Yes he refused doping control in 1982 Critérium de Callac and received a suspension as a result. He’s just trying to protect his position in the 5 club.
2018 PRO thread
Moderators: robbosmans, Moderator Team
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
I like how Hinault just makes up the rules as he sees fit.
Quite simply because he has tested positive, for me this is not an abnormal test. The people at the UCI should have said, you have been caught, so you should not be racing.
It's just ill-informed opinion. I prefer him throwing idiots off stage.
This may be nothing, and the timing is just coincidence, but I thought that Moscon being cleared of allegations due to lack of evidence comes at a pretty convenient time for Team Sky.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/moscon- ... ach-crash/
Hinault's comments apparently can be easily waved off as an hidden agenda for French/personal interests.
Team Sky have been playing the "he has all the rights to start" and "we did nothing wrong" cards.
Moscon's case could be considered as proof of how Team Sky gets wrongfully accused of wrongdoing, even when nothing wrong has been done.
Maybe it's just my opinion, but the timing is pretty good for the Team Sky PR team.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/moscon- ... ach-crash/
Hinault's comments apparently can be easily waved off as an hidden agenda for French/personal interests.
Team Sky have been playing the "he has all the rights to start" and "we did nothing wrong" cards.
Moscon's case could be considered as proof of how Team Sky gets wrongfully accused of wrongdoing, even when nothing wrong has been done.
Maybe it's just my opinion, but the timing is pretty good for the Team Sky PR team.
-
- Posts: 3282
- Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:38 pm
Do you really believe that? Hinault was a monster and dominated his era both physically and mentally. Surely the exact Hinault of 1982 might struggle to feature at the very pointy end if dropped into today's peloton but if the raw athletic material he had was trained in a 2018 manner with all the added knowledge there is today, I have no doubt that he would be as powerful today. If anything, he might be more dominant today because I don't see anyone in today's peloton as aggresive and as confident in himself as Hinault was. His intimidation factor was huge and I think it would work equally today in today's pro peloton.
Yeah I do believe he would have struggled today, and I think it bites at his ego too.BdaGhisallo wrote: ↑Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:11 amDo you really believe that? Hinault was a monster and dominated his era both physically and mentally. Surely the exact Hinault of 1982 might struggle to feature at the very pointy end if dropped into today's peloton but if the raw athletic material he had was trained in a 2018 manner with all the added knowledge there is today, I have no doubt that he would be as powerful today. If anything, he might be more dominant today because I don't see anyone in today's peloton as aggresive and as confident in himself as Hinault was. His intimidation factor was huge and I think it would work equally today in today's pro peloton.
'Monster in his day' doesn't mean anything. I mean, it actually means nothing. None of what you wrote has any empirical value to evaluating how he'd do today.
Even the psychological aspect about his intimidation. He wouldn't act the same, he wouldn't have the same confidence. He wouldn't have developed into the same character as he'd be in a tighter pool of talent, getting beat more regularly. That's if he could even cut it at pro level. Even with today's training and nutrition.
Of which, again, there's just no empirical evidence to back it up. We also don't know what sort of drugs he may have been using for which wins. The guy, like many in his era weren't subject to any sort of credible doping controls. But we do know they were doping in his era. Before and after. Plus ca change. Regardless, he should shut it and be proud and content with what he achieved in his day. Attacking Froome just marks him out as a bitter throwback.
- Ruimteaapjes
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 3:47 pm
So where's your "empirical evidence" that he would struggle in today's peloton and that this bites his ego?Shrike wrote: ↑Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:21 amYeah I do believe he would have struggled today, and I think it bites at his ego too.BdaGhisallo wrote: ↑Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:11 amDo you really believe that? Hinault was a monster and dominated his era both physically and mentally. Surely the exact Hinault of 1982 might struggle to feature at the very pointy end if dropped into today's peloton but if the raw athletic material he had was trained in a 2018 manner with all the added knowledge there is today, I have no doubt that he would be as powerful today. If anything, he might be more dominant today because I don't see anyone in today's peloton as aggresive and as confident in himself as Hinault was. His intimidation factor was huge and I think it would work equally today in today's pro peloton.
'Monster in his day' doesn't mean anything. I mean, it actually means nothing. None of what you wrote has any empirical value to evaluating how he'd do today.
Even the psychological aspect about his intimidation. He wouldn't act the same, he wouldn't have the same confidence. He wouldn't have developed into the same character as he'd be in a tighter pool of talent, getting beat more regularly. That's if he could even cut it at pro level. Even with today's training and nutrition.
Of which, again, there's just no empirical evidence to back it up. We also don't know what sort of drugs he may have been using for which wins. The guy, like many in his era weren't subject to any sort of credible doping controls. But we do know they were doping in his era. Before and after. Plus ca change. Regardless, he should shut it and be proud and content with what he achieved in his day. Attacking Froome just marks him out as a bitter throwback.
who, Froome? but he's so far from that status, actually more of the opposite of "legendary" as it stands today. maybe not "notorious" either, but "equivocal"? yeah, that one fits here just fine.
Hinault, just like lots of other retired pro athletes, think they stand on some moral high ground, totally forgetting, they were once down there themselves and did stuff as well. sure, Froome's case begs for intervention and ringing alarm bells, because it's like a middle finger pointed at the whole cycling world - "even if we do wrong, you can't touch us" kind of statement. it makes people angry, very rightfully so. but when one shady guy tells people to watch out for another shady guy, it only ridicules the whole issue.
if Hinault feels he shouldn't ride, or peloton should do this or that, he can put the pressure on ASO, pull some strings, try to make things happen. talking like that, he only shows his frustration, and the problem doesn't go even a bit more away
kkibbler wrote: WW remembers.
I don't know the circumstances of Hinault's declaration. But many times, these statements are honest answers to straightforward questions from journos. The answerer is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. I've gotten tired of all the media washed answers people are conditioned to give, so as not to cast a negative light on a sponsor, federation, race, whatever. Beyond all the technical handwringing, the Froome question is a philosophical one - is someone who has broken the rules on drugs entitled to race? In the case of at least two other pros, the answer was no. Hinault offered his opinion. It's not his job to lobby the ASO, UCI or anyone else.
^that's a possible explanation, true. although, regarding pros, seems like you only get to stand on the other side of the fence when you retire and have nothing to lose - that's my biggest criticism. has any current pro, except for Wellens (also during an interview) spoken against this situation? and if someone tried to speak their mind freely, like Bennett, they were forced to apologize shortly after.
kkibbler wrote: WW remembers.
I think Sky's PR is beyond saving. Maybe they can polish it a bit for the masses but the people who really follow cycling won't believe them anymore.Sacke wrote: ↑Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:06 amThis may be nothing, and the timing is just coincidence, but I thought that Moscon being cleared of allegations due to lack of evidence comes at a pretty convenient time for Team Sky.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/moscon- ... ach-crash/
Hinault's comments apparently can be easily waved off as an hidden agenda for French/personal interests.
Team Sky have been playing the "he has all the rights to start" and "we did nothing wrong" cards.
Moscon's case could be considered as proof of how Team Sky gets wrongfully accused of wrongdoing, even when nothing wrong has been done.
Maybe it's just my opinion, but the timing is pretty good for the Team Sky PR team.
Just as Froome will be damaged regardless of the outcome of his trial. There were always doubts regarding his sudden rise to the top while being dropped on mountains 1 or 2 years before that, and this won't work in his favour.
nm.
Can I go back to talking about pro bikes, and change for change's sake being marketed as "innovation" ?
Nevermind...
Nevermind...
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com