Clean Aussie Pro's

[sniper]

here another source, from 2007 or 2008,
has his weight at 68kg.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread368914/pg4

 

[sniper]

i'm assuming those are indications of his race weight (it wouldn't make much sense to indicate anything else)

 

[sniper]

admittedly, also found two sources putting him at 64kg.
this one from 2010:
http://www.podiumcafe.com/2010/4/24/1441908/lies-damned-lies-and-liege-majopes
and this one from 2009:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/general/evans-above/2008/02/06/1202233945498.html
not sure how to explain the discrepancies.
the 68 and 69 estimates strike me as more in line with how he actually looked when he won the TdF.
pretty darn chunky.

 

[King Boonen]

Looking at photos is a really bad way to estimate weight fella.

 

[The Hegelian]

One thing I'm not getting here: why would Evans be doping to put on extra weight, in order to keep up with the pure climbers? Surely a good doping strategy would be to do the exact opposite.....

I admire your tenacity here Sniper, but the logic here is a little underwhelming.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

One thing I'm not getting here: why would Evans be doping to put on extra weight, in order to keep up with the pure climbers? Surely a good doping strategy would be to do the exact opposite.....

I admire your tenacity here Sniper, but the logic here is a little underwhelming.

Tour climbs are more about churning a high power than dancing off on the pedals. For a rider like Evans who is able to put out large amounts of power over a long period, increasing muscle mass would probably be beneficial.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Not too keen to pursue this line of inquiry, but a random blog doing BMI calculations on figures with no source (or a source that does not corroborate the 69kg figure obviously used) is just fishing, imo. No offense mate.

Add in the fact that most cyclists are coy about their weight, and you're rarely seeing their pre-GT weight, but some generic weight from the off-season, and it's not difficult for me to believe he put on a few kg but nothing ridiculous.

No pro road cyclist is trying to increase his muscle mass to be a better cyclist. None of them. Roche says he did not eat the night before a queen stage so he wouldn't weigh too much. That's the other extreme of stupidity, but you get the general idea.

Krebs Cycle also mention Cadel trying to lose weight to improve his climbing but he lost TT power and so gave the idea away. Again, can't corroborate but find this a believable claim, given the lack of AICAR et al at the time this was done.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

One thing I'm not getting here: why would Evans be doping to put on extra weight, in order to keep up with the pure climbers? Surely a good doping strategy would be to do the exact opposite.....

I admire your tenacity here Sniper, but the logic here is a little underwhelming.

Tour climbs are more about churning a high power than dancing off on the pedals. For a rider like Evans who is able to put out large amounts of power over a long period, increasing muscle mass would probably be beneficial.

I don't believe this to be the case. I think increasing your mitochondrial density is more important than increasing your muscle mass for generating long-term power (in terms of muscle-related attributes for an endurance athlete). Ignoring Hgb mass, efficiency, etc.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

given the lack of AICAR et al at the time this was done.

What's the timeline of AICAR in cycling? It's been around since the 80's for medicinal uses.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

given the lack of AICAR et al at the time this was done.

What's the timeline of AICAR in cycling? It's been around since the 80's for medicinal uses.

Not sure. The fact that he lost some weight but also power indicates to me that whether it was available or not, he wasn't on it. *mutter*

Aussie! Aussie! Aussie!

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

One thing I'm not getting here: why would Evans be doping to put on extra weight, in order to keep up with the pure climbers? Surely a good doping strategy would be to do the exact opposite.....

I admire your tenacity here Sniper, but the logic here is a little underwhelming.

Tour climbs are more about churning a high power than dancing off on the pedals. For a rider like Evans who is able to put out large amounts of power over a long period, increasing muscle mass would probably be beneficial.

I don't believe this to be the case. I think increasing your mitochondrial density is more important than increasing your muscle mass for generating long-term power (in terms of muscle-related attributes for an endurance athlete). Ignoring Hgb mass, efficiency, etc.

Are the two not closely related? Depending on cell type of course. My biology is terrible. I'm not implying Marius pudzianowski could climb faster than Contador at the Tour, there's a very obvious trade off, I was basing it purely on Evans with the implied caveat we are talking about cyclists who are skinny runts...

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

given the lack of AICAR et al at the time this was done.

What's the timeline of AICAR in cycling? It's been around since the 80's for medicinal uses.

Not sure. The fact that he lost some weight but also power indicates to me that whether it was available or not, he wasn't on it. *mutter*

Aussie! Aussie! Aussie!

I believe Cadel over Wiggins...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

No I don't think so. I believe you can increase mitochondria density with no increase in muscle mass.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

given the lack of AICAR et al at the time this was done.

What's the timeline of AICAR in cycling? It's been around since the 80's for medicinal uses.

Not sure. The fact that he lost some weight but also power indicates to me that whether it was available or not, he wasn't on it. *mutter*

Aussie! Aussie! Aussie!

I believe Cadel over Wiggins...

Fo shizzle.

 

[sniper]

Re:

Looking at photos is a really bad way to estimate weight fella.

hence i looked for his weight online which apparently you missed.
for 2002 we have 62kg.
i found four estimates for the period 2007-2010, one of 68, one 69, two 64.

wiki (not sure what year) has him at 64.
google has him at 68.

it's not just photos. it's how he looked, you know, on tv and all that.
chunky. more 68-ish to me.

 

[sniper]

Re:

One thing I'm not getting here: why would Evans be doping to put on extra weight, in order to keep up with the pure climbers? Surely a good doping strategy would be to do the exact opposite.....

I admire your tenacity here Sniper, but the logic here is a little underwhelming.

i don't know.
i just trust my eyes.
try to find any picture or any footage from between, say, 2007 and 2011 where Cadel looks 64-ish.
he doesn't. he looks chunky, more like 68-ish.
And again, it's not my tenacity, there have been other observers who just describe things the way they see them on tv:
"Evans wasn't a pure climber - he was too chunky for that - but could grind out a tempo and limit his losses against the more attacking light-weight riders."
http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling/cadel-evans-to-retire-from-cycling-in-february-20140925-10m94g.html

now go back to pre-2002 and tell me Cadel was chunky then and there. He wasn't.
He became chunky.
Why? well KingBoonen has a good point.
It looks to me like overenthusiastic use of HGH, but that's just speculation of course.

 

[sniper]

Re:

Not too keen to pursue this line of inquiry, but a random blog doing BMI calculations on figures with no source (or a source that does not corroborate the 69kg figure obviously used) is just fishing, imo. No offense mate.

Add in the fact that most cyclists are coy about their weight, and you're rarely seeing their pre-GT weight, but some generic weight from the off-season, and it's not difficult for me to believe he put on a few kg but nothing ridiculous.

No pro road cyclist is trying to increase his muscle mass to be a better cyclist. None of them. Roche says he did not eat the night before a queen stage so he wouldn't weigh too much. That's the other extreme of stupidity, but you get the general idea.

Krebs Cycle also mention Cadel trying to lose weight to improve his climbing but he lost TT power and so gave the idea away. Again, can't corroborate but find this a believable claim, given the lack of AICAR et al at the time this was done.

of course it's fishing, but it's the only thing i could find looking for his weight in that period.
second source i posted says 68kg in 2008. also wrong? maybe.
but let's agree it's not a trivial data point.
going from 62kg to 64kg between age 25 and age 30? nothing suspect, agreed.
from 62 to 68/69? odd, especially for an endurance athlete.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Looking at photos is a really bad way to estimate weight fella.

hence i looked for his weight online which apparently you missed.
for 2002 we have 62kg.
i found four estimates for the period 2007-2010, one of 68, one 69, two 64.

wiki (not sure what year) has him at 64.
google has him at 68.

it's not just photos. it's how he looked, you know, on tv and all that.
chunky. more 68-ish to me.

No, I didn't miss it, that's almost as bad as looking at photos. Looked on TV? That's just as bad I'm afraid.

Edit: Grumpy git hasn't had his coffee, removed to pointless drivel.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Looking at photos is a really bad way to estimate weight fella.

hence i looked for his weight online which apparently you missed.
for 2002 we have 62kg.
i found four estimates for the period 2007-2010, one of 68, one 69, two 64.

wiki (not sure what year) has him at 64.
google has him at 68.

it's not just photos. it's how he looked, you know, on tv and all that.
chunky. more 68-ish to me.

No, I didn't miss it, that's almost as bad as looking at photos. Looked on TV? That's just as bad I'm afraid.

Edit: Grumpy git hasn't had his coffee, removed to pointless drivel.

coupla pages back, i argued Cadel was a 'mediocre' climbing talent, i said he was too heavy.
someone disagreed (was it goggalor?), and had to pull up fotos from 1996 and 2002 to make his point.
just saying, it's obvious to many observers (including the guy I quoted above) that post-2007 Cadel is chunky and (normally) too heavy to be a good climber.
Then you see his photo's from (pre-)2002, and suddenly it becomes arguable that he was a climbing talent after all.
it's just two different guys.
one lean guy, one chunky guy.
i don't trust the 62kg vs. 64kg
the difference looks more to me.

 

[sniper]

here Cadel's weight in 2011 is discussed.
http://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/754878-how-thin-not-thin-cadel-evans.html#post12987260
One guy says it's 150lbs, i.e. 68kg, same weight as Schleck.
Another guy comments, and sums it up nicely for me:

"Cadel Evans I can buy at that weight by looks - although as said, I'm shocked that a TdF winner can have a normal BMI and still climb with the anorexic guys."

 

[sniper]

from the same 2011 thread, more people trusting their eyes:

Cadel Evans looks remarkably not-thin, at least compared to the rail-thin anorexic Schleck brothers. He actually looks on the beefy side. I was surprised to see him riding not at rail-thin weight for such a heavy climbing race like the tour.

http://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/754878-how-thin-not-thin-cadel-evans.html#post12986847

would anybody in 2002 have said he looks on the beefy side and remarkably not-thin?

 

[hrotha]

I'm not sure who you're arguing with at this point. Nobody has said he was leaner in his winning days.

 

[sniper]

Re:

I'm not sure who you're arguing with at this point. Nobody has said he was leaner in his winning days.

if you can't be bothered to read the posts, well, don't bother.
i'll break it down for you though, cuz i'm in a good mood
the argument involves Cadel age 25 vs. Cadel 30(+).
DW says 2kg increase, fine, nothing to see.
I think it was (much) more, into the range of 6/7 kg increase which, for an endurance athlete, would be odd and in need of an exogenous explanation. My thought was initially based on my eyes. Then I checked online data, and some sources confirm it.

 

[hrotha]

I've read them and I still don't know what your point is.

You've made the observation that Evans was leaner when young. Nobody has really disputed this, although not everybody agrees he put on that much muscle weight.
You posit that he probably became beefier due to PED abuse. This is where people disagree, because it's trivially easy for anyone to put on the amount of muscle Evans gained by natural means (in response to your earlier question: yes, by hitting the gym. What's so odd about this?). And this is true even if he used HGH or whatever as part of his normal program, since that stuff is used widely and not to put on muscle weight.
You also posit that it's weird that he could keep up with the skinny types in the climbs. But then, this doesn't point to his muscle mass being the reason, does it? Every other GT contender aims for an unnaturally skinny body type. If Evans could keep up when he shouldn't, it won't be because he was beefier - it'll be because he blood doped like everybody else. At which point, this "Evans is so beefy" talk becomes superfluous. It doesn't explain Evans's performance. It's just blind shots.

 

[sniper]

Re:

I've read them and I still don't know what your point is.

You've made the observation that Evans was leaner when young. Nobody has really disputed this, although not everybody agrees he put on that much muscle weight.

just this, actually. just this.
I'd argue a 6/7 kg increase from age 25 to age 30(+) is suspicious to the point of never seen it before or after in any other endurance athlete.
if it's only 2kg, i'd agree, nothing to see.
So it's not a trivial point. Its either "2kg, fine, could be normal" or it's "6kg extra, 2011 TdF winner, wtf?".

imo it's clearly not just 2kg. You have people posting foto's from 2002 to demonstrate what a lean athlete he was (and indisputably so). Then you have a whole thread dedicated to why Evans is so beefy in 2011, the best year of his carreer. And a reporter noting he's too chunky to be a good climber.
Those observations from those people are important because they confirm the contrast, i.e. confirm that the difference between 2002 and post-2007 is evidently (much) more than 2kg
the point does not appear trivial to me.

may or may not have been HGH. I'd be open to any other explanation. The gym just doesn't cut it. Not for an endurance athlete. It wouldn't be beneficial. In Cadel's case, whatever he did to gain weight, it was very beneficial.