• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Colombians Considered Clean?

Page 25 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 12, 2017
221
0
0
Some say if you micro-dose by injecting intravenously and not subcutaneous you have a detection time of 6 hours. Only if something happens with your water balance or something you get caught. And there are ways of drinking some things before the test to clear the last part. There have been talks about allowing off competition testing 24/7 but there have been a massive resistance against it. Micro dosing doesn´t mess up the bio passport like injecting 400cc BB does. Maybe EPO is still the *** in the peloton, would be nice to get some inside information :cool:
 
Re:

rick james said:
Yet more is made of a adverse finding from Froome than an actual EPO busts with Trek.....The fact of the matter is certain people are only interested in the big bad British
No, you're talking about a 6 time GT winner and a very good climbing domestique. If you don't expect one of them to face more scrutiny then more fool you.
 
Apr 20, 2016
458
15
3,310
Serpentin said:
Some say if you micro-dose by injecting intravenously and not subcutaneous you have a detection time of 6 hours. Only if something happens with your water balance or something you get caught. And there are ways of drinking some things before the test to clear the last part. There have been talks about allowing off competition testing 24/7 but there have been a massive resistance against it. Micro dosing doesn´t mess up the bio passport like injecting 400cc BB does. Maybe EPO is still the **** in the peloton, would be nice to get some inside information :cool:
This paper was published back in 2013 which found microdoses of rhEPO could be detected 100% in plasma and 87.5% in urine samples at the respective 98% specificity threshold levels up to *18 hours* after an injection. So, if an athlete microdosed at 11:00 pm before retiring for the night, he could be glowing well into the late afternoon of the next day.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24190107

That paper was 6 yrs ago and I'm not finding anything newer - so perhaps WADA has improved the detection window even further?
 
Re:

hrotha said:
It is true that Sky and the likes of Froome or Thomas attract more attention than Trek (currently 13th in the CQ team ranking) and Pantano (1070th in the rolling year ranking). It is a mystery.
It's a mystery why you decided to focus on the rolling ranking instead of the actual palmares.
 
Re: Re:

roundabout said:
hrotha said:
It is true that Sky and the likes of Froome or Thomas attract more attention than Trek (currently 13th in the CQ team ranking) and Pantano (1070th in the rolling year ranking). It is a mystery.
It's a mystery why you decided to focus on the rolling ranking instead of the actual palmares.
oh, so you mean like, winning 6 out of the last 7 Tours de France?
 
Re: Re:

roundabout said:
hrotha said:
It is true that Sky and the likes of Froome or Thomas attract more attention than Trek (currently 13th in the CQ team ranking) and Pantano (1070th in the rolling year ranking). It is a mystery.
It's a mystery why you decided to focus on the rolling ranking instead of the actual palmares.
I used the rolling ranking because it's funnier without distorting the underlying argument one bit. Surely you aren't saying their palmares are at all comparable, so.
 
Apr 16, 2017
112
0
1,830
Re:

rick james said:
Yet more is made of a adverse finding from Froome than an actual EPO busts with Trek.....The fact of the matter is certain people are only interested in the big bad British
Not that this is a terribly good indication of anything, but in the Clinic, since January 1 of this year, there have been around 100 posts in the Sky topic. In the same period of time, there have been a little over 100 posts on the MVP topic. I think that the riders who have more attention get more attention in this forum, if that makes sense.
 
Re: Re:

Summoned said:
rick james said:
Yet more is made of a adverse finding from Froome than an actual EPO busts with Trek.....The fact of the matter is certain people are only interested in the big bad British
Not that this is a terribly good indication of anything, but in the Clinic, since January 1 of this year, there have been around 100 posts in the Sky topic. In the same period of time, there have been a little over 100 posts on the MVP topic. I think that the riders who have more attention get more attention in this forum, if that makes sense.
Usually but not always. There is a bias towards non English speaking riders. For a recent example, in Volta a Catalunya Astana's Miguel Angel Lopez set an eye watering pace to win on the climb to La Molina - 8.8km @6.6% climbed at 25.4km/h. Based upon Lopez's weight, that worked out to 450Watts for 21 minutes effort (below is the calculator I used assuming 7kg bike and Lopez Wiki weight of 65Kg). Early season. Not a peep in the clinic.

http://bikecalculator.com/
 
Re:

rick james said:
Yet more is made of a adverse finding from Froome than an actual EPO busts with Trek.....The fact of the matter is certain people are only interested in the big bad British
Pure gold. Crying about bias and acting like there's a difference between Froome getting caught doping and someone else getting caught doping. Oh yeah, there is one difference. In one case, the UCI came in and exonerated the rider with absolutely no justification.

It really is curious why people dislike Sky. Must be their nationality. Can't possibly be their leadership and complicity in the total corruption of the sport at the highest level.
 
Apr 16, 2017
112
0
1,830
Re: Re:

Cookster15 said:
Summoned said:
rick james said:
Yet more is made of a adverse finding from Froome than an actual EPO busts with Trek.....The fact of the matter is certain people are only interested in the big bad British
Not that this is a terribly good indication of anything, but in the Clinic, since January 1 of this year, there have been around 100 posts in the Sky topic. In the same period of time, there have been a little over 100 posts on the MVP topic. I think that the riders who have more attention get more attention in this forum, if that makes sense.
Usually but not always. There is a bias towards non English speaking riders. For a recent example, in Volta a Catalunya Astana's Miguel Angel Lopez set an eye watering pace to win on the climb to La Molina - 8.8km @6.6% climbed at 25.4km/h. Based upon Lopez's weight, that worked out to 450Watts for 21 minutes effort (below is the calculator I used assuming 7kg bike and Lopez Wiki weight of 65Kg). Early season. Not a peep in the clinic.

http://bikecalculator.com/
Fair enough, but is MVP to be considered a non-English speaking rider? He seems to be getting attention now, and has done little that I am aware of to warrant it, apart from performing well. Whereas Sky’s history includes enough basis for suspicion to warrant both WADA/UCI and government investigation. Lopez and MVP may be performing at a level that invites suspicion and comment, but there is not the accompanying incident that laid the groundwork for the extensive and prolonged reaction that Sky and British riders have elicited.

I am often wrong, but I think there is a substantive basis for differentiating between these examples.
 
Aug 2, 2012
4,219
1
0
red_flanders said:
rick james said:
Yet more is made of a adverse finding from Froome than an actual EPO busts with Trek.....The fact of the matter is certain people are only interested in the big bad British
Pure gold. Crying about bias and acting like there's a difference between Froome getting caught doping and someone else getting caught doping. Oh yeah, there is one difference. In one case, the UCI came in and exonerated the rider with absolutely no justification.

It really is curious why people dislike Sky. Must be their nationality. Can't possibly be their leadership and complicity in the total corruption of the sport at the highest level.
but there is a huge difference...........1 allowed with limit....1 totally banned

... 'skys complicity in the total corruption of the sport at the highest level'...
...that's a reach.....................
 
Re:

ebandit said:
red_flanders said:
rick james said:
Yet more is made of a adverse finding from Froome than an actual EPO busts with Trek.....The fact of the matter is certain people are only interested in the big bad British
Pure gold. Crying about bias and acting like there's a difference between Froome getting caught doping and someone else getting caught doping. Oh yeah, there is one difference. In one case, the UCI came in and exonerated the rider with absolutely no justification.

It really is curious why people dislike Sky. Must be their nationality. Can't possibly be their leadership and complicity in the total corruption of the sport at the highest level.
but there is a huge difference...........1 allowed with limit....1 totally banned

... 'skys complicity in the total corruption of the sport at the highest level'...
...that's a reach.....................
I'll probably regret replying here, but....

One sample massively over the limit, one from a totally banned substance. You really see a difference? A "huge" difference? I think that's a joke the way you mean it. There is a huge difference though, in enforcement. One obvious positive covered up, the other prosecuted. Corruption.

You really don't think Sky are doping, have been doping since 2011? You don't think they have won the Tour with multiple dopers, and don't see that they've obviously gotten protection from the UCI? That they have inundated the media around the sport with comically false narratives and explanations? Sky are the poster boys for the current state of the sport's corruption.

And no, none of that is because they're British. If anything they get less flak because so much of the media consumed by those who come here is english, and writers and readers are biased in favor of english-speaking riders. They have been long protected because of close ties between British Cycling, Sky, and the UCI.

The nationalistic whining of the fans is all the more ironic for all of that.
 
Re:

macbindle said:
To be honest I think they have been protected because they are the current big winner star team. Just as it has always been.

Nationality doesn't come into it.
You are 100% correct and I know I don't usually agree with you. They are too big to fall the biggest team in the sport.

But then Armstrong was too big to fall too it took non Europeans outside the cycling tent to expose him. Not sure who outside the cycling tent could be bothered doing a deep investigation of Sky. They would need to doing under secret without Sky's knowledge until the evidence was completely gathered so that they are armed when the inevitable court cases begin and Sky/ Ineos roll out their legal budget as they did for Froome.

But this thread is about the recent rise of Colombian riders. I do think the Colombians are improving their "methods" so it is no longer simply a fact they were born at altitude so have a physiological advantage. And I do think Colombian riders are not getting as much scrutiny as they should be.
 
Re: Re:

Cookster15 said:
Usually but not always. There is a bias towards non English speaking riders. For a recent example, in Volta a Catalunya Astana's Miguel Angel Lopez set an eye watering pace to win on the climb to La Molina - 8.8km @6.6% climbed at 25.4km/h. Based upon Lopez's weight, that worked out to 450Watts for 21 minutes effort (below is the calculator I used assuming 7kg bike and Lopez Wiki weight of 65Kg). Early season. Not a peep in the clinic.

http://bikecalculator.com/
It's like the 3rd time you bring this up.
Ammatipyoraily calculated 6.41w/kg for 13:58 (6.55w/kg based on Dr Ferrari's formula but he adjusted 2.14% due to the comparison on Woods' and Valverde's powermeters vs. estimate)

And no, I don't think Colombians are refining their methods... It's just a wrong survival choice given that doping is generalized in Latin America, the Colombian Federation doesn't give a damn, Journos will call witch hunt, and the traffic networks make tons of money.
 
Re: Re:

slosada said:
Cookster15 said:
Usually but not always. There is a bias towards non English speaking riders. For a recent example, in Volta a Catalunya Astana's Miguel Angel Lopez set an eye watering pace to win on the climb to La Molina - 8.8km @6.6% climbed at 25.4km/h. Based upon Lopez's weight, that worked out to 450Watts for 21 minutes effort (below is the calculator I used assuming 7kg bike and Lopez Wiki weight of 65Kg). Early season. Not a peep in the clinic.

http://bikecalculator.com/
It's like the 3rd time you bring this up.
Ammatipyoraily calculated 6.41w/kg for 13:58 (6.55w/kg based on Dr Ferrari's formula but he adjusted 2.14% due to the comparison on Woods' and Valverde's powermeters vs. estimate)

And no, I don't think Colombians are refining their methods... It's just a wrong survival choice given that doping is generalized in Latin America, the Colombian Federation doesn't give a damn, Journos will call witch hunt, and the traffic networks make tons of money.
People just don't pay as much attention to shorter efforts because it could be widely misguided. Maybe the longer efforts could be misguided as well but experts prefer to take them as a better reference.
 
Re: Re:

slosada said:
Cookster15 said:
Usually but not always. There is a bias towards non English speaking riders. For a recent example, in Volta a Catalunya Astana's Miguel Angel Lopez set an eye watering pace to win on the climb to La Molina - 8.8km @6.6% climbed at 25.4km/h. Based upon Lopez's weight, that worked out to 450Watts for 21 minutes effort (below is the calculator I used assuming 7kg bike and Lopez Wiki weight of 65Kg). Early season. Not a peep in the clinic.

http://bikecalculator.com/
It's like the 3rd time you bring this up.
Ammatipyoraily calculated 6.41w/kg for 13:58 (6.55w/kg based on Dr Ferrari's formula but he adjusted 2.14% due to the comparison on Woods' and Valverde's powermeters vs. estimate)

And no, I don't think Colombians are refining their methods... It's just a wrong survival choice given that doping is generalized in Latin America, the Colombian Federation doesn't give a damn, Journos will call witch hunt, and the traffic networks make tons of money.
Yes I brought it up because I felt it was worthy of discussion here. It was and yet it was ignored. Dual standards of the Clinic exposed. Your quoted numbers prove it. You think 6.41 Watts / Kg for a 21 minute effort in the early season is normal?
 
Re: Re:

Cookster15 said:
slosada said:
Cookster15 said:
Usually but not always. There is a bias towards non English speaking riders. For a recent example, in Volta a Catalunya Astana's Miguel Angel Lopez set an eye watering pace to win on the climb to La Molina - 8.8km @6.6% climbed at 25.4km/h. Based upon Lopez's weight, that worked out to 450Watts for 21 minutes effort (below is the calculator I used assuming 7kg bike and Lopez Wiki weight of 65Kg). Early season. Not a peep in the clinic.

http://bikecalculator.com/
It's like the 3rd time you bring this up.
Ammatipyoraily calculated 6.41w/kg for 13:58 (6.55w/kg based on Dr Ferrari's formula but he adjusted 2.14% due to the comparison on Woods' and Valverde's powermeters vs. estimate)

And no, I don't think Colombians are refining their methods... It's just a wrong survival choice given that doping is generalized in Latin America, the Colombian Federation doesn't give a damn, Journos will call witch hunt, and the traffic networks make tons of money.
Yes I brought it up because I felt it was worthy of discussion here. It was and yet it was ignored. Dual standards of the Clinic exposed. Your quoted numbers prove it. You think 6.41 Watts / Kg for a 21 minute effort in the early season is normal?
1. It's for 13:58 minutes, not 21. That's a huge difference. Ammati doesn't calculate Lopez' VAM or w/kg for the long segment (8.3Kms) which took him 19:38.
2. It's similar w/kg compared to Froome in Ax3D in 2013 for... 23 minutes and that after Pailhères.
3. For the longest section (8.3Kms) even Richie Porte, who finished 19th, would have come with the winning group last year. Bear in mind, Porte was not racing for stage or GC. That might explain something about conditions.
4. "Early season" is barely applicable when these guys are racing for win since February. Check the trend in the last couple of years, Astana starts the year with a bunch of wins...

Just to be clear: For me Lopez is a clean as Froome... Make of it whatever you want
 
For some reason I always feel bad when a Colombian rider is caught. I guess because I know that it's a way out of poverty, and these guys have a lot more to gain than someone from Western Europe.
 
Re:

Bolder said:
For some reason I always feel bad when a Colombian rider is caught. I guess because I know that it's a way out of poverty, and these guys have a lot more to gain than someone from Western Europe.
Not only that. It makes you wonder who is behind it. I have doubts that these young guys are doing it on their own without help of a big fish, or coach or someone well connected in the cycling world.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M The Clinic 34
Similar threads
Tour de Cleans?

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS