Log in:  

Register

Dumoulin.

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

Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

03 Aug 2018 23:43

so just start doping when you are young and avoid suspicion from the clinic? there could be alot of doping in u23...i actually dont see why not, getting doping doesn't require showing an id and the good results set you up for the future.

and if so it makes the clean riders progressing more naturally to their prime look bad or average at first to get shipped up to smaller teams working on their craft. hypothetically a guy like dumoulin. Then as time passes, the real good stuff gets more difficult to use as the testing gets better and better, the cycles get more complex to get right with micro dosing and obscure peptides etc but the support is lacking from most teams. and these youngsters stagnate when they are older which allows someone with talent but clean to get back in the wheel.

its just narrative

Dutch cycling is back on track though, im happy with that. and it coincides with an era of less effective gear, and less professional, team wide doping. so maybe we are good in diy or true talent can shine again. either way its a personal victory. :D
Cntfeelmylegs
New Member
 
Posts: 14
Joined: 12 Sep 2015 09:56

Re:

04 Aug 2018 09:28

Dekker_Tifosi wrote:Which is completely logical. Tour L'Avenir is, what, 8 days? With, relative to pro races, short stages.
A diesel like Kruijswijk would never come to the fore in such a race.
Dumoulin is also quite a diesel

Look. I totally get why people would suspect Dumo of doping and for that I'm not putting my hand in the fire.
But people like DFA are suspecting him for all the wrong reasons with all the wrong arguments.
Which are even disproven so easily.

The reason why you should suspect him is because he had 0 bad days in 2 grand days in a row while closely competing with the best GT rider of the last 7 years who himself is not exactly unsuspicious with all what's going around him and his team. That is a valid and totally understandable reason

Not dfa;s horseshit comparisons with the Tour l'Avenir or totally ridicolous comparisons to the transformation of track riders and Froome. It's not even close to Dumo's history. That's why I am saying, totally the wrong reasons.

It's not about suspecting whether or not Dumoulin is doping. That seems a pretty open and shut case. It's about whether or not Dumoulin is a donkey turned racehorse. Which youth results suggest he is the former - certainly compared with Thomas, for example.
User avatar DFA123
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,362
Joined: 07 Nov 2010 16:00
Location: Valencia

04 Aug 2018 10:54

Dumoulin's performance in the 2015 Vuelta raised plenty of eyebrows though. And he didn't even finish in the top 5. If he had won the Tour that year (he crashed out early) I guarantee he would be getting the same level of scrutiny as all the Sky riders.

Let's face it, even the domestiques are doping but it's always going to be the stars who are going to receive the highest level of scrutiny (and rightfully so).
DanielSong39
Member
 
Posts: 1,054
Joined: 15 Jul 2016 13:03

04 Aug 2018 11:03

why are youth results considered so significant though why are these results more pure? im sure you could get a vial of epo or whatever you want delivered at your doorstep at the age of 16

"Italian cyclist aged 14 reportedly fails anti-doping control after regional race"

"Teenage cyclist Gabriel Evans admits to doping because culture had been 'normalised and justified'
Evans said he had seen other riders being busted for drugs on a regular basis"

point being, a cyclist might look like a donkey in such an environment because he is (still) competing clean. it might actually be of benefit long term to start doping later in your career as opposed to getting these easy gains early before you streamlined your training, diet and get close to your natural ceiling. that kind of sensible build up might be something a meticulous guy like dumoulin actually did.
Cntfeelmylegs
New Member
 
Posts: 14
Joined: 12 Sep 2015 09:56

Re:

04 Aug 2018 11:50

Dekker_Tifosi wrote:Which is completely logical. Tour L'Avenir is, what, 8 days? With, relative to pro races, short stages.
A diesel like Kruijswijk would never come to the fore in such a race.
Dumoulin is also quite a diesel

Look. I totally get why people would suspect Dumo of doping and for that I'm not putting my hand in the fire.
But people like DFA are suspecting him for all the wrong reasons with all the wrong arguments.
Which are even disproven so easily.

The reason why you should suspect him is because he had 0 bad days in 2 grand days in a row while closely competing with the best GT rider of the last 7 years who himself is not exactly unsuspicious with all what's going around him and his team. That is a valid and totally understandable reason

Not dfa;s horseshit comparisons with the Tour l'Avenir or totally ridicolous comparisons to the transformation of track riders and Froome. It's not even close to Dumo's history. That's why I am saying, totally the wrong reasons.


Good post -- and yet: There were 5 weeks between the Giro and Tour. That seems like plenty of time to recover from anything other than an ultra-long distance event. So you could also argue that TD has excellent natural recovery powers and a strong constitution that allowed him to escape the illness that felled Pinot at the end of the Giro. Or that he raced really strategically and just knows how to measure his efforts over a 3 week race...

One thing that strikes me about TD is that he just looks really robust, like Indurain. It's just my impression, nothing more. He looks like a guy who could power through 2 GTs in a row.
Bolder
Member
 
Posts: 574
Joined: 25 Jun 2015 07:29

Re: Re:

04 Aug 2018 14:31

Bolder wrote:
Dekker_Tifosi wrote:Which is completely logical. Tour L'Avenir is, what, 8 days? With, relative to pro races, short stages.
A diesel like Kruijswijk would never come to the fore in such a race.
Dumoulin is also quite a diesel

Look. I totally get why people would suspect Dumo of doping and for that I'm not putting my hand in the fire.
But people like DFA are suspecting him for all the wrong reasons with all the wrong arguments.
Which are even disproven so easily.

The reason why you should suspect him is because he had 0 bad days in 2 grand days in a row while closely competing with the best GT rider of the last 7 years who himself is not exactly unsuspicious with all what's going around him and his team. That is a valid and totally understandable reason

Not dfa;s horseshit comparisons with the Tour l'Avenir or totally ridicolous comparisons to the transformation of track riders and Froome. It's not even close to Dumo's history. That's why I am saying, totally the wrong reasons.


Good post -- and yet: There were 5 weeks between the Giro and Tour. That seems like plenty of time to recover from anything other than an ultra-long distance event. So you could also argue that TD has excellent natural recovery powers and a strong constitution that allowed him to escape the illness that felled Pinot at the end of the Giro. Or that he raced really strategically and just knows how to measure his efforts over a 3 week race...

One thing that strikes me about TD is that he just looks really robust, like Indurain. It's just my impression, nothing more. He looks like a guy who could power through 2 GTs in a row.

Do you really find transformations both thomas, dimoulin underwent completely incomparable? for sure, unlike froome, tom had something under his belt, however big guy came to the vuelta and started owning gc contenders on muritos and delivered very impressive perfomances in high mountains, which was sensational and absolutely unexpected.
DFA123 wrote:A rider with incredible natural talent would always show it from a young age.

so you point being let quintana, bernal, dimoulin and thomas ride a gt clean or arrange exactly the same doping programme for each of 4, the colombians are going to destroy all-rounders uphill, isn't it?
dacooley
Member
 
Posts: 1,673
Joined: 30 May 2015 15:37

Re: Re:

04 Aug 2018 16:23

dacooley wrote:
18-Valve. (pithy) wrote:
Dekker_Tifosi wrote:Yeah it works for Dumoulin that he actually looks tired (both in Giro and Tour), while Thomas looked liked he was barely breathing and just on a sunday stroll


It seemed to me that the best rider by far wasn't allowed to, or didn't choose to win in a (more) dominating fashion, even when it was obvious that it was all over for Froome.

Sky likely got another podium spot out of their negative racing, but Thomas may have looked more believable if he would have gone in the red "a bit" more. To me, anyway. I've never seen anything like this. All other Tour winners I remember seemingly went all out on at least some of the major climbs.

Thomas went all out on Rosière. Or you admit could have put into Dimoulin and Froome yet 30-40 extra seconds?
Thomas may have gained some "lost" time back with that insane rush to the finish line, but he could have easily gained more time by dropping Dumoulin earlier and TTing away. How much time, I do not know, but he didn't look tired to me on the podium / during the interview. I don't think we'd be talking about a few measly seconds.
18-Valve. (pithy)
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,523
Joined: 04 May 2011 12:50

Re: Re:

04 Aug 2018 16:36

dacooley wrote:so you point being let quintana, bernal, dimoulin and thomas ride a gt clean or arrange exactly the same doping programme for each of 4, the colombians are going to destroy all-rounders uphill, isn't it?

Not entirely sure what you mean here. But I think the current in vogue doping favours heavier riders - so I don't think doping is a level playing field, even if you give riders the same program. The bigger riders seem to be able to drop significant weight right now without sacrificing any power. I think Terpstra also said that doing the same enabled him to win RVV. Smaller riders who naturally carry less weight and have smaller frames, don't benefit as much.

If everyone was clean, who knows who would win? Obviously it wouldn't be Froome or Dumoulin - but I'm not sure I'd vouch for anyone. Perhaps Pinot.
User avatar DFA123
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,362
Joined: 07 Nov 2010 16:00
Location: Valencia

04 Aug 2018 18:10

Even if you put everyone on the exact same doping program it's not going to help everyone the same. Everyone is different and everyone will react different to any type of doping.
User avatar Koronin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,916
Joined: 14 Oct 2017 01:42
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Re:

04 Aug 2018 19:52

DFA123 wrote:
dacooley wrote:so you point being let quintana, bernal, dimoulin and thomas ride a gt clean or arrange exactly the same doping programme for each of 4, the colombians are going to destroy all-rounders uphill, isn't it?

Not entirely sure what you mean here. But I think the current in vogue doping favours heavier riders - so I don't think doping is a level playing field, even if you give riders the same program. The bigger riders seem to be able to drop significant weight right now without sacrificing any power. I think Terpstra also said that doing the same enabled him to win RVV. Smaller riders who naturally carry less weight and have smaller frames, don't benefit as much.

If everyone was clean, who knows who would win? Obviously it wouldn't be Froome or Dumoulin - but I'm not sure I'd vouch for anyone. Perhaps Pinot.

to be honest I'm quite sceptical about the idea of just riding at world tour level completely clean, not to mention about winning something...you probably meant bigger riders. adjusted for body mass index, quintana is not lighter than froome, dimoulin and thomas. in this regard, tour hasn't favoured small riders since the beginning of 90's, so it's not like this year's tour opens up something new for us.

doping area has never been a level plaing field and will probably never be. sure tour de l'avenir's field is generally cleaner than tour de france one, but how much cleaner is real tough question to answer. almost certainly some riders decide to run the risk at tour l'avenir too, because the stakes are quite high with possibilites of being signed by a wt team and finishing career really early.
dacooley
Member
 
Posts: 1,673
Joined: 30 May 2015 15:37

Re: Re:

06 Aug 2018 12:06

dacooley wrote:
DFA123 wrote:
dacooley wrote:so you point being let quintana, bernal, dimoulin and thomas ride a gt clean or arrange exactly the same doping programme for each of 4, the colombians are going to destroy all-rounders uphill, isn't it?

Not entirely sure what you mean here. But I think the current in vogue doping favours heavier riders - so I don't think doping is a level playing field, even if you give riders the same program. The bigger riders seem to be able to drop significant weight right now without sacrificing any power. I think Terpstra also said that doing the same enabled him to win RVV. Smaller riders who naturally carry less weight and have smaller frames, don't benefit as much.

If everyone was clean, who knows who would win? Obviously it wouldn't be Froome or Dumoulin - but I'm not sure I'd vouch for anyone. Perhaps Pinot.

to be honest I'm quite sceptical about the idea of just riding at world tour level completely clean, not to mention about winning something...you probably meant bigger riders. adjusted for body mass index, quintana is not lighter than froome, dimoulin and thomas. in this regard, tour hasn't favoured small riders since the beginning of 90's, so it's not like this year's tour opens up something new for us.

doping area has never been a level plaing field and will probably never be. sure tour de l'avenir's field is generally cleaner than tour de france one, but how much cleaner is real tough question to answer. almost certainly some riders decide to run the risk at tour l'avenir too, because the stakes are quite high with possibilites of being signed by a wt team and finishing career really early.


One thing I always found interesting about lighter riders is that they are penalized by the weight of the bike. With the UCI minimum bike weight of 6.8 kg, a rider like Bardet is toting around a higher percentage of body weight vs. Dumoulin. Say Bardet, for example, weighs 60 kg ==> bike weighs 12 percent of his mass. Whereas a 70 kg rider ==> bike is 10 percent, 75 kg bike is 9 percent etc. In a sport of marginal gains, I think that might reduce some of the perceived penalty that larger riders pay in the mountains.

It may very well be that the current GT setup favors larger riders, doping or not. I'd like to see Sky back Bernal in a GT with the same kind of support they gave GT/CF this year. If he crushes a tour, then we can probably say that size doesn't matter.
Bolder
Member
 
Posts: 574
Joined: 25 Jun 2015 07:29

06 Aug 2018 13:11

Bernal is pretty tall and not as light as you might think
User avatar Dekker_Tifosi
Veteran
 
Posts: 24,042
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:52
Location: Roermond, the Netherlands

Re: Re:

06 Aug 2018 20:28

Bolder wrote:One thing I always found interesting about lighter riders is that they are penalized by the weight of the bike. With the UCI minimum bike weight of 6.8 kg, a rider like Bardet is toting around a higher percentage of body weight vs. Dumoulin. Say Bardet, for example, weighs 60 kg ==> bike weighs 12 percent of his mass. Whereas a 70 kg rider ==> bike is 10 percent, 75 kg bike is 9 percent etc. In a sport of marginal gains, I think that might reduce some of the perceived penalty that larger riders pay in the mountains.

It may very well be that the current GT setup favors larger riders, doping or not. I'd like to see Sky back Bernal in a GT with the same kind of support they gave GT/CF this year. If he crushes a tour, then we can probably say that size doesn't matter.


You know, you gotta ride a bike to compete, that's not a UCI thing, it's a cycling thing :o

So the UCI gets rid of the weight limit. Now Bardet rides a 6 kg bike, *Dumoulin* rides a 6 kg bike because frankly there just isn't much any difference between a 54 or 56 frame.
hazaran
Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: 14 Jul 2015 00:37

Re: Re:

15 Aug 2018 21:05

Bolder wrote:
dacooley wrote:
DFA123 wrote:
dacooley wrote:so you point being let quintana, bernal, dimoulin and thomas ride a gt clean or arrange exactly the same doping programme for each of 4, the colombians are going to destroy all-rounders uphill, isn't it?

Not entirely sure what you mean here. But I think the current in vogue doping favours heavier riders - so I don't think doping is a level playing field, even if you give riders the same program. The bigger riders seem to be able to drop significant weight right now without sacrificing any power. I think Terpstra also said that doing the same enabled him to win RVV. Smaller riders who naturally carry less weight and have smaller frames, don't benefit as much.

If everyone was clean, who knows who would win? Obviously it wouldn't be Froome or Dumoulin - but I'm not sure I'd vouch for anyone. Perhaps Pinot.

to be honest I'm quite sceptical about the idea of just riding at world tour level completely clean, not to mention about winning something...you probably meant bigger riders. adjusted for body mass index, quintana is not lighter than froome, dimoulin and thomas. in this regard, tour hasn't favoured small riders since the beginning of 90's, so it's not like this year's tour opens up something new for us.

doping area has never been a level plaing field and will probably never be. sure tour de l'avenir's field is generally cleaner than tour de france one, but how much cleaner is real tough question to answer. almost certainly some riders decide to run the risk at tour l'avenir too, because the stakes are quite high with possibilites of being signed by a wt team and finishing career really early.


One thing I always found interesting about lighter riders is that they are penalized by the weight of the bike. With the UCI minimum bike weight of 6.8 kg, a rider like Bardet is toting around a higher percentage of body weight vs. Dumoulin. Say Bardet, for example, weighs 60 kg ==> bike weighs 12 percent of his mass. Whereas a 70 kg rider ==> bike is 10 percent, 75 kg bike is 9 percent etc. In a sport of marginal gains, I think that might reduce some of the perceived penalty that larger riders pay in the mountains.

It may very well be that the current GT setup favors larger riders, doping or not. I'd like to see Sky back Bernal in a GT with the same kind of support they gave GT/CF this year. If he crushes a tour, then we can probably say that size doesn't matter.

Bernal is not that small. I think he could win it and still be within be the average range of size among winners. Not Quintana.
User avatar Escarabajo
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,361
Joined: 16 Apr 2009 18:38
Location: USA - Central Time

Re: Re:

17 Aug 2018 16:41

Escarabajo wrote:
Bolder wrote:
dacooley wrote:
DFA123 wrote:
dacooley wrote:so you point being let quintana, bernal, dimoulin and thomas ride a gt clean or arrange exactly the same doping programme for each of 4, the colombians are going to destroy all-rounders uphill, isn't it?

Not entirely sure what you mean here. But I think the current in vogue doping favours heavier riders - so I don't think doping is a level playing field, even if you give riders the same program. The bigger riders seem to be able to drop significant weight right now without sacrificing any power. I think Terpstra also said that doing the same enabled him to win RVV. Smaller riders who naturally carry less weight and have smaller frames, don't benefit as much.

If everyone was clean, who knows who would win? Obviously it wouldn't be Froome or Dumoulin - but I'm not sure I'd vouch for anyone. Perhaps Pinot.

to be honest I'm quite sceptical about the idea of just riding at world tour level completely clean, not to mention about winning something...you probably meant bigger riders. adjusted for body mass index, quintana is not lighter than froome, dimoulin and thomas. in this regard, tour hasn't favoured small riders since the beginning of 90's, so it's not like this year's tour opens up something new for us.

doping area has never been a level plaing field and will probably never be. sure tour de l'avenir's field is generally cleaner than tour de france one, but how much cleaner is real tough question to answer. almost certainly some riders decide to run the risk at tour l'avenir too, because the stakes are quite high with possibilites of being signed by a wt team and finishing career really early.


One thing I always found interesting about lighter riders is that they are penalized by the weight of the bike. With the UCI minimum bike weight of 6.8 kg, a rider like Bardet is toting around a higher percentage of body weight vs. Dumoulin. Say Bardet, for example, weighs 60 kg ==> bike weighs 12 percent of his mass. Whereas a 70 kg rider ==> bike is 10 percent, 75 kg bike is 9 percent etc. In a sport of marginal gains, I think that might reduce some of the perceived penalty that larger riders pay in the mountains.

It may very well be that the current GT setup favors larger riders, doping or not. I'd like to see Sky back Bernal in a GT with the same kind of support they gave GT/CF this year. If he crushes a tour, then we can probably say that size doesn't matter.

Bernal is not that small. I think he could win it and still be within be the average range of size among winners. Not Quintana.


You are right that he's tall at 1.74m, but billed as only 60 kg. I haven't weighed 60 kg since I was 13.
Bolder
Member
 
Posts: 574
Joined: 25 Jun 2015 07:29

27 Sep 2018 07:03

Looking at TD yesterday on the podium, he looked very very lean. I think his transition into a climber may be starting to affect his power output in the time-trial. There was virtually nothing between him and a whole host of other time-trialists whom a few years ago he would have put minutes into.
QuickZulu
New Member
 
Posts: 17
Joined: 18 Apr 2016 13:32

Re:

27 Sep 2018 08:39

QuickZulu wrote:Looking at TD yesterday on the podium, he looked very very lean. I think his transition into a climber may be starting to affect his power output in the time-trial. There was virtually nothing between him and a whole host of other time-trialists whom a few years ago he would have put minutes into.

The Rai commentary team were saying the same thing yesterday.
User avatar TourOfSardinia
Veteran
 
Posts: 7,760
Joined: 16 Feb 2010 14:25
Location: Sardinia

27 Sep 2018 11:11

I don't think that had effect on his time trial. I think peaking 3x in a year has.

In fact, I think he has become far stronger. Don't forget, he tried peaking 3x in 2016 as well, and then failed at the worlds as he was only 10th. This time he had bad legs but was still 2nd. Meaning his general level went far upwards.
User avatar Dekker_Tifosi
Veteran
 
Posts: 24,042
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:52
Location: Roermond, the Netherlands

27 Sep 2018 16:12

maybe his batteries were not fully charged ;D
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,525
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

Re:

30 Sep 2018 11:05

Dekker_Tifosi wrote:Bernal is pretty tall and not as light as you might think

60 kgs?
User avatar DNP-Old
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,226
Joined: 06 Aug 2014 17:38
Location: Sevilla, España

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests

Back to top