Doping in XC skiing - Page 64 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #631  
Old 11-27-12, 22:04
Tyler'sTwin Tyler'sTwin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,314
Default

Found this nonsense at VGD.

Quote:
I følge Lerheim så indikerte de blodtester man tok i OL-94 ikke noe misbruk blant medaljevinnerene. Det kan se ut til at det gikk et skille mellom 94 og 95 hvor jo blodverdier tyder på et omfattende bruk.
The italians were mega-juiced in -94. Click 'Danskerlægen - del 2' in the link below and watch from 11:55-15:40.

http://www.dr.dk/Sporten/Dokumentar/...0530140756.htm
Reply With Quote
  #632  
Old 11-27-12, 22:08
Tyler'sTwin Tyler'sTwin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,314
Default

Quote:
- Det er riktig, men de testene vi tok på de fire beste pluss to på loddtrekning fra hver konkurranse, både individuelt og i stafett, viste ingen abnorme blodverdier. Vi hadde ingen indisier på at utøvere hadde tatt noe som ville gi dem fordeler, sier Lereim.
Quote:
- Om utøvere hadde tatt EPO, så kunne vi ikke påvise det, men de hadde i hvert fall ikke for høye blodverdier.
http://sport.aftenposten.no/sport/article255092.ece

Now look at the italian hematocrits. How full of crap is Lereim?
Reply With Quote
  #633  
Old 11-28-12, 05:34
Tubeless's Avatar
Tubeless Tubeless is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 382
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kottila View Post
As far as I've read, it appears that the knowledge about EPO were shared across all sports and countries and almost all of it can be linked to a small number of doctors functioning as the central nodes of information. Seeing that no Norwegian (at least in XC) have ever been mentioned in relation to them, wouldn't that imply that the small country Norway (including Sweden?) established a EPO network completely independent that doped the athletes even better than those who could gather information from the entire network and without a single person breaking the silence after so many years? that sounds extremely unlikely in my opinion.
As we have learned from Tyler's book and other sources in cycling, it was simply not possible to be competitive against EPO-dopers clean. Look at these Men's 30km classic results from the 1995 World Championships in Thunder Bay, Canada:

http://www.fis-ski.com/uk/604/610.ht...=CC&raceid=647

Notes:
- This was before the Hb limits were established starting in 1997
- The effect of EPO was known to all, no EPO test existed
- Known EPO dopers at the time: Italians, Finns, Russians
- The 4 minute gap between 1st place and 10th place is simply amazing
- Rumor has it that Smirnov's Hb was 21 (comparable to Bjarne Riis' reported Hkr of 63.2 at the 1996 Tour de France)

And now look which country took positions 2, 7 and 8. Anyone who thinks that Norwegians did not participate in the EPO party of the 1990's is blind and ignorant. You have to give them credit for keeping the secret, but that does not mean they were clean. Germans almost certainly doped as well (positions 10, 12, 17) but no one has exposed their doping program either.

Skis (flex, grind, wax) can indeed make a difference - but nowhere near 4 minutes over 30km against other skiers who have access to the best ski prep money can buy.
Reply With Quote
  #634  
Old 11-28-12, 08:24
Velo1ticker Velo1ticker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 60
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeless View Post
As we have learned from Tyler's book and other sources in cycling, it was simply not possible to be competitive against EPO-dopers clean. Look at these Men's 30km classic results from the 1995 World Championships in Thunder Bay, Canada:

http://www.fis-ski.com/uk/604/610.ht...=CC&raceid=647

Notes:
- This was before the Hb limits were established starting in 1997
- The effect of EPO was known to all, no EPO test existed
- Known EPO dopers at the time: Italians, Finns, Russians
- The 4 minute gap between 1st place and 10th place is simply amazing
- Rumor has it that Smirnov's Hb was 21 (comparable to Bjarne Riis' reported Hkr of 63.2 at the 1996 Tour de France)

And now look which country took positions 2, 7 and 8. Anyone who thinks that Norwegians did not participate in the EPO party of the 1990's is blind and ignorant. You have to give them credit for keeping the secret, but that does not mean they were clean. Germans almost certainly doped as well (positions 10, 12, 17) but no one has exposed their doping program either.

Skis (flex, grind, wax) can indeed make a difference - but nowhere near 4 minutes over 30km against other skiers who have access to the best ski prep money can buy.
The question is how stupid do want to pretend you are? What do think is going on about 40 sec into this clip from the 30 km?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNRcNuQwS-g

You need to take the situation into consideration. Russia, Finland and Italy could not have any meaningful recruitment as everyone needed to join the dope club if the wanted to participate. These nations’ had worked for decades to find the best dope and ways to hide the cheating. What if someone actually used their recourses in a meaningful way and that their budget was lager than the competitors? All you got, and you seem to agree with me, is some results. If someone beat your doped up Italian favorite they are cheating whereas your dope friend get a seat in the parliament thanks to dope. If you don't understand what makes a good skier you will certainly conclude that all winners are doped!
Reply With Quote
  #635  
Old 11-28-12, 09:46
romnom romnom is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Velo1ticker View Post
Regarding 30 year old accusations you need to know that the Norwegian coach Lundemo accused Finland of doping after 1984 Olympics. Finland claimed it was the other way around. Now we know the facts. Finnish skiers were doped and they have systematically worked with Russia and later on with Italy when doing dope. There is nothing new about Norway and Sweden in the documentary and it is clearly a rewrite of the 1984 statement “we are innocent but everyone else is cheating” to “everybody did take dope”. It was documented that Finland started in the 70’s and it didn’t stop at the Lahti WC 2001 as they have claimed earlier. Judging from recruitment potential and popularly Norway and Sweden should dominating XC skiing – oh wait, that defense is only valid for Spain and Italy. You also dismiss the fact that Norwegians won the first and last race of the season only to miss out on the big prizes in 1970-89. So when the facts don’t fit you change the facts.
Why is it so important to accuse the Norwegian for maybe taking something (in the 90s) when you’ve got people far worse than Lance and Johan in Russia, Italy, Finland for 4 decades.
I'm not sure what your point is. We now know the facts about the Finnish side of the story after they had a huge scandal two decades into the accusations that encouraged people to try and figure out what has been going on. What you tell me is that the Norwegian side of the story still remains exactly the same, nothing to see just bitter idle speculation by dirty competitors. I think there's little to no chance that the Norwegian side of the story is anywhere near as dirty as the Finnish history, but as long as you keep telling me the claims are just the same stuff that has been going on for 30 years I'll stay convinced that you don't want to know what went on. All the dirt coming up from the other countries should encourage people to investigate things, but you seem to think it's the opposite. Somehow others being more dirty means we don't need to know what the less dirty athletes did?

Anyway, if you can't figure out why it is important to know what went on in the 90s, I really doubt you're interested in the sport being clean today. As long as people pass the tests everything is okay. Healthy attitude considering what we know about the success rate of the testing. Norwegians missing out on the biggest prices in 1970-89 and the becoming competitive in the 90s doesn't exactly help your case. Especially when you seem to think it isn't really important to know what the Norwegians maybe did or didn't do back in the 90s. I'm quite OK with people not wanting to know more about that stuff. I find it somewhat interesting when people obviously don't want to know while claiming they do want to know.
Reply With Quote
  #636  
Old 11-28-12, 10:10
Tyler'sTwin Tyler'sTwin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,314
Default

Manuela Di Centa

11 dec -93: 55.2%

17 jan -94: 50.9%

28 feb -94: 54.2%

4 mar -94: 52.0%


Silvio Fauner

16 dec -93: 40.9%

6 feb -94: 58.0%

Yeah, I'm sure there were no abnormal blood values in Lillehammer, Inggard.

Last edited by Tyler'sTwin; 11-28-12 at 10:13.
Reply With Quote
  #637  
Old 11-28-12, 11:22
python's Avatar
python python is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,485
Default

i will leave nationalities out of the post and will try to look into one very controversial issue abstractly, or mechanically if you will.

could an un-doped elite xc skier beat equally talented but a blood-doped competitor during the epo-saturated 90s due to superior ski preparation ?

many on the forum, including some serious posters who know the sport and appreciate the rampant epo history of the 90’s genuinely believe it was possible. they believe that some well preserved and repeatedly applied secrets of superior ski preparation could explain away some ‘clean’ victories.

Could it ?

it would be easy enough to answer the question if we knew with high degree of certainty the fixed percent advantage impacted by each approach. for example, blood boost =5%, ski prep= 3%. Boom 5>3... no way !?

unfortunately, it is not that simple. while studies show that the percent improvement due to blood doping varies greatly from one individual to another, we have recently learned from several sworn affidavits that elite cyclists of pre-epo test days would observe wattage improvements in the order of 3-5% when compared to themselves undoped. it would be reasonable to assume, though i do appreciate the difference between the 2 sports, that the blood-doped elite xc skiers of the 90s would experience a similar magnitude improvement.

but can a secret superior ski preparation - and I stress, at the world-cup level - provide a 3-5% advantage that could deliver a winning recipe year after year ?

if you assumed i know the answer, you are wrong. i don’t, despite being a xc ski fanatic all my life. that’s why i spent some time researching the answer. to my disappointment, I found no solid, reliable numbers. they simply don’t exist. at least, they don't exist in the public domain. i mean, there are some commercial and anecdotal claims by ski equipment vendors, but I do not consider them scientifically adequate for my comparisons to blood doping.

for example, there was a plausible claim that with the introduction of 3d generation fluorocarbon waxes friction coefficient went down by 2%. i buy that. i also found quite reasonable claims, even when compared to my own experience, that the properly applied glide wax to the professionally ground-stoned ski base gave an advantage of about 1-3%.

But what about 3-5% ? well, if it does exists, it’s not public and wont be found in those peer reviewed journals. this is a fact simply because of the very long skiing tradition of keeping waxing kitchen's secrets tight...

now, let’s engage some common sense. is it possible to keep a winning waxing recipe secret for a decade ? particularly in the age of the internet and the unprecedented fluid cross-employment of coaches, technicians, consultants etc. ? my answer - unlikely !

then there is the serious swedish research claiming that with the introduction of HDPE and particularly UHMWPE ski bases, the water repellent proprieties of the most advanced waxes were simply over commercialized and their effect small at best.

for this and the other reason outlined above (in red) i’m inclined to believe that the almost unlimited blood doping of the 90’s would trounce the best ski preparation each and every time.

nowadays, in the age of micro-dosing and blood passport things are different. but only in scale. not in principle.
__________________
I don't f***ing care. It's his problem not mine--Bernard Hinault

Last edited by python; 11-28-12 at 11:29.
Reply With Quote
  #638  
Old 11-28-12, 11:51
Bavarianrider's Avatar
Bavarianrider Bavarianrider is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bavaria
Posts: 3,660
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Velo1ticker View Post
The question is how stupid do want to pretend you are? What do think is going on about 40 sec into this clip from the 30 km?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNRcNuQwS-g

You need to take the situation into consideration. Russia, Finland and Italy could not have any meaningful recruitment as everyone needed to join the dope club if the wanted to participate. These nations’ had worked for decades to find the best dope and ways to hide the cheating. What if someone actually used their recourses in a meaningful way and that their budget was lager than the competitors? All you got, and you seem to agree with me, is some results. If someone beat your doped up Italian favorite they are cheating whereas your dope friend get a seat in the parliament thanks to dope. If you don't understand what makes a good skier you will certainly conclude that all winners are doped!
There is no doubt that you couldn't win a damn thing without EPO in the 90es. However, looking at one result only, especially a classic race, can be very dangerous.
In general, one can conclude that most certainly Norwegians, and Italians were leading in terms team wide of juicing in the 90es.
As for the Germans, i don't believe they were really on the juice in the 90es. At least not that heavily. Back in those days, it was already astonihsing if a German finished in the Top Ten. However, suddenly after 2002 Germans were jumping into the world class. Certainly something must have changed. I highjly doubt they got that much better over night.
Same for Mühlegg. He totally dominated as a Juniror, but in the 90es he wa sno more then a Top 10 guy at best. Then in 2000 things suddenly changed.
You can guess why. Was it cause Mühlegg started doping while everybody else was clean? Or was it more that Mühlegg as well as the other Germans started to do what Norwegians and Italians had done longe before
Reply With Quote
  #639  
Old 11-28-12, 12:41
Bavarianrider's Avatar
Bavarianrider Bavarianrider is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bavaria
Posts: 3,660
Default

The Austrians are of interest, too.
I mean they went from beings scrubbs in the mid 90es to winning medals in 98 the relay in 99 and gold medals in 2002.
I mean comme on.
Actually this pattern was redone recently as the Austrian biathletes all of a sudden were setting the pace around the year 2009.
However, after the Human Plasma thing came out, they went back to normal again.
Reply With Quote
  #640  
Old 11-28-12, 14:59
Alesle Alesle is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 28
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by python View Post
...
But what about 3-5% ? well, if it does exists, it’s not public and wont be found in those peer reviewed journals. this is a fact simply because of the very long skiing tradition of keeping waxing kitchen's secrets tight...
...
The most interesting easily available article I found on the subject was a french one that suggested "In V1-skating, the expertise level of skier is preponderant; but on equal expertise level, the difference on the performance between a good and a bad choice of topography and waxing of the ski sole varies between 3 and 10% of the course time."

The article itself is in French, which to say the least isn't exactly my strong suit, but as I understand the article (with the help of google translate), it only considers the difference between "good and bad" waxing/grinding. I doubt the differences in waxing/grinding is (was) consistently that big at the top international level, but at least the article provides some numbers.

Last edited by Alesle; 11-28-12 at 15:06.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:49.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.