Tour de France 2012

Already excited at the prospect of going to watch it. 100th Tour and hopefully like this year it'll be one to remember.

I reckon TDF will be a different kettle of fish next year with a hungry Contador there.

Glad Wiggo delivered the goods this year while he had the opportunity.

If this was the case, why the need to dope in the first place?

He didn't dope, it was a tainted steak. DUH!

True story bro.

Some like béarnaise with their steak, others a serving of performance-enhancing drugs. Maybe as a garnish - a nice salad, dressed with EPO. Happens in restaurants across the globe.

Contador or maybe Froome for a Tour where mountains > TTs, Syrup'o'Figgo in with a shot otherwise.

Contador won't have his turbo TT anymore and he will need an incredibly strong team to be able to launch away from Sky.

He didn't dope, it was a tainted steak. DUH!

Thankfully CAS aren't that gullible.

Contador will not be the rider he was when he returns.

Why will he not be the rider he was? No drugs? Mentally lost the edge?

I hope he rides clean (how would we know though?) and surprises us. Sky need some proper competition to make the tour interesting.

This tour was a bit dull wasn't it?

How clean do you think he was at the Giro and Tour last year?

I'm worried by the idea that Contador, no matter how doped he was before, won't be able to compete with Froome.

I wonder how Contador would go if he was on Sky, because there is no doubt he has natural talent.

He was very poor by his standards at the Tour last year, maybe an indication of his form when he's clean.

He was knackered after the Giro, not clean. He never thought he'd ride the Tour becase his ban would be in place by then, but escaped due to the time wasting tactics of his lawyers.

He was this close to being busted by the biological passport scheme but the clenbuterol positive scuppered any charges. He knows the UCI are watching him like a hawk, especially now his coach has been banned for life by USADA. Even if he continues to dope, he'll have to be so careful that the benefits will barely register.

He was this close to being busted by the biological passport scheme but the clenbuterol positive scuppered any charges.

What are you referring too?

On the same note, if Wiggins had not broke is collar bone last year, would he have beaten Cuddles?

I find it hard to understand how people are getting excited about Contador returning to the sport. I was fucking annoyed watching Valerde win a stage this year.

I'm not excited about it. I think dopers should be banned for life.

Me too. Sorry Millar.

The problem with cycling is that you never know what is true or false.

I'm afraid the initial euphoria has worn off, and the unbelievable performance of Froome, in particular, is a nagging thought that I can't suppress.

If Froome goes to the Vuelta and dominates it will only get louder and louder.

What are you referring too?

The evidence that was brought to CAS by WADA to support a blood transfusion contaminated with clenbuterol but not allowed to be heard as ultimately how it got there was not what CAS was asked to rule on.

Getting popped for Clenbuterol was the best possible outcome for him. Even his own expert could not explain the levels found in his blood data.

Mike Ashenden again

Because Contador had previously applied to the UCI for an exemption for high haematocrit, during 2006 he had spent several days at the Lausanne antidoping laboratory who collected some very carefully controlled blood tests. Those data were obviously considered to be reliable - Contador had been granted an exemption based on the validity of those data thus it would be very difficult for him to turn around and suggest those data could not be relied upon. I used those data to establish to my satisfaction what his natural values for haemoglobin and reticulocytes were.

AS: Based on that baseline data, what were you able to establish about Contador's '10 Tour test data?

MA: His 2010 Tour data definitely attracted my attention. As described in the panel’s ruling, my testimony was that his reticulocytes were higher than I would have expected. Not just a single result, but every result during that race was equal or above the carefully collected results he'd provided to the Lausanne lab in 2006.

At first I thought this could have been due to the analyser used during that Tour. If the analyser had been reporting results slightly high, that would have explained why Contador's values were higher than expected. However I cross-checked the results of other riders, and it was not due to the instrument.

My second thought was that perhaps this signature was just typical of how Contador's body responded to the competition of a major stage race. Again I was able to cross-check this with his other results during previous victories at major Tours, and that did not explain the 2010 Tour values either. In fact his 2010 Tour results were higher than any other value he'd provided during any of his previous major victories.

The inescapable conclusion was that his reticulocyte results were unusual for him. In fact, neither his own blood expert nor myself could conceive of any naturally-induced circumstance that could explain his elevated reticulocyte results during the Tour.

I find it hard to understand how people are getting excited about Contador returning to the sport. I was fucking annoyed watching Valerde win a stage this year.

They have been banned, and now they rightfully return.

What are you referring too?

It was referred to in an interview with Michael Ashenden following the CAS ruling earlier this year. I followed up with a friend, who is privy to a lot of what goes on at the UCI, who confirmed that their position on Contador had moved beyond suspicion.

I refer the gentleman to my previous response.

The problem with cycling is that you never know what is true or false.

I'm afraid the initial euphoria has worn off, and the unbelievable performance of Froome, in particular, is a nagging thought that I can't suppress.

If Froome goes to the Vuelta and dominates it will only get louder and louder.

maybe wiggins will step his game up yet again and prove froome is 2nd best

come on colonel wiggins

The problem with cycling is that you never know what is true or false.

I'm afraid the initial euphoria has worn off, and the unbelievable performance of Froome, in particular, is a nagging thought that I can't suppress.

If Froome goes to the Vuelta and dominates it will only get louder and louder.

Surely Froome has simply confirmed what he showed at last year's Vuelta, namely that he has the ability to podium at a Grand Tour?

Let's turn this round, do you think BC/Team Sky would tolerate a lone individual doping and bringing the whole infrastructure down and might have checks and balances in place to prevent it?

I refer the gentleman to my previous response.

You posted that whilst I was replying.

Thanks.