Log in:  

Register

Contador's doping on Verbier debunked?

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

Contador's doping on Verbier debunked?

16 Nov 2009 19:55

So all that talk about Contador having to have cheated on Verbier has "apparently" been disproven:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/2248/Contador-on-Verbier-recalculated.aspx

I'm just wondering that, if this is the case, why did it take so long for someone to come out with it?

Italian Doctor Roberto Corsetti said: “Is it useful to continue to want to see what is possible presented as unnatural in light of considerations and data, which, as you see, are questionable and debatable if not clearly incorrect?”

And questions why everyone is throwing guilt at Bert. Does anyone here know enough about those numbers to say one way or another?
yakko!
Junior Member
 
Posts: 77
Joined: 26 Oct 2009 17:26
Location: Some call it heaven, some hell...for me it's just home.

16 Nov 2009 20:01

Look, the bottom line here is that VAM calculations are highly inaccurate and it's pretty silly to throw around any kind of accusations based on VAM (and I've maintained this from the beginning BTW). Unless we know the actual power numbers from a calibrated power meter there is just no point in even discussing this.
User avatar BikeCentric
Junior Member
 
Posts: 1,880
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 16:24
Location: Northern California

16 Nov 2009 21:22

VAM doesn't prove anything either way. It certainly can be suggestive, but it's not like crushing the entire field isn't suggestive in and of itself.

He's a great rider, obviously amazingly talented. He also crushed the field nearly as badly as Armstrong used to and beat Cancellara in an ITT.

I sure wouldn't bet that he's clean. Then again, there are few riders at the top of the GT ranks I'd bet on as being clean.
User avatar red_flanders
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,980
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 06:45

16 Nov 2009 23:29

I know enough about Corsetti to know that him and Vayer have taken very different paths. Just remember who is making these calculations on both sides. Ferrari injected his viewpoint earlier also.
User avatar Epicycle
Junior Member
 
Posts: 809
Joined: 19 Mar 2009 05:31

17 Nov 2009 00:16

red_flanders wrote:I sure wouldn't bet that he's clean. Then again, there are few riders at the top of the GT ranks I'd bet on as being clean.


This I agree with; and again VAM is just not a good source to use as far as attempting to accuse someone of doping or as evidence of them being clean.
User avatar BikeCentric
Junior Member
 
Posts: 1,880
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 16:24
Location: Northern California

17 Nov 2009 01:50

That was a good explanation by Corsetti. Threads earlier in the year had a number of people taking a dig and saying their five cents worth. I asked why VAM was valid. You cannot compare two separate cilmbs in separate years using guesswork and an averaging equation (that is what VAM boils down to). One cannot compare apples and oranges. Few at the time acknowledged if Contador was out of this world, so too were Schleck and the next 3 riders after him, Wiggins, Nibali and Franck Schleck. Consistency and accuracy need to be maintained so the public receives relevant and reliable information. This seems to be much closer than Vayers data.
User avatar Galic Ho
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,564
Joined: 12 Aug 2009 13:49

17 Nov 2009 02:15

red_flanders wrote:VAM doesn't prove anything either way. It certainly can be suggestive, but it's not like crushing the entire field isn't suggestive in and of itself.

He's a great rider, obviously amazingly talented. He also crushed the field nearly as badly as Armstrong used to and beat Cancellara in an ITT.

I sure wouldn't bet that he's clean. Then again, there are few riders at the top of the GT ranks I'd bet on as being clean.


trees from the forest folks. Red Flanders has it dialed.

was it in 99, Jamie Burrow, still holds the record ascent for Plateau de Beille, ridden in u23 l'Izard, and he bear the u23 World tt champ, Hushovd, in the chrono in that event too.

64 kg guys, even with lowest drag coefficients, doing record ascents, and beating Cancellara in the chrono.

Ofcourse, Contador is a brilliant rider, and he did start out as a chrono rider. And looking at him, his drag profile will be less than Zabriskie, so he is made for chronos not just climbs. But to do both in the one Tour...
the easy way (doping) is not the Norway Way - Bjorn

love the alliteration Bjorn, props there brah
User avatar blackcat
Senior Member
 
Posts: 9,234
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 19:20

17 Nov 2009 02:17

Interesting read, but we talked about VAM until we were blue in the face, and I find myself agreeing with Red and Bike here.

Curious to hear Ross and Jonathan from SOS comment.

Also, keep in mind that as much as anything Lemond asked of Berti: "What is your VO[SIZE="2"]2[/SIZE]Max?", a fairly simple question, and AC refused to answer. That drove a lot of people around here's suspicion.
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Senior Member
 
Posts: 8,260
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

17 Nov 2009 02:32

Alpe d'Huez wrote:Interesting read, but we talked about VAM until we were blue in the face, and I find myself agreeing with Red and Bike here.

Curious to hear Ross and Jonathan from SOS comment.

Also, keep in mind that as much as anything Lemond asked of Berti: "What is your VO[SIZE="2"]2[/SIZE]Max?", a fairly simple question, and AC refused to answer. That drove a lot of people around here's suspicion.

but the VO2 has been debunked as the be all indicator. It is AN indicator, but not the be all.

Lemond gotta give up that VO2 fixation, otherwise we may as well enter the lab to decide the winner.

I know Alpe was not positing that argument, merely pistolero being coy.

But those in the know, do not even need to ask a question to appreciate what goes on for the GC. Not just pistolero. The reason why these questions are asked, is for a different audience. The audience who assumes since there are drug tests, Lance and pistolero must be clean, because they are tested.
the easy way (doping) is not the Norway Way - Bjorn

love the alliteration Bjorn, props there brah
User avatar blackcat
Senior Member
 
Posts: 9,234
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 19:20

17 Nov 2009 03:10

Correct.

[color="White"][SIZE="1"]. [/SIZE][/color]
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Senior Member
 
Posts: 8,260
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

17 Nov 2009 15:04

I would bet El Pistolero is clean, and pharmstrong isn't.

VO2 max, what is VO2 max? :rolleyes:
User avatar DavidVilla7
Junior Member
 
Posts: 87
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 20:52

17 Nov 2009 15:05

This article is just rubbish. Cancellara must have been putting out something like 460-470 at Annecys TT, and Contador just smoked him. Even if Contador is bit more aero than Fabian, he still must have been putting out ridiculous watts, definitely way more than 400 watts.

And in that article they claim that Contador weighs 64kg. Contador says he weighs 62kg, but actually he might even be lighter than that (pro's like to play games with their weight)
wattage
Junior Member
 
Posts: 181
Joined: 17 Nov 2009 14:51

17 Nov 2009 15:20

wattage wrote:This article is just rubbish. Cancellara must have been putting out something like 460-470 at Annecys TT, and Contador just smoked him. Even if Contador is bit more aero than Fabian, he still must have been putting out ridiculous watts, definitely way more than 400 watts.

And in that article they claim that Contador weighs 64kg. Contador says he weighs 62kg, but actually he might even be lighter than that (pro's like to play games with their weight)


The article is rubbish because . . . you ASSUME what Spartcus' wattage was at Annecy and Contador SMOKED him . . . by all of 3 seconds. AC was ahead by over 30 seconds at the top of the Category 3 climb and lost a ton of time over the back half of the course. He HELD on to win. He didn't smoke him, he just beat him. Barely.
User avatar Publicus
Senior Member
 
Posts: 9,781
Joined: 17 Mar 2009 12:55
Location: Oakland, CA

17 Nov 2009 15:59

DavidVilla7 wrote:I would bet El Pistolero is clean, and pharmstrong isn't.

VO2 max, what is VO2 max? :rolleyes:


Yeah he is clean as a “HOG” in slop.

VO2 max? I have no clue either.
Riley Martin
 

17 Nov 2009 16:15

blackcat wrote:but the VO2 has been debunked as the be all indicator. It is AN indicator, but not the be all.

Lemond gotta give up that VO2 fixation, otherwise we may as well enter the lab to decide the winner.


lemond has never said anything other than what you said: it is AN indicator.

and lemond has called for power meters to be put on bikes so that we can know exactly -- and that too can be AN indicator.

lemond has always talked about looking at EVERYTHING involved so as to make a judgment.

but it does follow that a jump in wattage of 20-25% would logically need to register a substantial uptick in VO2.

thus lemond CAN argue that powering up a major climb averaging over 500 watts (as armstrong has done) would require a VO2 near or above 100.

considering lemond has the highest ever recorded VO2 at 92.5, you could say that his argument holds some water.
Big Doopie
Junior Member
 
Posts: 1,165
Joined: 06 Oct 2009 12:46

17 Nov 2009 16:34

Big Doopie wrote:lemond has never said anything other than what you said: it is AN indicator.

and lemond has called for power meters to be put on bikes so that we can know exactly -- and that too can be AN indicator.

lemond has always talked about looking at EVERYTHING involved so as to make a judgment.

but it does follow that a jump in wattage of 20-25% would logically need to register a substantial uptick in VO2.

thus lemond CAN argue that powering up a major climb averaging over 500 watts (as armstrong has done) would require a VO2 near or above 100.

considering lemond has the highest ever recorded VO2 at 92.5, you could say that his argument holds some water.

Actually Bjørn Dæhlie, a norwegian skier, has the highest ever recorded VO2 at 96. This was in off season tough, and it is estimated that he would have around 100 at his peak.
maltiv
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5,238
Joined: 23 Oct 2009 20:25

17 Nov 2009 17:02

maltiv wrote:Actually Bjørn Dæhlie, a norwegian skier, has the highest ever recorded VO2 at 96. This was in off season tough, and it is estimated that he would have around 100 at his peak.


bet he's now kicking himself over this being revealed, seeing as this can be considered a strong indicator that he was doped. :eek: especially as since then very many of his toughest opponents have been caught

file that along with his early retirement just around the time when the test for r-epo was ready :eek:

also, word on the street is he was spotted along with vegard ulvang at a seminar in italy where the topic supposedly was how to dope (now this is very unofficial) :eek:
User avatar workingclasshero
Junior Member
 
Posts: 750
Joined: 21 Jun 2009 10:31

17 Nov 2009 17:53

Publicus wrote:The article is rubbish because . . . you ASSUME what Spartcus' wattage was at Annecy and Contador SMOKED him . . . by all of 3 seconds. AC was ahead by over 30 seconds at the top of the Category 3 climb and lost a ton of time over the back half of the course. He HELD on to win. He didn't smoke him, he just beat him. Barely.


Well okay, there's no power file for Spartacus. But there is a power file for Gustav Erik Larsson from TOC 2009 and he has threshold power of 470 watts. And Fabian did beat him easily at Worlds.

So even though it was third week at the Tour, it should be pretty doable for Fabian to hold 460 watts for an hour. At least.
wattage
Junior Member
 
Posts: 181
Joined: 17 Nov 2009 14:51

17 Nov 2009 19:59

yakko! wrote:So all that talk about Contador having to have cheated on Verbier has "apparently" been disproven:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/2248/Contador-on-Verbier-recalculated.aspx

I'm just wondering that, if this is the case, why did it take so long for someone to come out with it?


Old news - Cyclingnews already covered that here.
User avatar laura.weislo
 
Posts: 127
Joined: 04 Mar 2009 17:49
Location: North Carolina, USA

17 Nov 2009 20:52

Big Doopie wrote:lemond has never said anything other than what you said: it is AN indicator.

and lemond has called for power meters to be put on bikes so that we can know exactly -- and that too can be AN indicator.

lemond has always talked about looking at EVERYTHING involved so as to make a judgment.


I'm glad you point this out, it's an important part of his stance that a lot of people seem not to get from his statements. Whether that's because of how he makes his case or their hearing what they want to I don't know, but I'm glad you're pointing it out.
User avatar red_flanders
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,980
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 06:45

Next

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: meat puppet, Nick C., The Tristero, Yahoo [Bot] and 30 guests

Back to top