Windbreaker

Hey I don't need rollers to fall indoors, I once fell off my trainer. It wasn't level (tiled floor) and the vibration loosened the clamp screw. Stood up to start a sprint and next thing I'm on my arse with a very sore elbow & a buggered wheel.

What you are finding is one of the biggest arguments for power training as opposed to hr training. But why are you saying that it is useless training? My bet is that you just are not working as hard as you do on the road even though it feels as tough. I've got a power tap and the numbers don't lie. A 2x20min session on the trainer is MUCH more difficult for me than a 2x20min session on the road. So if I didn't have a PT and used my perceived exertion level, the actual effort & corresponding HR would drop (assuming that I had as much cooling as on the road). Indoor trainers can be very valuable - especially if you don't have lots of time to train.

So at the end of the day there is no doubt that there are no gains from a "physics" point of view but possibly some benefit from a physiological aspect and the question is just whether the gain is even enough to be seen above the "noise". That is going to be VERY difficult to prove because other factors at play such as hydration, heat, motivation etc will probably have more impact than the gains of the Q-rings - especially as the gains are apparently more in cyclists with less efficient pedal strokes who would suffer more from the above than the pro's.

And talking of technical loopholes. Next time that you see the blue flash but don't get a fine in the post drive straight to the nearest traffic department and fork out your R800 bucks. It's a technical loophole that prevented you getting the fine in the first place. The reason you never got the fine is because it can't be proven that you were speeding. Only a fool would argue that you should have to pay the fine. Hey, I was in the car just behind you and I saw you speeding but that's just not good enough. Right??

Fact is Rabobank fired Rasmussen same as Astana was invited to withdraw. I don't for a minute believe that there is a conspiracy to manipulate the situation to get a French winner but I am questioning what role the pressure to get a French winner is playing in the murky, behind the scenes politics. Do you think that a "French Rasmussen" would have received the same treatment?

I don't think that he is going to argue that point. But the rules say that he can't be sanctioned for only 2 such offences. Same as if you think that you can get a diploma for passing 40 out of 45 (whatever) modules and when you turn up for your certificate they tell you that they decided yesterday that you actually need 42. You only failed 5 so when did the rules change?? Also how many of your buddies got their certificates for only 40 modules?? "There are a lot of other riders in Denmark and on the National Team with warnings that the public knows nothing about," claimed Rasmussen. "So once again, a remarkably special treatment has been carried out." Windbreaker2007-07-31 15:30:22

Rasmussens story. http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2007/tour07/?id=/features/2007/tour_rasmussen_post07 For those not interested in reading the full story- He has not been on the Danish team since 2004, doesn't have a Danish license so he questions how the Danish Cycling Union can claim that he missed two tests. I guess the same as if the CSA had to claim that Robbie H was unavailable for two test in South Africa during the month of June?? He admits that he was rightfully warned by the UCI for failing to submit his schedule (1 of 6 Rabobank boys) n March 2006. No comment on the other instance which I assume was in the run up to the Tour. But that is only 2 warnings which is NOT ENOUGH to warrant any action. If that is the long and short of the full story then he does appear to have a strong case. Interesting that he makes comments about disqualifying riders until there is a French winner. I wonder how much weight that factor plays in the behind the scenes politics?? "It is highly reprehensible that a race director feels that he has the right to kick riders out of the competition and 'choose' the winner himself," responded Rasmussen when asked about ASO pressuring Rabobank into its decision. "Meaning, if he wanted to, he could attack Contador, attack Evans and ... so maybe a Frenchman could be on the podium..." I really wonder how they would have dealt with a win by Leipheimer. I'm still expecting at least one positive test within the next few days ... And just for the eternal cycnics - he doesn't provide "spin" responses to the questions. Asked if he had ever doped, Rasmussen flatly responded with a "no, absolutely not" Windbreaker2007-07-31 15:17:26

I'm sure that many otherwise unpopular decisions which are driven by business motivations will be cloaked under the "doping" excuse. Don't know the details re BMC report but I guess that this is possibly one of them.

When has the Tour EVER been innocent? They've had contenders mugged & stabbed along with many other forms of sabotage. Drugs & alcohol have plagued the Tour almost from day 1. They've tried this "national team" thing before and it never worked. I guess that the real underlying factor for any motiveation to change the structure is so that a French team has a reasonable chance of winning. How many years has it been now??

This is the problem when the "authorities" don't stick to the rules. Rules which are designed specifically to prevent this sort of crap. When Le Equipe gets fed the results of "non-negative", unverified findings and publicises them long before the rider or his management are afforded the opportunity to scrutinise them then this is the next step. The media fights for the scoop and eventually produce their own. A credible witness in one persons view is quite possibly a liar in another's. Someone lied here and the media jumped on it. How can you say that Soler is not affected. His name will be linked to a "doping scandal" forever. It will be forgotten that it was false claim long before the headlines will be lost in time - especially by the cynics. How many people on this forum now have suspicions about Soler?

Hmmm, actually thinking about it, LNDD would have pulled another positive out of the hat for todays stage.

I was hoping that Levi could manage to take the yellow. Imagine the sh*tstorm that would have caused!. The frenchies would have canceled the tour immediately with some bullsh*t excuse.

Oh sh*t I hope not! Can you just imagine ..... It's hard enough dealing with swimming, cricket, rugby, netball. Please, oh please not cycling too.

That's not strictly true. "They were invited to withdraw" by the Tour organisers which in my books is a euphemism for "get the f... out of here!". I was very interested to see whether they also invited Cofidis to withdraw but nothing been mentioned in anything that I have read.

On the upside of all of this it does look like there is a clear line being drawn now. It looks like the teams are now buying into the "zero tolerance" thing. Of course the cynics will say that Rabobank had no choice and/or that he was about to be busted anyway.

Ok so he's just a hypocrite then Thats half the problem he has nothing to fear, 2 years ago he was the villian and now everyone feels sorry for him - so if Vino, Basso, Ullrich ect... get a 2 year ban should they be welcomed back?If they were caught before the charter thingy, admit what they did and take a public "no doping" stance then yes. I think that last years tour was the line in the sand. I also think that the way Rijs was treated was counter-productive

From Velonews "Informed by the Astana management, the organisers of the Tour de France invited the team to withdraw, which was immediately accepted." Invited nogal

Sure forgive the rapists and murderers too but put them in jail. In the doping instance prosecute them with whatever they can - fraud if they can. But at least ban them for life.