based on mere observational data. With one mountain stage to go, he is only 3 seconds ahead of Nibali. Also, even if the estimated numbers here are true, it is not fair to compare his VAM over a 6k climb to the 1800+ VAM's of proven dopers that were over much longer distances. Iban Mayo's 1750 VAM on Ventoux was over 21k, with 1820 over the last 16k. Pantani's 1800+ VAM on Alpe D'huez was over 14k. 

Again, I am not saying that Horner is innocent. I will assert though that he has always climbed this well and that we should make sure that we are considering everything and not comparing apples to oranges.


----------



## love4himies

spade2you said:


> He's outclimbing Contador and Froome? I wasn't aware that they were at the Vuelta.


And here I was thinking Froome was here in Canada racing in the Quebec Grand Prix.


----------



## misterwaterfallin

love4himies said:


> And here I was thinking Froome was here in Canada racing in the Quebec Grand Prix.


No matter what you say(and how true it is) there is always someone on the internet telling you that you are wrong


----------



## love4himies

misterwaterfallin said:


> No matter what you say(and how true it is) there is always someone on the internet telling you that you are wrong


That's OK, it's just the internet. I'll worry when my boss or my hubby start saying I'm wrong. No, wait, cross out hubby, he knows I'm right all the time.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

thechriswebb said:


> Thus far, he isn't launching Pantani-like attacks that put minutes into his rivals in one mountain finish. Unlike Armstrong and co., he isn't dominating in the mountains and then dominating in the time trial as well.


It's probably worth considering those guys were competing against guys just as doped as themselves. So it's not like the doping necessarily set them apart.


----------



## Fireform

I don't see anything unusual about Horner's performances--when he's had good form throughout his career, this is what he's looked like, and how he has had success. He's just not racing against top fuel edition Contadors and Armstrongs anymore.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

Fireform said:


> I don't see anything unusual about Horner's performances--when he's had good form throughout his career, this is what he's looked like, and how he has had success. He's just not racing against top fuel edition Contadors and Armstrongs anymore.


To play devil's advocate, he's considerably older than any one else who's ever had this kind of success in a GT, he's never had this kind of success in a GT, and it's not like during the last 20 years he's one of those guys who's gotten a reputation as a clean rider (e.g. like Moncoutie).


----------



## grandprix

Dwayne Barry said:


> he's considerably older than any one else who's ever had this kind of success in a GT


He is only 1 year older than Poulidor when he was 2nd at TdF?


----------



## pedalruns

Fireform said:


> I don't see anything unusual about Horner's performances--when he's had good form throughout his career, this is what he's looked like, and how he has had success. He's just not racing against top fuel edition Contadors and Armstrongs anymore.


I agree .. Look at how well Basso used to climb, Contador could climb AND time trial.. I'm not saying he or any riders are clean, but things do appear to be at least cleaner than in years past. I think we are seeing a cleaner field and the natural talented riders are doing well and not the super-responders.


----------



## cq20

The Velonews/Gazzetta article also says


> La Gazzetta dello Sport ran with the headline, “Esagerato! Un Horner mai visto.” That translates to, “Exaggerated! A Horner like never before.” The paper reported that his VAM broke all records at 2,034. According to the Italian daily, he would have averaged 437 watts or around *6.83 watts/kg*.


6.83 w/kg!!


----------



## Dwayne Barry

grandprix said:


> He is only 1 year older than Poulidor when he was 2nd at TdF?


So you would agree, exceptional performance for his age? Out of thousands of riders over several decades you could find one guy who was fighting for the podium at this sort of advanced age? And a guy that has never even been within sniffing distance of a GT podium. At a time in the sport when there's probably an advantage to be had if you are doping.

Could he be clean, maybe, but I think no one would be surprised if he's doping, even more so than your typical professional cyclist.


----------



## spade2you

cq20 said:


> The Velonews/Gazzetta article also says
> 
> 6.83 w/kg!!


What did Horner's power meter say?


----------



## coldash

spade2you said:


> What did Horner's power meter say?


Probably "Does not compute!".


----------



## spade2you

coldash said:


> Probably "Does not compute!".


The fact is that at the moment we don't have his power meter readings. His actual power is speculation, perhaps to get ratings n' stuff. 

I'm not saying that he's clean by any stretch, but we've had a lot of power estimates on guys who have a power meter. I'd rather see his SRM data and not argue about Strava estimates.


----------



## cq20

Here is some input from Nibali 



> “I can’t climb at 500 watts. I was going at 430 watts and that guy accelerated. What could I do?”


----------



## Local Hero

Every time I see the title of this thread I chuckle a little. 

Are we just going to ignore Horner?

No, we've got to _do something_ about it! I know! Let's post on a message baord


----------



## burgrat

Local Hero said:


> Every time I see the title of this thread I chuckle a little.
> 
> Are we just going to ignore Horner?
> 
> No, we've got to _do something_ about it! *I know! Let's post on a message baord *


Just like you did? And just like I did?! Ok, it is officially time to actually go ride the bike. 
Congrats Horner. Good stage today.


----------



## Local Hero

burgrat said:


> Just like you did? And just like I did?! Ok, it is officially time to actually go ride the bike.
> Congrats Horner. Good stage today.


I have a 'cross race in 90 minutes  

I hope to see highlights on the youtubes when I get back.


----------



## terzo rene

Angliru 6.39 watts/kg for 28 minutes - only Heras faster. At the end of a GT, almost 42 years old, performance improving over the race. Yeah that makes sense.


----------



## Charlie the Unicorn

I believe this one as much as I believe Sky's riders were able to ride the way they did because of "marginal gains". There's just no freaking way. The red jersey gave him wings-- I thought the red jersey meant you were on the rag (or something else).


----------



## bruin11

Posted power numbers for Chris Horner on SRM website for all of you armchair analyzers. Haha

News


----------



## Fireform

terzo rene said:


> Angliru 6.39 watts/kg for 28 minutes - only Heras faster. At the end of a GT, almost 42 years old, performance improving over the race. Yeah that makes sense.


If that's accurate, and there is no way to know whether or not it is, it's comparable to estimates for Froome on AX-3 in the Tour this year (6.5w/k for 23 odd minutes). Horner is a skinny little dude, much smaller than Froome, and has been a climber (and only a better than average TT guy) his whole career.


----------



## den bakker

Fireform said:


> If that's accurate, and there is no way to know whether or not it is, it's comparable to estimates for Froome on AX-3 in the Tour this year (6.5w/k for 23 odd minutes). Horner is a skinny little dude, much smaller than Froome, and has been a climber (and only a better than average TT guy) his whole career.


I'm sorry but did the goal posts just get moved to "not as bad as Froome"? 
anyway, the time was faster than 2008 contador.


----------



## masi85

Exactly! Average power over stage 18 was 221 watts with 425 watts up the final climb of the Pena Carbarga. What's more amazing to me as a rider is being able to average almost 24 mph on a stage with almost 9000 feet of climbing!


----------



## badge118

den bakker said:


> I'm sorry but did the goal posts just get moved to "not as bad as Froome"?
> anyway, the time was faster than 2008 contador.


First comparing VAMS from different climbs, at different points in races, after different levels of stress from earlier in the race, is incredibly stupid. Different avg % grades with different maximum grades with different levels of remaining endurance, under different weather conditions...with different terrains leading to climbs...Jesus...how can anyone with a straight face say this is accurate? Unless of course one's mind is already made up and you are grasping at straws to justify a prejudice...

People are also forgetting the effect of racing an entire season with multiple stage races...this I think is what kills me. People are looking at results without the context. You have a person who has always been one of the best climbers being incredibly fresh due to not destroying himself in other races for a team leader or going for a podium vs guys who have been crushing themselves non-stop, most of them on their 2nd GT of the season. How is it that people keep ignoring this mind boggling important fact?

The Vuelta for years, due to it's place on the calendar has been the place where the guy who wanted to win the Giro or the TdF went to try and win a 2nd GT, the guy who lost one or both to try and get a win or lastly the race for the guy who made his bones killing himself in an earlier GT as a water carrier. Here you have a guy going at the Vuelta like the team leaders do the Giro or the TdF. It is a unique position to be in on a team of that scale because of A) his injuries and B] the lack of performance of the guy(s) who should have shown they were team leaders earlier in the season.

It is at least as likely, if not more so, than doping that these lucky circumstances (fresh quality rider vs tuckered out guys) that is showing us these results.


----------



## badge118

grandprix said:


> Are you referring to the UCI's list as 'scientific evidence'?
> 
> If so that is delicious.


Actually the bio-passports have proven reliable. The problem is the UCI refusing to act of them appropriately. That is the important difference.


----------



## badge118

mpre53 said:


> As far as I can see from limited research, a grand total of 8 riders have been sanctioned by UCI for irregularities in their bio-passport. The most prominent seeming to be Thomas Dekker, after his positive test for EPO caused UCI to take a closer look at it. I will say that his zero in that 2010 report does give his claim that he stopped in 2006 more weight than Hincapie's (but he only rated a 1), and Levi and CVV, who both scored a 4.


Because the UCI lacks balls to actually use the bio-passport, which is sad. As it is indirect evidence it would definitely get challenged and thus cost a lot of money and create bad press...neither of which the UCI has the intestinal fortitude to address. 

What you mention is actually a part of my point. Hincapies 1 is debatable but a 4 or higher to me raises suspicion. If he was doping as well I would suspect him to match other people. He is also essentially double bio-passport tested and has been since going to Garmin. This I think also puts weight to the issue as well.


----------



## thechriswebb

bruin11 said:


> Posted power numbers for Chris Horner on SRM website for all of you armchair analyzers. Haha
> 
> News



Well, I am calculating this to be in the ballpark of 6.7 W/Kg (I am estimating Horner's weight), which is identical to Dr. Ferarri's scary estimate for what was necessary to win a GT back in the Armstrong/Pantani era.... However, it requires acknowledgement I believe that this was supposed to be for 40+ minutes. I can't remember how long it took them to do the final climb in stage 18 but I believe it was a good bit shorter than that.


----------



## bruin11

thechriswebb said:


> Well, I am calculating this to be in the ballpark of 6.7 W/Kg (I am estimating Horner's weight), which is identical to Dr. Ferarri's scary estimate for what was necessary to win a GT back in the Armstrong/Pantani era.... However, it requires acknowledgement I believe that this was supposed to be for 40+ minutes. I can't remember how long it took them to do the final climb in stage 18 but I believe it was a good bit shorter than that.


16 minutes


----------



## Fireform

I think this is getting lost in the hyperventilation. 6.7 watts/kg for 16 minutes is tremendous, but human. 6.7 watts/kg for 40 minutes is mutant. Not the same thing at all.


----------



## Local Hero

*Chris Horner, racing at approximately 65kg*

With 4.6km to the summit finish, Horner made his attack on the steep pitch to Alto de Hazallanas. He averaged over 390 watts in the final 4.5km with an average cadence of 73rpm at 18.3kph average speed.

*390/65=6 watts/kg*

Vuelta a España Stage 10




Puerto de la Braguia: The gap decreased to 5 minutes as Horner and the breakaway group climbed the steep ascent to Puerto de la Braguia.

Chris pushed 342 average watts in this challenging 6 km segment with his consistent 82rpm average cadence.

*342/65=5.26 watts/kg*

Alto del Caracol: On the Alto del Caracol the attacks began in the break and Chris delivered over 325 average watts for over twenty minutes after riding nearly 140 kilometers.

*325/65=5 watts/kg*

Final Climb - Peña Cabarga: After a long downhill and just before the final ascent, RadioShack Leopard took the lead in the peloton to ensure a safe position for Chris Horner and pulled hard into the climb. RSLT's Ben Hermans and Matthew Busche delivered expert pace making skills in these last difficult and crucial kilometers. The hard-fast pace was also set by Saxo Bank and Movistar Team riders driving a very fast climb from the begining. A clear "peak" in speed and "valley" in power is evident due to the 800m flat-downhill section of the climb just before the last steep section.

Chris averaged 425 watts in the final 6 kilometers uphill with a 744 watt maximum output.

*425/65=6.54 watts/kg*

Vuelta a España Stage 18


----------



## Fireform

None of that is mutant material.


----------



## Local Hero

not even close


----------



## Wardnemisis

Of course everyone is going to question if Horner was doped to the gills. I believe he was with everyone else. My main question though was about Valverde who kept getting "dropped" and then miraculous came back to finish how many times in second or third etc.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Horner is not 65 kg, he is 62. Even his team says 63-64....but that is BS

6.85 w/kg for 16:44
6.55 for 28 minutes....

Not normal. Also factor in the Horner and the others softpedaled (34x32) for a few minutes. Valverde caught back on because of that. 

Not normal


----------



## jaggrin

I think it is funny to read all you little pseudo scientists trying to calculate someone's watt output on the back of a napkin and make a determination as to whether someone must be doping or not. On our ride today seven garmin 500's had different elevation gains ranging from 4,694 feet to 5,770 feet and not two of them close so if the same piece of equipment comes up with such varied results no way in my mind can you compare different riders in different years under different conditions with different racing scenarios. I also believe that your calculations are not reflective of his actual output.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

jaggrin said:


> I think it is funny to read all you little pseudo scientists trying to calculate someone's watt output on the back of a napkin and make a determination as to whether someone must be doping or not. On our ride today seven garmin 500's had different elevation gains ranging from 4,694 feet to 5,770 feet and not two of them close so if the same piece of equipment comes up with such varied results no way in my mind can you compare different riders in different years under different conditions with different racing scenarios. I also believe that your calculations are not reflective of his actual output.


Apparently you are unaware that Horner, and other riders, have been posting their SRM files online. This is not back of the napkin. The only question is weight and that will be cleared up in the next week as more riders, with confirmed weights, share their files. Pretty easy to do the math based on the gaps


----------



## MTBryan01

jaggrin said:


> I think it is funny to read all you little pseudo scientists trying to calculate someone's watt output on the back of a napkin and make a determination as to whether someone must be doping or not. On our ride today seven garmin 500's had different elevation gains ranging from 4,694 feet to 5,770 feet and not two of them close so if the same piece of equipment comes up with such varied results no way in my mind can you compare different riders in different years under different conditions with different racing scenarios. I also believe that your calculations are not reflective of his actual output.


Yeah I hope the Vuelta officials and UCI are reading this great information from random Internet guys so they too can be informed and seek justice.


----------



## jaggrin

MTBryan01 said:


> Yeah I hope the Vuelta officials and UCI are reading this great information from random Internet guys so they too can be informed and seek justice.


Too bad these Internet hacks missed an exciting race.


----------



## Charlie the Unicorn

The one thing I do give Horner credit for is posting his srm info online for everyone to read. Unlike Sky where they don't want to "give away their secrets" he's putting it out there. Who knows?


----------



## den bakker

badge118 said:


> First comparing VAMS from different climbs, at different points in races, after different levels of stress from earlier in the race, is incredibly stupid. Different avg % grades with different maximum grades with different levels of remaining endurance, under different weather conditions...with different terrains leading to climbs...Jesus...how can anyone with a straight face say this is accurate? Unless of course one's mind is already made up and you are grasping at straws to justify a prejudice...
> 
> People are also forgetting the effect of racing an entire season with multiple stage races...this I think is what kills me. People are looking at results without the context. You have a person who has always been one of the best climbers being incredibly fresh due to not destroying himself in other races for a team leader or going for a podium vs guys who have been crushing themselves non-stop, most of them on their 2nd GT of the season. How is it that people keep ignoring this mind boggling important fact?
> 
> The Vuelta for years, due to it's place on the calendar has been the place where the guy who wanted to win the Giro or the TdF went to try and win a 2nd GT, the guy who lost one or both to try and get a win or lastly the race for the guy who made his bones killing himself in an earlier GT as a water carrier. Here you have a guy going at the Vuelta like the team leaders do the Giro or the TdF. It is a unique position to be in on a team of that scale because of A) his injuries and B] the lack of performance of the guy(s) who should have shown they were team leaders earlier in the season.
> 
> It is at least as likely, if not more so, than doping that these lucky circumstances (fresh quality rider vs tuckered out guys) that is showing us these results.


contador 2008 on the same climb. Speaking of being fresh, it was one week earlier in the race. as for weather, absolutely there might have been a strong tailwind with all that fog.


----------



## den bakker

jaggrin said:


> I think it is funny to read all you little pseudo scientists trying to calculate someone's watt output on the back of a napkin and make a determination as to whether someone must be doping or not. On our ride today seven garmin 500's had different elevation gains ranging from 4,694 feet to 5,770 feet and not two of them close so if the same piece of equipment comes up with such varied results no way in my mind can you compare different riders in different years under different conditions with different racing scenarios. I also believe that your calculations are not reflective of his actual output.


what does elevation gain have to do with time keeping?


----------



## grandprix

Dwayne Barry said:


> So you would agree, exceptional performance for his age?


No, I'm just disagreeing with your claim that he is significantly older than anyone else who has ever done this well at a GT. Poulidor did that well and was not significantly older.

No I would not be at all surprised if he was doping.


----------



## grandprix

badge118 said:


> Actually the bio-passports have proven reliable. The problem is the UCI refusing to act of them appropriately. That is the important difference.


I wonder who compiled the UCI's index....


----------



## Local Hero

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Horner is not 65 kg, he is 62. Even his team says 63-64....but that is BS
> 
> 6.85 w/kg for 16:44
> 6.55 for 28 minutes....
> 
> Not normal. Also factor in the Horner and the others softpedaled (34x32) for a few minutes. Valverde caught back on because of that.
> 
> Not normal


Where are you getting his weight?


----------



## cda 455

Man, what an experience:

1) First American to win Vuelta a Espana.

2) Oldest rider to win a GT.

3) Chris Horner winning a GT!

4) Levi Leipheimer sitting at home watching Chris Horner win Vuelta a Espana :lol: !


----------



## badge118

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Horner is not 65 kg, he is 62. Even his team says 63-64....but that is BS
> 
> 6.85 w/kg for 16:44
> 6.55 for 28 minutes....
> 
> Not normal. Also factor in the Horner and the others softpedaled (34x32) for a few minutes. Valverde caught back on because of that.
> 
> Not normal


Can I ask how you know his weight...seems like a fair question.


----------



## badge118

den bakker said:


> contador 2008 on the same climb. Speaking of being fresh, it was one week earlier in the race. as for weather, absolutely there might have been a strong tailwind with all that fog.


Thank you for ignoring the rest of the context and continuing to pound the drum of myopia.


----------



## badge118

eyebob said:


> It's been kinda quiet around here (unless I missed it) that there has been little Horner talk. 42 and climbing like that? Against known cheats?
> 
> Dunno.
> 
> BT


Tbh I think this is simply part III of this...

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013...win-represents-quandary-of-new-cycling_289152

We had this after the Giro...Similar with Froome after the TdF, now this.

In essence we have become so freaking jaded that anytime someone regardless of specific circumstance does well some are going to say "they must be doping."

This begs the following question...why bother watching a sport you have NO trust in? Where you feel every great performance owes as much to the syringe? So you can feel better about yourself as an athlete or a person?


----------



## jaggrin

A slew of elite and master athletes (those 35 and older) are pushing the bounds of what once was thought possible for middle-aged and older athletes.

Dara Torres — who at 41 was the oldest swimmer ever to make the Olympic team — captured three silver medals in freestyle swimming and relays at the 2008 summer Olympics.

Diana Nyad, who just turned 62, attempted to swim the 103-mile stretch from Cuba to Key West, Fla., without a shark cage; though she was ultimately beset by an asthma attack, shoulder pain and choppy waters, she tackled a swim she had last attempted at age 28 and that would be daunting for an athlete of any age. (her most recent attempt at 64 was successful)

Ed Whitlock, a runner from Canada, became the oldest person to run a marathon in under three hours in 2003, at the age of 73.

In 1994 George Foreman at age 46 won the heavyweight championship beating an opponent that was 27 years old.


----------



## cq20

jaggrin said:


> A slew of elite and master athletes (those 35 and older) are pushing the bounds of what once was thought possible for middle-aged and older athletes.


Don't forget Jeannie Longo


----------



## thechriswebb

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Horner is not 65 kg, he is 62. Even his team says 63-64....but that is BS
> 
> 6.85 w/kg for 16:44
> 6.55 for 28 minutes....
> 
> Not normal. Also factor in the Horner and the others softpedaled (34x32) for a few minutes. Valverde caught back on because of that.
> 
> Not normal


I agree that Horner is not 64 kg. 

6.55 for 28 minutes is on the cusp for sure but do you think that is high enough to be decisively "superhuman?" 

It was an extraordinary performance and unfortunately I am not able to believe in anyone 100% anymore. That said, I am not sure that I think that it was so extraordinary that it would not be possible by a clean athlete. That is of course unless we are taking his age into consideration, which on its own isn't striking me as much as other people. I do think that athletes probably can stay competitive at the top level into their 40's if they train correctly. 

I am not necessarily arguing that Horner is clean; these are just some considerations.


----------



## albert owen

Wiggins - doped and won the TdF. Froome - doped and won the TdF. 
Horner - didn't dope and won the Vuelta, because he is a "good old boy". 
I love these threads. :thumbsup:


----------



## badge118

albert owen said:


> Wiggins - doped and won the TdF. Froome - doped and won the TdF.
> Horner - didn't dope and won the Vuelta, because he is a "good old boy".
> I love these threads. :thumbsup:


Apples and Oranges...gotta love it...comparing fresh guy who targeted a specific race beating guys beaten up racing hard and targeting other races all year vs suspicions of guys targeting the race they won beating guys who were fresh targeting the exact same race....love these threads for that myself. Troll on my friend.


----------



## spade2you

albert owen said:


> Wiggins - doped and won the TdF. Froome - doped and won the TdF.
> Horner - didn't dope and won the Vuelta, because he is a "good old boy".
> I love these threads. :thumbsup:


Wrong. Sky didn't dope.


----------



## David Loving

In my view a 41 year old is not winning a tour without Rx. For example, Derek Jeter is lost for the year. Talk about Floyd Mayweather retiring since he is nearing age 40. People not juiced wearing out at that age. Test his samples in about 5 years to let the chemists catch up. I'm sure is a very fine fellow.


----------



## RkFast

badge118 said:


> Apples and Oranges...gotta love it...comparing fresh guy who targeted a specific race beating guys beaten up racing hard and targeting other races all year vs suspicions of guys targeting the race they won beating guys who were fresh targeting the exact same race....love these threads for that myself. Troll on my friend.


I seem to recall another American racer who "targeted" a specific race and came in "fresh" to it.


----------



## love4himies

Horner misses drug test after Vuelta win; hotel mixup blamed - VeloNews.com

I hope Chris truly did notify US Anti Doping officials and they can clear up the misunderstanding. 



> Horner, 41, found himself in the center of confusion over just where he was Monday morning the day after his historic Vuelta victory as the oldest rider to win a grand tour.
> 
> On Monday morning, Spanish anti-doping controllers arrived at the RadioShack hotel in central Madrid only to find Horner was not there.
> 
> Team officials, however, claimed Horner had notified U.S. Anti-Doping officials via the prescribed protocol the previous day to tell them he was changing hotels to stay with his wife in another nearby hotel.



I thought they took the winners immediately after the race for urine samples???

Edit: I see the link now that shows the e-mail from Horner to USADA.


----------



## sir duke

RkFast said:


> I seem to recall another American racer who "targeted" a specific race and came in "fresh" to it.


Just an unfortunate coincidence....and stop trolling. 

What Horner achieved was a miracle and we are just going to have to accept that. I mean, it's not as if we haven't accepted miracles in the past, is it? Consistency is a virtue.


----------



## foto

sir duke said:


> Just an unfortunate coincidence....and stop trolling.
> 
> What Horner achieved was a miracle and we are just going to have to accept that. I mean, it's not as if we haven't accepted miracles in the past, is it? Consistency is a virtue.


still waiting for a discussion of horner's methods...


----------



## Dwayne Barry

foto said:


> still waiting for a discussion of horner's methods...


If I had to guess, it's simply microdosing of testosterone, GH, EPO and/or blood. I'd be extremely surprised if the other top, especially Spanish, riders aren't doing something along the same lines.

Doesn't seem like there's been hardly any Biopassport suspensions, so why not push the values with the drugs as much as possible as long as staying below the thresholds for being positive? Same game as always.


----------



## Local Hero

love4himies said:


> Horner misses drug test after Vuelta win; hotel mixup blamed - VeloNews.com
> 
> I hope Chris truly did notify US Anti Doping officials and they can clear up the misunderstanding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought they took the winners immediately after the race for urine samples???
> 
> Edit: I see the link now that shows the e-mail from Horner to USADA.


Is is possible that Horner peed in a cup after the stage and was still subject to bio passport testing?


EDIT: I think someone should take up the troll-position that Horner purposefully skipped his test. (Not you) It's easy, from now on a troll can just argue that Horner skipped tests because he had dirty blood at the Veulta and insist on his guilt.


----------



## thechriswebb

Maybe he was out busting his ass on his bike?


----------



## JohnStonebarger

Dwayne Barry said:


> If I had to guess, it's simply microdosing of testosterone, GH, EPO and/or blood. I'd be extremely surprised if the other top, especially Spanish, riders aren't doing something along the same lines.
> 
> Doesn't seem like there's been hardly any Biopassport suspensions, so why not push the values with the drugs as much as possible as long as staying below the thresholds for being positive? Same game as always.


The question is, if Horner's age is evidence that he must be doping, what doping method has turned back the clock for him?

None of the confirmed dopers have won GTs (or even stages) at 42. This was one hell of a ride... dope or not.


----------



## MTBryan01

thechriswebb said:


> Maybe he was out busting his ass on his bike?


Like!


----------



## love4himies

Local Hero said:


> Is is possible that Horner peed in a cup after the stage and was still subject to bio passport testing?
> 
> 
> EDIT: I think someone should take up the troll-position that Horner purposefully skipped his test. (Not you) It's easy, from now on a troll can just argue that Horner skipped tests because he had dirty blood at the Veulta and insist on his guilt.


True and I bet people will. I was glad to see the release of the e-mails between Horner & USADA to nip most of the speculation in the bud. 

I'm going to believe he won it fair & square until proof of doping comes forth. I was skeptical at first, but I think he was so determined to win it that only an accident (or heart attack) would have stopped him.


----------



## sir duke

foto said:


> still waiting for a discussion of horner's methods...


Well, we'll have to wait until Horner 's busted for that. I can't imagine he'll volunteer the information. Until that happens, you, me and everyone else will just have to keep on speculating.


----------



## Local Hero

JohnStonebarger said:


> The question is, if Horner's age is evidence that he must be doping, what doping method has turned back the clock for him?
> 
> None of the confirmed dopers have won GTs (or even stages) at 42. This was one hell of a ride... dope or not.


Yes, this goes to the boogieman genedoping arguments. And I'll admit right up front that I am a skeptic. 

Using our imaginations, we can conceive of novel doping procedures which allow incredible feats. Yet these procedures and medications so far only exist in our imaginations and science fiction. They are not available to modern medicine. So we are left wondering, how is it that a fringe sport can access anti-aging tricks and turn back time, yet the tricks are not yet known to modern medicine?


----------



## DrSmile

If he makes himself available from 6-7am, they should do a surprise visit and knock on his door at 10am... I'd love to see and hear the kerfuffel that ensues before the door opens.


----------



## misterwaterfallin

DrSmile said:


> If he makes himself available from 6-7am, they should do a surprise visit and knock on his door at 10am... I'd love to see and hear the kerfuffel that ensues before the door opens.


At this point even if he was doping during the Vuelta nothing would be happening as there is no reason to do anything after the tour is over. Apparently he was on his way to the airport and left after 7


----------



## badge118

I think I found a photo of the doping method...


----------



## Local Hero

DrSmile said:


> If he makes himself available from 6-7am, they should do a surprise visit and knock on his door at 10am... I'd love to see and hear the kerfuffel that ensues before the door opens.


It would sound identical to housekeeping tidying up the hotel room in preparation for the next guest.


----------



## love4himies

misterwaterfallin said:


> At this point even if he was doping during the Vuelta nothing would be happening as there is no reason to do anything after the tour is over. Apparently he was on his way to the airport and left after 7


So if he _was _ doping during the Vuelta and _not_ now, wouldn't the change in blood counts indicate doping during the race?


----------



## misterwaterfallin

love4himies said:


> So if he _was _ doping during the Vuelta and _not_ now, wouldn't the change in blood counts indicate doping during the race?


12 hours after? Probably not a huge swing there. Chances are he was tested after the last stage, so the next morning wouldn't be much of a change after that unless something synthetic was introduced that showed up. 

I don't think he did, but it sounds like they need someone to confess to catch them at this point. They may be able to test these samples in the future if it turns out they are using something new, but it's not like the riders are all using EPO which would be easily caught immediately


----------



## badge118

misterwaterfallin said:


> 12 hours after? Probably not a huge swing there. Chances are he was tested after the last stage, so the next morning wouldn't be much of a change after that unless something synthetic was introduced that showed up.
> 
> I don't think he did, but it sounds like they need someone to confess to catch them at this point. They may be able to test these samples in the future if it turns out they are using something new, but it's not like the riders are all using EPO which would be easily caught immediately


But all of his tests throughout the race when compared with his results from the last 365 days would indicate the use of doping products. Hell with the bio-passport you don't even need comparisons from prior tests...reductions in reticulocyte count and other things beyond baseline parameters also provide indicators.

I would how many people actually understand how the bio-passport works....


----------



## love4himies

misterwaterfallin said:


> 12 hours after? Probably not a huge swing there. Chances are he was tested after the last stage, so the next morning wouldn't be much of a change after that unless something synthetic was introduced that showed up.
> 
> I don't think he did, but it sounds like they need someone to confess to catch them at this point. They may be able to test these samples in the future if it turns out they are using something new, but it's not like the riders are all using EPO which would be easily caught immediately


So what would the purpose of testing him today?? Would this testing be done under USADA's control, rather than a different agency who was doing the testing during the Vuelta? 

Just trying to get a sense of the reasoning for the testing today.


----------



## stevesbike

that would be my guess - that it's the first opportunity for USADA to get a sample for their testing.



love4himies said:


> So what would the purpose of testing him today?? Would this testing be done under USADA's control, rather than a different agency who was doing the testing during the Vuelta?
> 
> Just trying to get a sense of the reasoning for the testing today.


----------



## misterwaterfallin

badge118 said:


> But all of his tests throughout the race when compared with his results from the last 365 days would indicate the use of doping products. Hell with the bio-passport you don't even need comparisons from prior tests...reductions in reticulocyte count and other things beyond baseline parameters also provide indicators.
> 
> I would how many people actually understand how the bio-passport works....


I'm not refuting that, I'm just saying it's silly to get up in arms about a missed test(that he didn't really miss) when he likely had one done under 24 hours prior during the final stage. I think Stevesbike is right in that USADA just wanted it done. Maybe they don't have access to the Spanish tests that were done over the tour or something


----------



## badge118

misterwaterfallin said:


> I'm not refuting that, I'm just saying it's silly to get up in arms about a missed test(that he didn't really miss) when he likely had one done under 24 hours prior during the final stage. I think Stevesbike is right in that USADA just wanted it done. Maybe they don't have access to the Spanish tests that were done over the tour or something


Oh okay. In that case I think it's more a control thing. Their sample, their lab, etc.


----------



## upstateSC-rider

thechriswebb said:


> Maybe he was out busting his ass on his bike?



That's my guess too.


----------



## burgrat

I assume that they would find his blood alcohol content to be elevated. I know that if I just won the Vuelta, I'd be nursing a wicked hangover!


----------



## mulkdog45

MTBryan01 said:


> Like!


Like +++


----------



## Ventruck

The only real suspicion for me is he was coming off a knee injury - the point he supposedly had a hard time walking. Paired with age Chris must've been some tough guy to come back at this level. Nibali was slugging what he could. I could believe the stars aligning with Nibali perhaps not at his very best, and the steep grades truly favoring Horner, but that injury is something.

I'll have to go with waiting to see how this unfolds, even if this is quite the story of the year imo. So far Horner and RS are open to share anything, more so than Froome/Sky's camp were.


----------



## badge118

Ventruck said:


> The only real suspicion for me is he was coming off a knee injury - the point he supposedly had a hard time walking. Paired with age Chris must've been some tough guy to come back at this level. Nibali was slugging what he could. I could believe the stars aligning with Nibali perhaps not at his very best, and the steep grades truly favoring Horner, but that injury is something.
> 
> I'll have to go with waiting to see how this unfolds, even if this is quite the story of the year imo. So far Horner and RS are open to share anything, more so than Froome/Sky's camp were.


You would be surprised. I completely jacked up my elbow earlier in the year (April). I was not allowed to lift more than 15 lbs for a time. I then got work done. I can now lift what I was before and am right back where I was before in terms of my martial arts and work. I am a LEO in a place where I get into real knock down drag outs with people so it's not like I am talking about just the dojo or the gym...rather real world fight or flight kinda stuff, often against kids I am old enough to have fathered and/or who have had time in jail to do nothing but work out to fight the boredom.

I also turn (or maybe already do turn =P ) 42 this year. If you don't positively destroy something what Docs can do now is rather stunning.


----------



## badge118

thechriswebb said:


> Maybe he was out busting his ass on his bike?


Actually it looks like he was getting a "little sumthin sumthin" since he had swapped to his wife's hotel ;-)....good for him lol.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

badge118 said:


> I would how many people actually understand how the bio-passport works....


And how many have been suspended with it?


----------



## badge118

Dwayne Barry said:


> And how many have been suspended with it?


The point here is not about the lack of intestinal fortitude on the part of the UCI as I noted...I was simply commenting on how people somehow think a blood draw on the last day of the Vuelta would somehow not have value because his numbers would not have changed appreciably from other tests during the Vuelta.

I tend to be very focused on what I respond to. If you would like I would be happy to address how I believe financial and PR concerns have the UCI only using the bio-passport results on soft targets. That to me however is a different topic than the one I was responding too.


----------



## love4himies

I was thinking on my jog this morning that perhaps we are too focused on the number (42), rather than what is going on physically with him. Just like there are child geniuses that are "not normal", perhaps Chris has an abnormal heart/lung function or muscle recovery that allows him to compete with those who are a decade younger. We have 80 year olds running marathons and 60 year olds who can barely walk around the block.


----------



## thechriswebb

badge118 said:


> Actually it looks like he was getting a "little sumthin sumthin" since he had swapped to his wife's hotel ;-)....good for him lol.


I don't know.... When it's what you do for six hours a day and there's a flight to catch back to the United States, there isn't much time for that. 


What are you on?


----------



## foto

thechriswebb said:


> I don't know.... When it's what you do for six hours a day and there's a flight to catch back to the United States, there isn't much time for that.
> 
> 
> What are you on?


huhuhuh he's talking about intercourse.


----------



## mpre53

foto said:


> huhuhuh he's talking about intercourse.


If he can keep that going for 6 hours at 42, God bless him. :lol:


----------



## spade2you

Has LeMond gone after him yet?


----------



## badge118

thechriswebb said:


> I don't know.... When it's what you do for six hours a day and there's a flight to catch back to the United States, there isn't much time for that.
> 
> 
> What are you on?


Dude...he went to his wife's hotel to get laid....jeez...I know I would after crushing myself for 3 weeks.


----------



## terzo rene

If Horner is doping he's failing to take full advantage of it because of his frequently low cadence. Of course that makes averaging 5.9 watts/kg over the major climbs of the Vuelta even more inexplicable (same number as Froome hit for the Tour climbs) and it's back to square one. Oh well, I tried to believe in miracles.


----------



## phoehn9111

Uh oh. Now certain elements of testimony in the reasoned decision have been,
redacted. Another sleazy term of bike racing for our noses to be rubbed into
the sewer, yet again. Apparently parts of Leipheimers and Van de Veldes testimony
may have involved Horner, but these tree branches were lopped of the investigation
because they were not sufficiently provable in the scope of that previous decision.
We also have an attempted phone interview by a bike mag apparently cut short.


----------



## Lazy Spinner

Ahhhh...Daniel Benson's riveting piece in CyclingNews.

So, Chris Horner just gets back into Portland after about 10-12 hours of air travel plus layovers (after 3 weeks of brutal bike racing) when Mr. Benson calls his cell phone. Since Horner says that he is driving, I can only assume that he and the wife are now making the 3 1/2 hour drive from PDX over the Mt. Hood passes (pretty but, not exactly fun) to their home in Bend. Jet lagged, physically depleted, and behind the wheel in a state where chatting on the phone while driving is illegal, Horner humors Mr. Benson with a few answers and then basically tells the guy to call him back at another time. After giving the courtesy of a entire hour, Benson is rebuffed during his second call and now summoning all of his butthurt "How dare that damned Yank ignore me!" Brit rage, publishes the equivalent of a supermarket tabloid whisper column and the dope obsessed conspiracy theorists start running with it.

Cripes!


----------



## cda 455

Lazy Spinner said:


> Ahhhh...Daniel Benson's riveting piece in CyclingNews.
> 
> So, Chris Horner just gets back into Portland after about 10-12 hours of air travel plus layovers (after 3 weeks of brutal bike racing) when Mr. Benson calls his cell phone. Since Horner says that he is driving, I can only assume that he and the wife are now making the 3 1/2 hour drive from PDX over the Mt. Hood passes (pretty but, not exactly fun) to their home in Bend. Jet lagged, physically depleted, and behind the wheel in a state where chatting on the phone while driving is illegal, Horner humors Mr. Benson with a few answers and then basically tells the guy to call him back at another time. After giving the courtesy of a entire hour, Benson is rebuffed during his second call and now summoning all of his butthurt "How dare that damned Yank ignore me!" Brit rage, publishes the equivalent of a supermarket tabloid whisper column and the dope obsessed conspiracy theorists start running with it.
> 
> Cripes!


Yeah, I just read that article too.


That was probably the worst 'article' I've ever read from a 'news' source  .

It's written in such a way that it appears incomplete and more in a tone that one would find on FB.


----------



## sir duke

Lazy Spinner said:


> Ahhhh...Daniel Benson's riveting piece in CyclingNews.
> 
> So, Chris Horner just gets back into Portland after about 10-12 hours of air travel plus layovers (after 3 weeks of brutal bike racing) when Mr. Benson calls his cell phone. Since Horner says that he is driving, I can only assume that he and the wife are now making the 3 1/2 hour drive from PDX over the Mt. Hood passes (pretty but, not exactly fun) to their home in Bend. Jet lagged, physically depleted, and behind the wheel in a state where chatting on the phone while driving is illegal, Horner humors Mr. Benson with a few answers and then basically tells the guy to call him back at another time. After giving the courtesy of a entire hour, Benson is rebuffed during his second call and now summoning all of his butthurt "*How dare that damned Yank ignore me!" Brit rage, *publishes the equivalent of a supermarket tabloid whisper column and the dope obsessed conspiracy theorists start running with it.
> 
> Cripes!


Benson's piece was shoddy, il-conceived and came off making Horner look like he was being elusive (when he wasn't, IMO). But why do you have to resort to childish bigotry by dragging Horner or Benson's nationality into it? Would the piece have sat better with you if the reporter had been American? Benson has a right to ask questions, Horner has the right to rebuff him. I think the reporting stank, your petty nationalism stinks too.


----------



## badge118

phoehn9111 said:


> Uh oh. Now certain elements of testimony in the reasoned decision have been,
> redacted. Another sleazy term of bike racing for our noses to be rubbed into
> the sewer, yet again. Apparently parts of Leipheimers and Van de Veldes testimony
> may have involved Horner, but these tree branches were lopped of the investigation
> because they were not sufficiently provable in the scope of that previous decision.
> We also have an attempted phone interview by a bike mag apparently cut short.


So we should take as credible an article on cycling news where a reporter assumes, based on being miffed that a jet lagged athlete won't give him a full detailed interview while driving in a state that has a no cell phone while driving law, in a redacted name

That is what it comes down to. Sorry but that is not what I would call a credible source....

"He wouldn't keep breaking the law to give me a phone interview so, while to cover my asscI will constantly repeat his name appears no where and has never showed a positive test, I will voice my currently baseless suspicion that he is a redacted name in a report or two even when those reports also infer and bluntly say at times that the unnamed person was a member of US Postal WHEN Horner was NOT a member of US Postal."

That report reminded me of an article written by a student reporter on the high school paper trying to look like Woodward and Bernstien. A reputable news outlet would have cut that report off at the knees during the editorial process.


----------



## Lazy Spinner

I will grant that the cheating of Mr. Armstrong, Mr. Landis, and others have poisoned the image of U.S. cycling. I am troubled by the Europe based cycling press gushing enthusiastically anytime one of their own wins but immediately seeking to prove cheating and doping whenever a North American wins.

Horner? Well he was once Armstrong's teammate and Bruyneel was his DS for a few years...nudge, nudge.

Hesjedal? He rides for Vaughters and Vaughters used to ride with Armstrong...wink, wink.

To hear Cycling News and their affiliated sites and publications, Wiggins and Froome are the most genetically talented and hardest workers ever to grace the peloton while the braintrust of Team Sky are the smartest people ever to walk the Earth. That is why they have dominated the past two editions of the TdF despite their humble origins and very fast ascents to the pinnacle of road cycling.

Nationalism and Eurocentrism runs rampant in the cycling press. Cycling is changing and has become a world sport. I can only imagine how apoplectic and suspicious some journalists will be when a Chinese rider wins a Classic or a black Kenyan wins on Alpe d'Huez because it upsets their world view.


----------



## thechriswebb

Lazy Spinner said:


> I will grant that the cheating of Mr. Armstrong, Mr. Landis, and others have poisoned the image of U.S. cycling. I am troubled by the Europe based cycling press gushing enthusiastically anytime one of their own wins but immediately seeking to prove cheating and doping whenever a North American wins.
> 
> Horner? Well he was once Armstrong's teammate and Bruyneel was his DS for a few years...nudge, nudge.
> 
> Hesjedal? He rides for Vaughters and Vaughters used to ride with Armstrong...wink, wink.
> 
> To hear Cycling News and their affiliated sites and publications, Wiggins and Froome are the most genetically talented and hardest workers ever to grace the peloton while the braintrust of Team Sky are the smartest people ever to walk the Earth. That is why they have dominated the past two editions of the TdF despite their humble origins and very fast ascents to the pinnacle of road cycling.
> 
> Nationalism and Eurocentrism runs rampant in the cycling press. Cycling is changing and has become a world sport. I can only imagine how apoplectic and suspicious some journalists will be when a Chinese rider wins a Classic or a black Kenyan wins on Alpe d'Huez because it upsets their world view.


I absolutely agree with you and I can't wait to see a black African rider blow everybody away on a storied European climb. 

Let's be fair though. As an American, I can say that the ethnocentrism here in the United States is just as bad as it is anywhere else. The Brits have finally produced a dominant team and after a dry century, won the Tour de France twice in a row with two different athletes. The discussion boards I see with British people defending them and saying "you people just don't understand how smart, dedicated, and tenacious the British people are. Wiggo and Froome-dog won because they trained harder than everybody else. Sky is dominant because our team management is smarter than everybody else" just remind me of what Americans were saying just a few years ago about Lance and USP. "Lance won because he was American and those Euros over there had just never dealt with a Texan before...." "People just don't understand how smart, tenacious, and dedicated we Americans are." "Remember when we kicked your a$$es in the Revolutionary War (to the Brits) and saved your a$$es in WWII (to the French) and kicked your a$$es in WWII (to the Germans and Italians)...." which all just sounds ignorant, nationalistic, and biased to me. I pick up a Euro-centric bias in Cyclingnews too but Americans are just as bad.


----------



## Local Hero

You have to hand it to Benson. The timing of his troll piece was impeccable.


----------



## Lazy Spinner

You are correct that we have more tools than we know what to do with in 'Murica. While you cannot expect blog posters and chatters for consistent wisdom and nuance, we really should expect journalists to remain objective and be held to a higher standard.

Although, Velonews seems to have a tough time getting weened off of the Lance teat. Instead of covering the historic significant of Horner's win or analyzing his performance this week, they still give top billing to stories like, "Lance Tweets Positive Words About Brian Cookson's Truth and Reconciliation Ideas!!!".


----------



## terzo rene

Whatever the journalistic merits of the piece, the debate is missing the point. It could have gone like this:
"Are you rider #15?"
"No, I don't know who it is, but it's not me. Now let me rest." <click>

It's a very short conversation and would have addressed the issue. If you, as an innocent person, faced similar questions (at an inopportune time) what would you say? Dragging out the conversation by avoiding the big question isn't likely to be the first choice.


----------



## Local Hero

We can assume that Horner has read the reasoned decision and affidavits? 

Actually, I just used control+F to look through the reasoned decision and could not find anything about the 2005 tour de swiss or "15th" rider. http://d3epuodzu3wuis.cloudfront.net/ReasonedDecision.pdf

It's not as easy to search Levi's affdavit: http://d3epuodzu3wuis.cloudfront.net/Leipheimer,+Levi,+Affidavit.pdf

But I did find one paragraph which says, more or less, that a rider was injured and used EPO prior to the tour de switzerland in 2005. It is not detailed.


----------



## badge118

terzo rene said:


> Whatever the journalistic merits of the piece, the debate is missing the point. It could have gone like this:
> "Are you rider #15?"
> "No, I don't know who it is, but it's not me. Now let me rest."
> 
> It's a very short conversation and would have addressed the issue. If you, as an innocent person, faced similar questions (at an inopportune time) what would you say? Dragging out the conversation by avoiding the big question isn't likely to be the first choice.


However it could also be...

"Are you number 15"

"Listen mother ffer...I have been dealing with these BS questions since last year. I wasn't on his team during the "bad times" leave me the ff alone. I am jet lagged I broke the law talking to you the first time...you called me back and I feel like u are trying to ambush me...fff of."


I know first hand about being under what would be called confrontational questioning. I am paid to deal with it in a calm and reasoned manner. An athlete is not


----------



## sir duke

badge118 said:


> I know first hand about being under what would be called confrontational questioning. I am paid to deal with it in a calm and reasoned manner. An athlete is not


Well, Benson is paid to ask questions. Whether Horner likes it or not Benson and his fellow journalists don't get salary to make things easy for sportsmen. Benson overplayed the inquisitor role in this instance but Horner must surely realise that in the current climate and considering his circumstances the questioning towards him will be rigourous. How he responds his down to him. "F*ck off, I'm tired" won't win him any favours and has limited effectiveness.

One of the reasons Lance and others were able to deceive for so long was that they had the benefit of a largely supine press who chose to avoid the hard questions in order to maintain their access to the big names. Quality journalism was sacrificed in favour of the feelgood stories generated by Armstrong/Livestrong. Now that the gravy train has hit the buffers you can bet the media will try to compensate for their formerly craven behaviour and go after any and all who might give them the next doping scoop. If you've been trained and paid to deal with these people you would know that.


----------



## SFTifoso

Who cares. He's 42, let him dope. In fact, I say we pass a rule that anybody over 40 can take whatever they want to keep them in the sport. We can call it the Jens Voigt rule.


----------



## Coolhand

SFTifoso said:


> Who cares. He's 42, let him dope. In fact, I say we pass a rule that anybody over 40 can take whatever they want to keep them in the sport. We can call it the Jens Voigt rule.


Or Masters Nat's rule. . . .


----------



## sir duke

SFTifoso said:


> Who cares. He's 42, let him dope.


Right, let him dope. Let the media crucify his ass. :thumbsup:


----------



## badge118

sir duke said:


> Well, Benson is paid to ask questions. Whether Horner likes it or not Benson and his fellow journalists don't get salary to make things easy for sportsmen. Benson overplayed the inquisitor role in this instance but Horner must surely realise that in the current climate and considering his circumstances the questioning towards him will be rigourous. How he responds his down to him. "F*ck off, I'm tired" won't win him any favours and has limited effectiveness.
> 
> One of the reasons Lance and others were able to deceive for so long was that they had the benefit of a largely supine press who chose to avoid the hard questions in order to maintain their access to the big names. Quality journalism was sacrificed in favour of the feelgood stories generated by Armstrong/Livestrong. Now that the gravy train has hit the buffers you can bet the media will try to compensate for their formerly craven behaviour and go after any and all who might give them the next doping scoop. If you've been trained and paid to deal with these people you would know that.


Yes...my only point is to say that inferring guilt because he doesn't want to give an interview is well...BS. Now if it was just "**** off I am tired" I would see a different story but if I read the article right it was one call followed by an hour interview...followed by another call where he finally says "enough already." Sorry but even as an ACLU and media rights supporters at some point you have to say that MAYBE this issue has more to do with a crappy reporter who doesn't know how to read his subject and arrange an interview properly and not a recalcitrant interviewee.


----------



## sir duke

badge118 said:


> Yes...my only point is to say that inferring guilt because he doesn't want to give an interview is well...BS. Now if it was just "**** off I am tired" I would see a different story but if I read the article right it was one call followed by an hour interview...followed by another call where he finally says "enough already." Sorry but even as an ACLU and media rights supporters at some point you have to say that MAYBE this issue has more to do with a crappy reporter who doesn't know how to read his subject and arrange an interview properly and not a recalcitrant interviewee.


I think you're right as far as Benson is concerned. Benson is no Walsh. He felt he got blown off and let righteous indignation push his agenda. I think his game was to hassle Horner into more evasions and/or a denial. Horner was quite classy in how he dealt with it. Benson came off as nothing but a cub reporter. Point being, the heavyweight journos who know how to research a story and who and what to ask will smell blood and start pressing Horner too.
The 15th man question is largely a red herring that I'm sure would have been explored by now if the story had legs. But the questions will keep coming. I think it's right and fair that questions should be asked, the sad part is that Benson isn't the person best equipped to ask them and his amateurishness will reflect negatively on his more accomplished colleagues.


----------



## Local Hero

Benson calld Horner once and he was starting to drive. An hour later he connected with him at home. 


Do we think that Benson only called Horner twice and connected both times? Or do we think that Benson called REPEATEDLY? 

I tend to think it was the latter, with Benson redialing Horner's number every five-ten minutes. I would find that pretty annoying. 


And what's wrong with asking Levi who he was talking about? 

What about the larger sections of Levi's affidavit which mention a redacted coach/trainer giving him EPO? Nobody cares about that?


----------



## badge118

Local Hero said:


> Benson calld Horner once and he was starting to drive. An hour later he connected with him at home.
> 
> 
> Do we think that Benson only called Horner twice and connected both times? Or do we think that Benson called REPEATEDLY?
> 
> I tend to think it was the latter, with Benson redialing Horner's number every five-ten minutes. I would find that pretty annoying.
> 
> 
> And what's wrong with asking Levi who he was talking about?
> 
> What about the larger sections of Levi's affidavit which mention a redacted coach/trainer giving him EPO? Nobody cares about that?


That isn't journalism. Journalism is to a large extent asking questions of the BIG interviewee that you already know the answer too. Benson clearly didn't have the answers. Hell in his own article he ADMITS that in one case Horner is irrelevant to a statement because the dope showing up was only for US Postal riders and Horner was not on US Postal.

I work regularly with Attorneys and Journos. Basically what Benson was doing was going at Horner on a fishing expedition..."well Horner might not be the guy BUT if he isn't the guy then I bet he will throw that guy under the bus because Horner is that kinda guy sometimes when you get him pissed off.". When neither happens he tries to throw Horner under the bus. Classy.


----------



## davidka

SFTifoso said:


> ... In fact, I say we pass a rule that anybody over 40 can take whatever they want to keep them in the sport. We can call it the Jens Voigt rule.


It is my understanding the the UFC allows almost exactly this because their biggest name/draws are older guys that they want to keep competitive so there's a testosterone "threshold" that the older guys are allowed to dope to. 



badge118 said:


> .. Hell in his own article he ADMITS that in one case Horner is irrelevant to a statement because the dope showing up was only for US Postal riders and Horner was not on US Postal.


Earlier in the same paragraph he implies that Horner could be the "name", then finishes with that. I wondered who proofread that one for him...


----------



## badge118

davidka said:


> It is my understanding the the UFC allows almost exactly this because their biggest name/draws are older guys that they want to keep competitive so there's a testosterone "threshold" that the older guys are allowed to dope to.
> 
> 
> 
> Earlier in the same paragraph he implies that Horner could be the "name", then finishes with that. I wondered who proofread that one for him...


Yeah...it's why I mentioned earlier that a real news publication would have crushed this in the editorial process. You accuse someone based on a sworn statement when that same sworn statement essentially says the person you are accusing can't be the person? A real editor would have said "umm come back to me when you have facts."


----------



## King Arthur

It must be that special chamois cream.


----------



## love4himies

Vuelta champion Horner to release biological passport data - VeloNews.com



> American Chris Horner (RadioShack-Leopard) will release his biological passport data today in an effort to curb the cynicism that’s bloomed around his remarkable Vuelta a Espana win — a win he called “perfect and beautiful.”
> 
> “I’m gong to release all my biological passport, from 2008, the inception of the biological passport. I don’t know how many guys have done that in the past, but I’m going to release all of mine,” Horner told VeloNews Tuesday night. “I think it’s just necessary. Clearly there are a lot of people out there that think the result wasn’t done clean at the Vuelta. I think this will clear up any matter at all, and they’ll have no leg to stand on from this point on.”


----------



## gobes

Horner just released all of his passport data.

www.chrishornerracing.com - Home


----------



## JohnStonebarger

Once more: Yea, Chris!


----------



## saird

JohnStonebarger said:


> Once more: Yea, Chris!


Yea, Chris! Hematocrit and Haemoglobin rising during a GT! Yea!


----------



## foto

saird said:


> Yea, Chris! Hematocrit and Haemoglobin rising during a GT! Yea!


Isn't an increase in hematocrit consistent with hanging out in higher altitudes for an extended period of time?

Like the mountain stages of a bike race?


----------



## Local Hero

Good for him. Get it all out in the open.


----------



## badge118

saird said:


> Yea, Chris! Hematocrit and Haemoglobin rising during a GT! Yea!


A...what the fudge are you babbling about...

B...does anyone have the necessary training to look at these numbers and actually comment with anything resembling intelligence? If not being quiet will like save embarrassment.


----------



## Local Hero

I think we'll see a fair amount of armchair speculation on Horner's biopassport until some veloclinic guy writes his tumblr blog. Then that will be gospel. Until then....




Until then we can read this: Welcome to 53x12.com


----------



## badge118

Local Hero said:


> I think we'll see a fair amount of armchair speculation on Horner's biopassport until some veloclinic guy writes his tumblr blog. Then that will be gospel. Until then....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Until then we can read this: Welcome to 53x12.com


Yeah. Hematocrit I know a LITTLE about due to a family member's cancer treatment. A "normal" male would have a hematocrit of 40.x. So a 41.X in 2013... When pros will train at altitutude and use tents to raise it is not off in the least...


----------



## badge118

Double post


----------



## eyebob

So, now he's released his BioPassport data, what next?

Is this more believable? Has he been clean? If so, is he the best US roadie ever?

Horner Releases Biological Passport Results | Cyclingnews.com


----------



## badge118

eyebob said:


> So, now he's released his BioPassport data, what next?
> 
> Is this more believable? Has he been clean? If so, is he the best US roadie ever?
> 
> Horner Releases Biological Passport Results | Cyclingnews.com


I would say the Best was Lemond. Next would be Armstrong...dope or not...all of his top competitors have been caught out doping so the best you could say is "he doped better" but that seems like a cop out. The best we can do is ignore that generation...if you don't you have to say he was the best becaus all the dope in the world didn't help TH and Landis beat him. Next who knows. Horner never really had a legit chance to prove himself. French teams always had a steeper cultural learning curve and I think some immaturity added to his problem...so we will probably never really know where he would have stacked up BUT I would say he never would have won a tdf. He is an awesome climber but with the exception of Her as what pure climber has won a TdF in the last 20-30 years?


----------



## 88 rex

badge118 said:


> Yeah. Hematocrit I know a LITTLE about due to a family member's cancer treatment. A "normal" male would have a hematocrit of 40.x. So a 41.X in 2013... When pros will train at altitutude and use tents to raise it is not off in the least...


A change from 40 to 41 isn't worth squat and can change that much from instrument to instrument sitting side by side. I haven't seen Horner's numbers, but would be interested in taking a look to offer my armchair advice.


----------



## knowthefacts

Hello Forum.

Hematocrit is ratio of red blood cells to the total volume of blood. I recently had some general blood work done. My hematocrit? 46? Asked the doc why? You live at 6,500 ft he answered. He said you're actually a little below the norm for this altitude. He said some populations in the Andes can push 60. So there is no norm for hematocrit. There is a mean value based on a range of numbers.

Why can the number go up during competition? 
1. Simply; Hydration or dehydration which directly effects total blood volume. So if your re-hydration is a little low for the number of variables involved during after a stage, yes it could rise because your blood volume has little less H20 in it. It's not that you have more red blood cells in regards to dehydration, but you have less blood plasma a lot of which is water. Hematocrit is a ratio not a total measure of new red blood cells. 

2. EPO (actually the acronym for the body's natural signal protein to produce more red blood cells) results from basically from less oxygen (or altitude) and bodily trauma. I have never seen a study on how cycling competition effects this, but it would stand to reason that it might fall in the trauma category. So, say the micro tears in muscle due mostly to hard efforts could actually signal the body to up the red blood cell production. As the body is known to respond to training in performance gain, for example, AT, it would be great to see a study if long-term endurance athletes also gain some benefit in recovery.

Of course known use of synthetic EPO drugs and transfusions cloud the picture. Horner's numbers are actuallyare not wildly insane and are well within the perameter under current rules regarding Hematocrit, but I cannot say one way or the other about them over three weeks of racing. Horner's age? He's not going to lose his cardio gain over the years he's had of raicing at 41, by that standard he's young. Power to weight? It can improve over time with improve diet. He has not shown any improvement in ITT, but has maintained good and consistent climbing performances when healthy and not injured or sick. Although this sometimes relies on his own accounts. His knee tendon problem is fact unless there's that many bad docs willing to lie. He had problems with it last year. The fix on it probably won't last. Age. His number of recent racing days are also only counted within the 2013 calendar year. Given an extra month back to July 2012, he actually did a lot of racing. TDF, The Olympics Road Race, Utah, Colorado, Worlds, Italy.

Some questions not ask here; Has Horner ever been given the number one spot on a team for a grand tour? No. Reason? The parcours in almost all other would count him out. Even in this Vuelta he lost a lot of time in the single ITT with almost half of it a Cat 3 climb. On the downhill and the flat last 7km he lost a lot of time. 

I'd say Horner has already proven he's a very good climber on 9% plus stuff at length and the parcours of this Vuelta in particular the last three climbing stages would make his performance creditable because he took time on the steeper sections. Specifically the Angliru was only a 88 mile stage! What is far more freakish than Horner's age is almost half of this year's Vuelta stages where summit finishes. Nibali, Valverde, and Rodriguez would have waxed him with more techno-descent finishes added.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

88 rex said:


> A change from 40 to 41 isn't worth squat and can change that much from instrument to instrument sitting side by side. I haven't seen Horner's numbers, but would be interested in taking a look to offer my armchair advice.


It is worth squat when it comes in the 3rd week of a GT. The average undoped rider's Hct drops 13% during a GT. Horner's increased. Why? You also need to look beyond Hct, his other values are odd as well. 

We also have to wonder why he only released some tests results and not others. There are dozens of tests missing

As has been explained many times here the instruments used by the UCI and WADA are calibrated to insure stability of measurements. They have been challenged in CAS in multiple biopassport cases and each time they have won.


----------



## Local Hero

Doctor Falsetti said:


> As has been explained many times here the instruments used by the UCI and WADA are calibrated to insure stability of measurements. They have been challenged in CAS in multiple biopassport cases and each time they have won.


Can you link to more reading on this?


----------



## knowthefacts

How can you draw a average of the undoped? Is there a published study or a who's who list of them. Doping in and of its self clouds all baseline data since transfusions began circa 1970s. The use of EPO drugs only makes it worse. The only creditable study in my mind would have to take some body of endurance athletes with no vested interest in high-stakes $$ wins on a professional level and test the effects of three weeks in a controlled GT simulation. Not likely. 

An average would also have to include those who are riding because they are paid too, regardless of the fact that they have to race too many times in a year. That I would think play some role into "average" Hct going down more in the over raced during a GT, I agree that the Hct should drop, but in Horner's case his lack of racing for in 2013, but backed up by a huge block of racing in 2012, might, that's a might, play a role in no Hct fall off or not. 

Too many variables to be conclusive, but The Vuelta had short stages for the most part. The TV coverage came up late. And once the GC contenders were established, all the attacks that came of significance within the GC contenders group where on the summit finishes with the time taken in the last 1.5 kms. Climatic conditions play the exception on the stage up to Andora. The long and short of that is not much in the way of stage-long hard riding over three weeks except for a couple of the Pyrenees stages.

The freshness factor of Horner makes some sense to me. Personally when I raced, it was only a half season, and I could peak within a given two to three weeks after that there was a definite decline. Horner's more of a pure climber, so he's much more efficient on the up hill of which there was plenty in Spain. Other factors for GC leaders are they are well protected by their team. They seldom hit the wind until it really counts.

None of this says for certain that Hct. should not drop, but does give pause to think at what point all-factors might make it so or not. The cloud of doping is too thick to see what a real numbers for protected GC riders look like. An average also includes those who are on the down side or getting sick, not eating right, etc. These are real factors, but as I said the amount of blood doping in recent time and lack of pure baseline data over the past 20 years make it hard to say what a truly creditable performance looks like. I wonder where Cookson got his idea of less race days and a shorter calendar from?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Local Hero said:


> Can you link to more reading on this?


Yes, 

Teams have been tracking Hct, and other markers for decades. Even prior to blood doping teams would often get GC riders blood testing several times during a Grand Tour. This led to a general idea of the drop. 

The most well known study was by Belhage and Damsgaard.

[Changes in blood profiles during Tour de Fran... [Ugeskr Laeger. 2008] - PubMed - NCBI



> the [Hb] and Hct were 11.5% and 12.1% lower on day 19 compared to baseline.


----------



## 88 rex

Doctor Falsetti said:


> It is worth squat when it comes in the 3rd week of a GT. The average undoped rider's Hct drops 13% during a GT. Horner's increased. Why? You also need to look beyond Hct, his other values are odd as well.
> 
> We also have to wonder why he only released some tests results and not others. There are dozens of tests missing
> 
> As has been explained many times here the instruments used by the UCI and WADA are calibrated to insure stability of measurements. They have been challenged in CAS in multiple biopassport cases and each time they have won.



Like I said and will continue say, a variation in 1% is clinically insignificant. Over a 3 week period of racing could be a little more significant, but without lots of hard data it is purely speculation. His numbers dropped and then slowly crept back up. All his off scores were fine. 13% is higher than the linked article you provided, which specifically states 11.5-12%. Some articles even say as low as 7%. Let's just take 11% of Horner's 45 % hct to start with. A 11% reduction would make it a reduction of 5% to a hct of 40%. Which Horner's number mimick by week 2 and then his numbers start to gradually climb. Why? I don't know. It would be very beneficial to see everyone's numbers. It does no good to isolate a single patient without a clear benchmark. The UCI's off score doesn't appear concerned. He very well could be doping, but these numbers don't do a convincing job or proving it. 

How can the "most well known study" only have 7 patients and be over 5 years old??

You have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to the actual instruments, who runs the tests, who certifies the labs, and what parameters are even acceptable (or possible) in regards to precision and accuracy.

edited due to correct hgb to hct after 45%.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

88 rex said:


> Like I said and will continue say, a variation in 1% is clinically insignificant. Over a 3 week period of racing could be a little more significant, but without lots of hard data it is purely speculation. His numbers dropped and then slowly crept back up. All his off scores were fine. 13% is higher than the linked article you provided, which specifically states 11.5-12%. Some articles even say as low as 7%. Let's just take 11% of Horner's 45 % hgb to start with. A 11% reduction would make it a reduction of 5% to a hct of 40%. Which Horner's number mimick by week 2 and then his numbers start to gradually climb. Why? I don't know. It would be very beneficial to see everyone's numbers. It does no good to isolate a single patient without a clear benchmark. The UCI's off score doesn't appear concerned. He very well could be doping, but these numbers don't do a convincing job or proving it.
> 
> How can the "most well known study" only have 7 patients and be over 5 years old??
> 
> You have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to the actual instruments, who runs the tests, who certifies the labs, and what parameters are even acceptable (or possible) in regards to precision and accuracy.


You post is so redonkulous I can only assume you are joking.


----------



## 88 rex

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You post is so redonkulous I can only assume you are joking.


Duly noted.


----------



## JohnStonebarger

Doctor Falsetti said:


> We also have to wonder why he only released some tests results and not others. There are dozens of tests missing...


What makes you say that? The press coverage I saw was very specific that "Horner has provided the results of all of his tests since [the UCI's biological passport program began in 2008]" (Horner Releases Biological Passport Results | Cyclingnews.com). Dozens of Horner's tests are missing?


----------



## Coolhand

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You post is so redonkulous I can only assume you are joking.


Achievement Unlocked! [Use "redonkulous" in context in a Doping Forum post]


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

JohnStonebarger said:


> What makes you say that? The press coverage I saw was very specific that "Horner has provided the results of all of his tests since [the UCI's biological passport program began in 2008]" (Horner Releases Biological Passport Results | Cyclingnews.com). Dozens of Horner's tests are missing?


The testing for the Bio-Passport is very specific and is carried out by the UCI. There were many other tests carried out by USADA, and other national ADA's, that Horner did not chose to release. I wonder why? 

For example, last year Horner was target tested by USADA as they tested him 16 times. Chris released none of these tests, just the 8 Biopassport tests the UCI did. 

Wonder why? Would have been interesting to see all his tests not just a select few


----------



## love4himies

Doctor Falsetti said:


> last year Horner was target tested by USADA as they tested him 16 times.


How do you know this?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

love4himies said:


> How do you know this?


You can search any athletes testing history on the USADA website. They will not have results but they will have the number of tests. 

Prior to the Vuleta's Horner's best form was in spring of 2010. He was 2nd in Giro di Sardegna won País Vasco. Funny how this coincided with his most questionable blood values. His Hct was 47.5 when his off season baseline was 40-41 and his off score was 112.30 (!). Normal is 85-95.


----------



## love4himies

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You can search any athletes testing history on the USADA website. They will not have results but they will have the number of tests.


I tried on their search function, but couldn't come up with any results. Do you have to have a log on access?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

love4himies said:


> I tried on their search function, but couldn't come up with any results. Do you have to have a log on access?


No need to log on. Here is the link

Athlete Test History | U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)


----------



## 88 rex

Doctor Falsetti said:


> No need to log on. Here is the link
> 
> Athlete Test History | U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)


It doesn't tell his results only that he was tested 68 times. It also doesn't tell what those tests were. Could be 68 pee tests.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

88 rex said:


> It doesn't tell his results only that he was tested 68 times. It also doesn't tell what those tests were. Could be 68 pee tests.


You didn't read my post did you?


----------



## 88 rex

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You didn't read my post did you?


Oh I read it alright. You're speculating on what info might be hiding behind 8 additional tests without know what those tests are. It would seem highly likely, and reasonable to assume that the "missing tests" were pee tests. Cross the finish...."excuse me sir, we're going to need you to pee in a cup." Those results have no bearing on the passport. It seems unreasonable to think Horner had 50+ cbc's performed in 2013.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

88 rex said:


> Oh I read it alright. You're speculating on what info might be hiding behind 8 additional tests without know what those tests are. It would seem highly likely, and reasonable to assume that the "missing tests" were pee tests. Cross the finish...."excuse me sir, we're going to need you to pee in a cup." Those results have no bearing on the passport. It seems unreasonable to think Horner had 50+ cbc's performed in 2013.


You have no idea of what you are talking about. 

To be clear I wrote that USADA did not publish the results.....your response to was to cry that there were no results....exactly what I wrote

None of USADA's 16 OOC tests last year were "Cross the finish" tests as due to the feud with the UCI there was no USADA testing at any of the races Chris did in the US last year. This means all of his USADA tests were OOC tests. Seldom is target tested rider given an OOC that does not include blood. 

You are welcome to continue your ranting but you are just making yourself look silly with you various attempts at deflection


----------



## asgelle

Doctor Falsetti said:


> This means all of his USADA tests were OOC tests. Seldom is target tested rider given an OOC that does not include blood.
> 
> You are welcome to continue your ranting but you are just making yourself look silly with you various attempts at deflection


It's hardly deflection to point out that there is no hard evidence that there were any blood tests performed by USADA, and that without that information, your accusation that Horner is withholding results is pure speculation


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

asgelle said:


> It's hardly deflection to point out that there is no hard evidence that there were any blood tests performed by USADA, and that without that information, your accusation that Horner is withholding results is pure speculation


Deflection is trying to pretend a study is not valid because it is 5 years old. Have human's blood values suddenly evolved in the last 5 years? 

Deflection is questioning a testing process he clearly does not understand and has withstood multiple court challenges

Deflection is posting the wrong range as he did not read the study

Deflection is ignoring his highest ever Hct and an highly questionable off score during a period of his greatest ever career success 

Horner did not release any of his USADA results. You are welcome to pretend that none of these are blood tests but anyone who knows the OOC process would laugh at that suggestion. Pretending that the 16 USADA tests did not include blood is pure speculation.


----------



## love4himies

Doctor Falsetti said:


> No need to log on. Here is the link
> 
> Athlete Test History | U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)


Thanks. I was in the wrong place when I did my search.


----------



## asgelle

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Pretending that the 16 USADA tests did not include blood is pure speculation.


You need to understand the difference between saying "I don't know how many tests were blood tests." and "I know there were no blood tests."


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

asgelle said:


> You need to understand the difference between saying "I don't know how many tests were blood tests." and "I know there were no blood tests."



Given that USADA seldom sends a tester just to collect urine from a targeted rider this is deflection



88 rex said:


> Could be 68 pee tests.


The spike in his off score and hct could have come from Space aliens or Nazi Frogmen, we don't know for sure


----------



## asgelle

88 rex said:


> Could be 68 pee tests.





Doctor Falsetti said:


> The spike in his off score and hct could have come from Space aliens or Nazi Frogmen, we don't know for sure


That is a great example of deflection. The issue is how you know Horner is concealing blood test results and now you're trying to turn it into a discussion of off-score.

You made the claim Horner didn't release all his test results,



Doctor Falsetti said:


> We also have to wonder why he only released some tests results and not others. There are dozens of tests missing


The question is how credible is this statement. While there is published data that there were 68 USADA tests for which results weren't released, it seems no one knows how many of these were blood tests. Saying (without proof) that USADA seldom sends a tester just to collect urine, does not answer the question of how many, if any, blood tests are in those 68.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

asgelle said:


> That is a great example of deflection. The issue is how you know Horner is concealing blood test results and now you're trying to turn it into a discussion of off-score.
> 
> You made the claim Horner didn't release all his test results,
> 
> 
> The question is how credible is this statement. While there is published data that there were 68 USADA tests for which results weren't released, it seems no one knows how many of these were blood tests. Saying (without proof) that USADA seldom sends a tester just to collect urine, does not answer the question of how many, if any, blood tests are in those 68.


No, the issue is if Chris is doping. Having a off score of 112.30 and a hct spike to 47.5 when he is winning the biggest race of his career is questionable. 

You are welcome to believe that all those OOC's test were piss tests, but don't expect many to share this theory......maybe you can share some evidence to support it?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Lets see what the experts say

Bio passport expert raises concerns about Hornerâ€™s published biological passport values



> there’s certainly unusual patterns there,” Parisotto told VeloNation on Friday. “If this was something that came across my desk for evaluation [as part of cycling’s biological passport panel – ed], I would certainly be putting a question mark on it. I’d at least request that further samples to be taken, particularly just before and during competitions,





> I would certainly have a question mark over some of those results.”





> “Obviously the most suspicious thing about this profile is that during a long Grand Tour race like the Vuelta or the Tour or the Giro, it is quite normal and it is almost expected that your haemoglobin is going to decrease over the course of the race, and to generally stay decreased,” he explained. “Your reticulocytes may increase slightly, and then they should stabilise over the course of the Grand Tour.”
> 
> “In this case, the haemoglobin has done what you would expect it to do in the first part of the Vuelta, but what is unusual is that the last two samples, the haemoglobin has actually, while not quite returning to baseline, has certainly gone up. However what you would expect in such a late stage of the race is that the haemoglobin would actually keep decreasing, particularly when you are getting into the third week.
> 
> “You would expect that if the hemogloblin is going up, that the young red blood cells that are coming into the circulation would reflect that. In this case, the haemoglobin has gone up, albeit slightly, but those young red blood cells, the reticulocytes, don’t seem to match that response.”


----------



## asgelle

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You are welcome to believe that all those OOC's test were piss tests, but don't expect many to share this theory......maybe you can share some evidence to support it?


The only claim I make is that the evidence presented doesn't support your charge that there are dozens of unreleased test results. I'd say your posts are the only proof needed.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

asgelle said:


> The only claim I make is that the evidence presented doesn't support your charge that there are dozens of unreleased test results. I'd say your posts are the only proof needed.


It is clear there are dozens of unreleased results, the only question is how many of those unreleased results were blood.


----------



## 88 rex

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You have no idea of what you are talking about.
> 
> To be clear I wrote that USADA did not publish the results.....your response to was to cry that there were no results....exactly what I wrote
> 
> None of USADA's 16 OOC tests last year were "Cross the finish" tests as due to the feud with the UCI there was no USADA testing at any of the races Chris did in the US last year. This means all of his USADA tests were OOC tests. Seldom is target tested rider given an OOC that does not include blood.
> 
> You are welcome to continue your ranting but you are just making yourself look silly with you various attempts at deflection


I simply provide the logic based explanations to your otherwise wildly speculative narrative.


----------



## 88 rex

Doctor Falsetti said:


> No, the issue is if Chris is doping. Having a off score of 112.30 and a hct spike to 47.5 when he is winning the biggest race of his career is questionable.


Are you referring to the Vuelta?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

88 rex said:


> I simply provide the logic based explanations to your otherwise wildly speculative narrative.


Your "Logic" has lost in court multiple times


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

88 rex said:


> Are you referring to the Vuelta?


Reading posts is not your thing is it?


----------



## 88 rex

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Reading posts is not your thing is it?


You tell me. It's so hard to keep track of which numbers you are referring to. Your stories are so jumbled that your posts are an incohesive mess. 

You said:

_No, the issue is if Chris is doping. Having a off score of 112.30 and a hct spike to 47.5 when he is winning the biggest race of his career is questionable. _

Winning the Vuelta was the biggest win of his career. The numbers you posted were from an out of competition test in early 2010. So, are you referring to the 2013 Vuelta or not?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

88 rex said:


> You tell me. It's so hard to keep track of which numbers you are referring to. Your stories are so jumbled that your posts are an incohesive mess.
> 
> You said:
> 
> _No, the issue is if Chris is doping. Having a off score of 112.30 and a hct spike to 47.5 when he is winning the biggest race of his career is questionable. _
> 
> Winning the Vuelta was the biggest win of his career. The numbers you posted were from an out of competition test in early 2010. So, are you referring to the 2013 Vuelta or not?


It is more to do with your reading skills then my posts. 



Doctor Falsetti said:


> Prior to the Vuleta's Horner's best form was in spring of 2010. He was 2nd in Giro di Sardegna won País Vasco. Funny how this coincided with his most questionable blood values. His Hct was 47.5 when his off season baseline was 40-41 and his off score was 112.30 (!). Normal is 85-95.


At that time the 4 weeks from mid March to early April 2010 was, up to that point, the best month of Chris's long career. It also coincided with his most absurd blood values. Of course there could be some even crazier values in the many tests that Chris has not released but I doubt we will seen them until a sanction is filed


----------



## BlackDoggystyle

This thread is funny. Nobody actually has a clue what they are talking about. 

I will give some advice. Do bloodtests on yourself for the next 2 years and after that you will figure it out that there is no straight line in how to explain why hematocrit (or bloodlevels in general) can drop or rise by 4 points in just a few days. 

In winter I also have the lowest blood levels, they increase with long but easy training and drop with extensive repetition of competition days. If I rest for a week it gets back up most of the time by 4 points , some cases it even drops.. How to explain... I don't know...do you?

For all I know... the level that Chris is racing now is the level he always had...besides the he crashes most of the time and was unable to realy show what he is capable of. 

Most people don't know that Chris was making a top10 spot in the dauphiné back in '98 when EPO was at his highlights ... and Chris was on nothing back then. How do I know for sure... I was his teammate and roommate most of the time that year. He crashed 2 days before the end and broke his wrist... what cost him for all I know a great result in the TdF that year ... yeas... he was selected by Française Des Jeux to start that year. That was the year of the Festina case. 
You can imagine what the result would be when someone makes top10 in the dauphine with nothing and had to go in a TdF where it was impossible to do something for all the rest because of all the police controls after the Festina soigneur got arrested. I say CH lost at least a million back there in that dauphine crash.

In that year, the speed of the peleton went like 5 times slower from the moment the Festina case broke out. I was first year pro back then...and it was an unbelievable diffirence that year before the TDF and after. So much diffirence I figured ... damn, so much diffirence can not be made because just a handfull of riders where on dope, that must be at least like be a half a peleton.
Me and Chris where confident that '99 would be a great year because whe tought the dope would be out of the peleton...boy...where we wrong...same sh*t all over again. Chris went back to US to come back a few years later when the newer doping tests started to make some diffirence.

And you think a guy like that, after all the disappointment he had to endure during his first years in the european peleton because of doping... would go on and dope himself? 

Funny thing is that all over the world people have to work longer to get to there pension age because people life healthier and longer... so why can't someone still make a good performance when he is over 40 these days? 

Most of the pro top riders are getting burned out at 35. Why? They have enough money to go and go for a relaxed life. They mentaly get burned out faster than there body does. Chris still likes to ride his bike like he's a 15 year old kid... he takes good care of himself... so why isn't it possible? tell me?

btw... Chris has always been a top climber. He is one "pure sang". He got lucky he started the Vuelta with no Nibali, Valverde, Rodrigues, Froome or Quintana on the top of there game, that the finishes where up hill most of the time, most of the top riders already did the TdF and most of all... only a small amount of TT kilometers. If there where as much as TT in the Vuelta than in the TdF he would get 4th place at the most...and if Froome, Wiggins and some others would start he would be happy to make it top 8 and no one would put Chris and doping in the same sentence.

But he won... because all the planets where aligned. 


My 2 cents


----------



## love4himies

Thanks Blackdoggy for that post.


----------



## 88 rex

BlackDoggystyle said:


> This thread is funny. Nobody actually has a clue what they are talking about.
> 
> I will give some advice. Do bloodtests on yourself for the next 2 years and after that you will figure it out that there is no straight line in how to explain why hematocrit (or bloodlevels in general) can drop or rise by 4 points in just a few days.



I have.

You can't lump "bloodlevels in general" into one category. Some parameters are more likely to shift naturally in that short of a time span and some aren't. Some of those fluctuations can be accounted for due to instrument precision. You aren't going to see MCV's wildly fluctuate in a few days when run on the same machine. You could see it change a little further if you run them on a different machine. If you run back to back back tests in Spain within the same 3 block period, you would likely see very little variance in the MCV. Parameters like Hgb/hct/rbc have a little more fluctuation involved due to the nature of the testing and natural variations. 

Thanks for you post though. I like CH.


----------



## 88 rex

Doctor Falsetti said:


> It is more to do with your reading skills then my posts.
> 
> 
> 
> At that time the 4 weeks from mid March to early April 2010 was, up to that point, the best month of Chris's long career. It also coincided with his most absurd blood values. Of course there could be some even crazier values in the many tests that Chris has not released but I doubt we will seen them until a sanction is filed


A hct of 47 is hardly absurd. I've put out those numbers in the past, and I've had them be around 40 as well. I'm hardly an elite athlete and I've never trained as hard as these guys in my life. 

Chris released all the biopassport info. To continually claim otherwise is ingenuous without any solid proof.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

BlackDoggystyle said:


> This thread is funny. Nobody actually has a clue what they are talking about.
> 
> I will give some advice. Do bloodtests on yourself for the next 2 years and after that you will figure it out that there is no straight line in how to explain why hematocrit (or bloodlevels in general) can drop or rise by 4 points in just a few days.
> 
> In winter I also have the lowest blood levels, they increase with long but easy training and drop with extensive repetition of competition days. If I rest for a week it gets back up most of the time by 4 points , some cases it even drops.. How to explain... I don't know...do you?
> 
> For all I know... the level that Chris is racing now is the level he always had...besides the he crashes most of the time and was unable to realy show what he is capable of.
> 
> Most people don't know that Chris was making a top10 spot in the dauphiné back in '98 when EPO was at his highlights ... and Chris was on nothing back then. How do I know for sure... I was his teammate and roommate most of the time that year. He crashed 2 days before the end and broke his wrist... what cost him for all I know a great result in the TdF that year ... yeas... he was selected by Française Des Jeux to start that year. That was the year of the Festina case.
> You can imagine what the result would be when someone makes top10 in the dauphine with nothing and had to go in a TdF where it was impossible to do something for all the rest because of all the police controls after the Festina soigneur got arrested. I say CH lost at least a million back there in that dauphine crash.
> 
> In that year, the speed of the peleton went like 5 times slower from the moment the Festina case broke out. I was first year pro back then...and it was an unbelievable diffirence that year before the TDF and after. So much diffirence I figured ... damn, so much diffirence can not be made because just a handfull of riders where on dope, that must be at least like be a half a peleton.
> Me and Chris where confident that '99 would be a great year because whe tought the dope would be out of the peleton...boy...where we wrong...same sh*t all over again. Chris went back to US to come back a few years later when the newer doping tests started to make some diffirence.
> 
> And you think a guy like that, after all the disappointment he had to endure during his first years in the european peleton because of doping... would go on and dope himself?
> 
> Funny thing is that all over the world people have to work longer to get to there pension age because people life healthier and longer... so why can't someone still make a good performance when he is over 40 these days?
> 
> Most of the pro top riders are getting burned out at 35. Why? They have enough money to go and go for a relaxed life. They mentaly get burned out faster than there body does. Chris still likes to ride his bike like he's a 15 year old kid... he takes good care of himself... so why isn't it possible? tell me?
> 
> btw... Chris has always been a top climber. He is one "pure sang". He got lucky he started the Vuelta with no Nibali, Valverde, Rodrigues, Froome or Quintana on the top of there game, that the finishes where up hill most of the time, most of the top riders already did the TdF and most of all... only a small amount of TT kilometers. If there where as much as TT in the Vuelta than in the TdF he would get 4th place at the most...and if Froome, Wiggins and some others would start he would be happy to make it top 8 and no one would put Chris and doping in the same sentence.
> 
> But he won... because all the planets where aligned.
> 
> 
> My 2 cents


Thanks for the good post, Chris is indeed a talented rider. 

I would not say nobody knows what they are talking about. Robin Parisotto certainly does. He helped invent the EPO tests and sits on the Biopassport board. He raises the same questions being asked here. He is not comparing off season with peak but the odd values during a Grand Tour. Chris had other significant fluctuations during what was previously the best peak of his career. 

What do you think of Phil Zajicek saying Chris had EPO and HGH in his fridge? Or that he got Justin England into doping at Webcor. Levi has made it clear to many that he is not too happy with USADA as they have done nothing with the info he gave them on Chris. 

Chris is indeed a talented climber, and a nice guy....but 2nd fastest up the Angrilu? The rest of the list filled with banned dopers at their peak? Sorry, hard to believe


----------



## cda 455

88 rex said:


> You tell me. It's so hard to keep track of which numbers you are referring to. Your stories are so jumbled that your posts are an incohesive mess.
> 
> You said:
> 
> _No, the issue is if Chris is doping. Having a off score of 112.30 and a hct spike to 47.5 when he is winning the biggest race of his career is questionable. _
> 
> Winning the Vuelta was the biggest win of his career. The numbers you posted were from an out of competition test in early 2010. So, are you referring to the 2013 Vuelta or not?


Oh look.


Is someone butthurt again in the doping forum?!!1!


----------



## love4himies

Doctor Falsetti said:


> What do you think of Phil Zajicek saying Chris had EPO and HGH in his fridge? Or that he got Justin England into doping at Webcor. Levi has made it clear to many that he is not too happy with USADA as they have done nothing with the info he gave them on Chris.


Can we really trust what Phil says???


----------



## asgelle

Doctor Falsetti said:


> I would not say nobody knows what they are talking about. Robin Parisotto certainly does. He helped invent the EPO tests and sits on the Biopassport board. He raises the same questions being asked here. He is not comparing off season with peak but the odd values during a Grand Tour. Chris had other significant fluctuations during what was previously the best peak of his career.


Of course, he doesn't actually spell out what data gives rise to those suspicions; he merely outlines broad reasons. I can understand his position of not wanting to help people cover up doping, but without spelling out his case, it's impossible to know how strong it is, or if perhaps he just made a mistake.


----------



## 88 rex

cda 455 said:


> Oh look.
> 
> 
> Is someone butthurt again in the doping forum?!!1!



I'll more than likely be watching some college football today which is just a reminder to myself that this topic is purely about entertainers and for entertainment only. Just tune in and enjoy the show. Stepping into the doping forum is akin to a chinese finger trap.


----------



## Guest

One vote for Davis Phinney (sprinter). 328 victories mostly in the US but he did win a couple TDF stages.. No crybaby interviews, he did not threaten people or try to ruin anyone. Just a good guy that could win. I was watching TV when Zanoli punched him in the face to keep him from winning the stage. It worked.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

love4himies said:


> Can we really trust what Phil says???


Good point. As an isolated data point I would say it is meaningless.....but when combined with the 2nd fastest time every on the Angrilu and winning a GT at 42 it becomes more interesting


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

88 rex said:


> A hct of 47 is hardly absurd. I've put out those numbers in the past, and I've had them be around 40 as well. I'm hardly an elite athlete and I've never trained as hard as these guys in my life.
> 
> Chris released all the biopassport info. To continually claim otherwise is ingenuous without any solid proof.


You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. 

His Hct is interesting because it shows a sharp increase during a period where he also had a sharp increase in form. That his offscore was 112 only makes it more questionable. All good indicators of a transfusion. 

You attempt at deflection does not change the fact that Horner has only released a fraction of his test results.


----------



## 88 rex

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
> 
> His Hct is interesting because it shows a sharp increase during a period where he also had a sharp increase in form. That his offscore was 112 only makes it more questionable. All good indicators of a transfusion.
> 
> You attempt at deflection does not change the fact that Horner has only released a fraction of his test results.



Do you even know what deflection means?


----------



## Guest

I guess I do not worry about it that much.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Anti-Doping Agency Exposed Armstrong, but What About Others? - NYTimes.com




> Hincapie took off alone. But inexplicably, another rider took off after him. It was Chris Horner, an American on the RadioShack-Nissan team, who proceeded to have a conversation with Hincapie as millions watched on television......Two weeks earlier, news leaked that Hincapie was one of the riders who testified against Armstrong, a rider Horner had defended as being clean.........Last week, neither rider would tell me what was said. Horner, who would go on to win the 2013 Vuelta a España at 41, becoming the oldest Grand Tour winner in history, called it “nothing that can be discussed in the newspaper.”





> Horner had told him years ago, “‘If everybody’s doing it, it ain’t cheating.’”


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Chris Horner, the Vuelta, and his bio-passport problem | Road Biking | OutsideOnline.com

More questions for Horner


----------



## eyebob

the ongoing suspicion would explain why he's without a job yet. It wouldn't surprise me if he doesn't get a ride for 2014 and has to retire. A-la Levi.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

eyebob said:


> the ongoing suspicion would explain why he's without a job yet. It wouldn't surprise me if he doesn't get a ride for 2014 and has to retire. A-la Levi.


Would you sign him? The two most likely outcomes are 1) we end up finding out he's been doping 2) He takes your money, calls it a day, doesn't dope anymore and you get no results out of him.

It would take a very naive person to sign him thinking that performance was clean and he's likely to get more of those sorts without significant risk of getting caught doping.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Lets see what the experts say
> 
> Bio passport expert raises concerns about Horner’s published biological passport values


Translation: He was infusing blood, no?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Tilford questioning Horner

Unbelievable Chris Horner | Steve Tilford


----------



## love4himies

WTF would anybody publish records that were going to make that person look suspicious?


----------



## SNS1938

lighthouse54.1 said:


> ... He has passed his testing satisfactorily and it's good enough for me. If they take it away again later on well that is good enough for me also. I enjoyed rooting for him during the race. ....


We know others have passed tests too, but have been doped to the eyeballs. Its possible to prove someone doped, but unfortunately for CH it's impossible to prove conclusively that someone didn't.

It's a real sad situation for pro-cycling, I'd not be surprised by any rider being busted now. I want to believe they're all clean, but that is naive.


----------



## Dwayne Barry

love4himies said:


> WTF would anybody publish records that were going to make that person look suspicious?


Because they weren't so bad that they triggered a biopassport violation so he thinks, good enough for the UCI good enough for the fans?


----------



## eyebob

DB,

Dunno, but if he isn't signed, it'll be a sign that these teams are at least trying to appear to be less doped.


----------

