- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Add new comment
50 comments
Googling the issue suggests that some retesting has been done, Beijing Olympics for example but Chris did not ride Beijing they chose dopers instead. It is not clear how much retesting has been done.
In many of the big cases we don't actually have positive tests - LAs case in particular and Balco. As I have posted above the thought is that the testing regimes are not good enough, and so many athletes pass the tests.
Besides, as we know from the Tour, they don't test for all types of PEDs all the time. Sometimes it is blood doping, sometimes it's for blood PEDs and sometimes just urine.
The science behind it shows that it is easier to evade a test, than be caught. Makes you realise how dumb it is to be caught.
Given that in a poll of Olympic athletes, when asked the question would you use a PED if you knew you could get away with it most answered 'yes'. You'd be a mug not to be using them.
I am skeptical about the 'Sky Train', and especially Horner. Yes, a positive result helps, but until testing catches up with doping we live in a world where the benefits of cheating are great, and the chances of being caught slim.
You don't rise from the shadows to become a GC contender over night either. You talk about shadows, but the Schleck's never cast a great shadow over their team - physically or metaphorically. Why has Horner not dominated a small tour, or taken the mantle in the time period from 2012 Tour? Even before, when Andy was injured I can only remember him in passing.
His ability in this Vuelta really doesn't pass the scratch test. Unfortunately for every incredible performance it raises the suspicion on the likes of Froome and co. Though I admit the Vuelta seems to bring with it less credible performances in a country which has had no drug testing scandal, but has been known as a great place for dopers to get their fixes....Even the results of the Fuentes case were burned to prevent further testing.
I give up. None of you even seem to know what Horner has won, else you wouldn't be asking why he hasn't won smaller tours.
Also, his grand tour results, as a DS are right up there
Um...I suspect most of us know enough to know that a DS is a Directeur Sportif. AFAIK, Horner isn't one.
I think we need to talk about Pozzovivo.
I would have let that comment go, because with 15 posts, I thought you were new to the site, but I see you've been around over two years.
So you should know by now, around these parts, DS is a shortened form of Domestique....
What do his past results prove? That's like saying Armstrong didn't dope in 2005 because he'd won the Tour every year since 99.
Horner has publically stated what his stance on doping is - if you pass the test on the day, then you're clean, no going back. Part of the game is passing the test. He still believes LA should have his 7 Tour wins (BTW, I agree with him on that point).
Source?
Really? Why would anyone abbreviate "domestique" to DS when DS is already an acknowledged abbreviation for Directeur Sportif? Random.
@Gkam84 - what's the approved abbreviation for Directeur Sportif 'around these parts' then?
I have been trying to back up my re-testing statement above; but can't.
My thoughts are that the people queuing up to grass themselves up and contribute to the USADA case against LA must have done so with some sort of encouragement ie admit or we will re-test. Chris seems to have been rubbing shoulders with many of the disgraced riders; surely USADA would have spoken to him and given him the same choice? I am speculating.
BUT anyone remember this from the 2010 TdF
http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/05/news/lequipe-publishes-list-of-uc...
Chris Horner managed to finish 9th and scored -0- on the list = no suspicion at all.. but so did Zabriskie
Cavendish -2-
Wiggins -5-
Lance -4-
Basso -3-
He is either lucky or determined to be clean?
He has had plenty of opportunity to dope and must have raised suspicion? Time will, hopefully, tell.
DS meaning domestique comes from the fantasy game, I think. It's an accepted shorthand on these forums.
Directeur sportif is also abbreviated to DS; whichever one it is will usually be clear from the context.
Hope that helps
Hopefully this link works, took me a while to find this! It's quite long, but very interesting and informative. The part I was referring to is in the Armstrong section at the end. After reading this, I'm sure you'll agree Horner is a fully-paid up member of the omerta crewe, as reinforced by JV's recent twitter comments. Doesn't proves he's doping now, or ever has doped, but it gives a good insight into his views:
hopefully works this time:
http://m.cyclingnews.com/features//exclusive-interview-chris-horner-on-h...
It'd be easier to count the people who aren't part of the pro cycling omerta crew.
Just been reading this http://journalvelo.com/opinion/chris-horners-power-files-revealed-is-he-...
Seems, no matter what he weights, his power to weight doesn't go above the suspicious level that everyone seems to spout, but no-one knows where it came from...
close to 6.2 on final climb at over 40 years old!! What could he push out at his peak?? He must have been the worlds best cyclist at one time. Imagine what he could have done the other day if he'd have been doped!
I wasn't aware of this as I don't look at the fantasy league on this site.
DS = Directeur Sportif in the rest of the world.
Despite having the opportunity during the long interview with Matt Rendell, Horner never said he was racing clean. And interestingly, at the press conference even Valverde, an experienced and recidivist doper, seemed to be left wondering at Horner's performance. That certainly rang an alarm bell for me!
I see what you mean daddyELVIS; given the company that he has kept it would take an iron will to not dope. But he seems ambivalent to the issue and follows the familiar not doping = not getting caught ideology.
But the company he has kept must have put him under the spotlight for many years, USADA in particular... better to be born lucky than rich?
Takes one to know one.
Pages