Hmmm, well if it's correct about mountain bikers being virulently anti doping, i hope so. Plus he's aussie, so if he can pick up a podium place-quite possible now, he'd BETTER be. Thats the weird thing though, it seems this stuff is so sophisticated, and the tour has some of the toughest anti doping regulations on the planet; its impossible to keep up with it. Training is one thing, but even Armstrong came under a drug cloud at some point, he was either a man possesed, or his team had better shit than the competition. I mean, a rubdown and a cold beer doesnt cut it for recovery these days. That being said, its still a great race, a premier sporting event. Sure, its a shame that doping is so prevalent, but as someone else has mentioned, it's only noticed because this is international, not domestic league football-these guys, if they manage to get near the leader board, are representing their country to a great extent. Looking forward to tonight's stage.
rasmussen was a champion mountainbike rider as well. I wonder if any of them have been clean their whole career. I would bet all these guys are popping positive because their masking agents are breaking down or the testers are improving the testing technology. I just dont think vinikourov (sp) would have automatically exposed himself to a four year expulsion (at his age - his career) if he did not think he was going to pass the test.
Looks like a wrap for Contador and his team, but anything can happen. Traditionally, the last stage is basically a roll in but for the go-for glory sprints, so well see. Remarkable to think Evans team spent so much energy chasing down vinokourov & rasmussen, but thems the breaks.
You mean what was seen the world over on Sunday the 29th was just a collective daydream? Wow... weird, wild stuff. Welcome back to the future.
We "two"? Really? Let's see, shall we... in my post, I was having a bit of fun with the preceding poster, who apparently made a correct prediction regarding an event which (presumably, unknown to him) had already taken place in the past, more than a full day before his post. Are you on the same page now, Ryan? Are you beginning to appreciate the comedic potential of predicting past events? Don't lose me now... good. Always glad to help out.
Well, should be good next year-a few contenders have put their hands up, proven their ability, thats something. Juan mauritzio henandez solare, (why do they have to use their full names???????) Evans, contador, a handfull of others-fact is many of the the riders on these teams could do it, if given the chance, but thats professional cycling, its weird. I sometimes wonder, if that is the reason they "buy" a top contender to lead a team, because they are in fact disposable-would you hire rasmussen, vinokourov, now? Or last years winner, Floyd whatshisname Landis, whom incidentally, still hasnt been found guilty of doping, and is still the official winner? (i havent checked that particlar fact btw) Im guessing the sponsors will be a tad nervous , but overall, it shouldnt be a huge issue-likely even more strict rule's will be in place by then, the tour only survives off the sponsorship dollar.
So, Floyd Landis narrowly loses (2-1 arbitration panel decision just out today), but is still as defiant as ever. He is formally stripped of his 2006 Tour title... forfeits the â¬450,000 prize money... banned for 2 years, although retroactive to Jan. 30, 2007 - think "credit for time served" punishment model, I suppose. Excerpt from the story: âThis ruling is a blow to athletes and cyclists everywhere,â said Landis, in a statement released Thursday by his lead lawyer, Maurice Suh. âFor the Panel to find in favor of USADA when, with respect to so many issues, USADA did not manage to prove even the most basic parts of their case shows that this system is fundamentally flawed. I am innocent, and we proved I am innocent.â Pearl Piatt, a spokeswoman for Suh, said Landis would not be available for comment this week. But in June, during an autograph session for his book, âPositively False,â Landis said he likely would not appeal the arbitratorsâ decision if it went against him, mostly because of the cost of such a process.