Crystal ball for 2010 Cycling
No doping positives this tour, so I thought that I would rant about it anyhow.
Lance Races – Clean Tour. Lance is somewhat the Mafia Don of Cycling – he controls lots of things, through leverage payments, and IOU’s. Cyclings Dope testing arm is somehow involved in this web. Lance was reported to have made a known (how many other private bribes were there?) $100,000 payment to them (paying out of a +ve test?) I can no longer find the story, but he said at the time it was to help keep the sport cleaner. Right. And he also bitched about being tested so much.
When people cross Lance and leave his team on bad terms they generally test positive after that. Lance Loves the tour and would not want to sully it’s reputation (anymore than he/ it already has) so nothing will go down there.
Contador will test positive at some race (who knows how to tip off the dope police on dope avoidance methods better than the Master?). References? Lances ex-team mates: Floyd, Heras, Hamilton. Also when people leave the Lance – Bruneel combo the generally don’t ride as well – so I doubt that Contador will be as fast next season. But he will also pay for ruffling the Don with a 2 year time out.
Other interesting notes:
Contador’s 99.5 VO2 Max score – keep in mind that it’s a super-charged value. He beat Riis’s admittedly super doped values when cycling (and endurance sports but cycling now does more testing than the others) was a no-holds-barred EPO fest.
This is also why most cyclists guard their actual body weight so closely. Don’t believe what you read.
Lance’s Natural VO2 Max is 83-85
http://velonews.com/article/96120/lab-official-still-wary-of-tour
vtralph on August 2nd, 2009
WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! He may be doped but at least he’s putting his high profile to good use. The rest of us will do a fraction of the good work that Lance has done via his Cancer work. Do you know someone who has died from Cancer?
Also, note that the assumption behind the V02 max, wattage, watt/kg, etc were pretty well deemed flawed by several experts. Let’s try to be somewhat objective here. Do you really think Contador’s is at 99.9? If not, then how can you believe the methodology?