Dan Martin - "Now I know you can win clean"

[Dr. Maserati]

LeMond could only beat some riders on EPO. Not all of them.

Dan Martin beat every single rider who used EPO or a BB for the race, as well as all the riders who used test, HgH, coritsone, etc for their preparation. All of them.

Well, there it is.
I am not even going to ask for a link to back up any of this because this is just so obvious. As all doped, all - then obviously Martin had to dope too. Totally logical.
No further discussion needed.

Can a mod come and just close the thread?

 

[pmcg76]

LeMond could only beat some riders on EPO. Not all of them.

Dan Martin beat every single rider who used EPO or a BB for the race, as well as all the riders who used test, HgH, coritsone, etc for their preparation. All of them.

LeMond at 31 beat all but 4 riders in the TT in 92. You have no idea how many riders are on the things you listed in 2013 anymore than we know how many people were on EPO, cortisone, testosterone, HGH in 1992.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

LeMond at 31 beat all but 4 riders in the TT in 92. You have no idea how many riders are on the things you listed in 2013 anymore than we know how many people were on EPO, cortisone, testosterone, HGH in 1992.

Whether there was only 1 rider (0% chance) or the "top ~20" (1 per team - 95% chance) or the "top ~40" (2 per team average - 85% chance) riders that only used recovery pharma to prepare for the race, DM still beat every single one of them.

Unless I am missing something, your argument (or the use of "you have no idea") is founded on the premise that the entire peloton in 2013 is clean.

I can't accept this as a fact for the pro peloton in 2013.

I can agree to disagree.

Re: your personal response (attack?) to my lack of knowledge of Jeff whoever: I am going to claim the Henry Ford defense. (Couldn't find the source, and searching gives other stories but the premise holds). No, I don't know everything there is to know about every race in every era of cycling. But I don't need to - I can just ask someone. In my case, it starts with asking Google. She puts me in touch with people who do know things I wish to know, cqranking, wiki, cyclingstats, etc. I'd rather look something up than commit it to memory.

And if it forces me to look at something for the first time, I prefer my information to be fresh and accurate (LeMond beat Roche by 0.12% on time / Wiggins rode with a sprinter) than easily dismissable and dubiously supporting my theory (LeMond beat Roche who some here claim was on EPO / Wiggins won a hilly stage in L'Avenir).

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Your knowledge of that period seem's limited, especially if you don't know who Jeff Bernard is so not sure why you would have such reverence for LeMond.

With all due deference and respect to Ford:

The reporters started to call foul, and Ford lowered the ear piece, looked directly at the reporter and said: it doesn't matter that I know the answer, what matters is that I know how to get the answer so that it can be put to use.
http://www.articulateventures.com/a...missouri-venture-forum-and-the-speed-of-ideas

 

[Race Radio]

There is a misconception abut the early days of EPO. It took years before riders and doctors figure out how to use it and combine it with a full program. In many cases riders "Crashed" after using it as their body struggled to manufacture new blood cells.

I see people tossing out 89,90,91 as start dates for EPO use. Edwig Van Hooydonck won Flanders in 91.....Clean

 

[Race Radio]

LeMond could only beat some riders on EPO. Not all of them.

Dan Martin beat every single rider who used EPO or a BB for the race, as well as all the riders who used test, HgH, coritsone, etc for their preparation. All of them.

Could you provide a list of riders using BB at LBL last year? WADA wants to know

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Would Blood bags offer such a great improvement in one day races? I have always seen it as a tool for recovery more than anything else. Most people would go into a one day race fairly fresh and so their HCT would be close to 'normal' anyway. What kind of gains could be expected without flagging?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Whether there was only 1 rider (0% chance) or the "top ~20" (1 per team - 95% chance) or the "top ~40" (2 per team average - 85% chance) riders that only used recovery pharma to prepare for the race, DM still beat every single one of them.

Unless I am missing something, your argument (or the use of "you have no idea") is founded on the premise that the entire peloton in 2013 is clean.

I can't accept this as a fact for the pro peloton in 2013.

I can agree to disagree.

Re: your personal response (attack?) to my lack of knowledge of Jeff whoever: I am going to claim the Henry Ford defense. (Couldn't find the source, and searching gives other stories but the premise holds). No, I don't know everything there is to know about every race in every era of cycling. But I don't need to - I can just ask someone. In my case, it starts with asking Google. She puts me in touch with people who do know things I wish to know, cqranking, wiki, cyclingstats, etc. I'd rather look something up than commit it to memory.

And if it forces me to look at something for the first time, I prefer my information to be fresh and accurate (LeMond beat Roche by 0.12% on time / Wiggins rode with a sprinter) than easily dismissable and dubiously supporting my theory (LeMond beat Roche who some here claim was on EPO / Wiggins won a hilly stage in L'Avenir).

Ya - being honest you are missing something if you come up with that conclusion - it was the rest of the line which was..
"You have no idea how many riders are on the things you listed in 2013.."

How you managed to miss it and conclude that Pmcg76 "argument is built on a premise" that the "entire Peloton of 2013 is clean", is mystifying.

 

[Race Radio]

Would Blood bags offer such a great improvement in one day races? I have always seen it as a tool for recovery more than anything else. Most people would go into a one day race fairly fresh and so their HCT would be close to 'normal' anyway. What kind of gains could be expected without flagging?

EPO or BB are excellent for one day races. Recovery from hard efforts are key and EPO is excellent for this.....Even Marion Jones used EPO

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

EPO or BB are excellent for one day races. Recovery from hard efforts are key and EPO is excellent for this.....Even Marion Jones used EPO

But is this training prior to the race or also for the race? For instance, EPO would allow you to train much harder but it would make sense (to taper) this off closer to race day to avoid being flagged.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Recovery from hard efforts are key and EPO is excellent for this..

You're not the first person to state this as fact. I would be very interested in your explanation of the physiology behind EPO's recovery properties.

Personally, I believe EPO does a few things (angiogenesis, for example) that can help performance, but its key action in the body is to increase production of RBCs, which helps performance.

Increased oxygen can improve recovery, but saying EPO improves recovery seems like a big leap. The body also requires B complex and iron for those new blood cells. You can take as much EPO as you like but without the other raw ingredients you're not getting new RBCs. So does EPO act as a recovery agent directly, or do you mean through the production of more RBCs?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Ya - being honest you are missing something if you come up with that conclusion - it was the rest of the line which was..
"You have no idea how many riders are on the things you listed in 2013.."

How you managed to miss it and conclude that Pmcg76 "argument is built on a premise" that the "entire Peloton of 2013 is clean", is mystifying.

If there are no dopers, Dan Martin won the race clean because there is no doubt in anyone's mind that you can beat clean riders when clean.

If there is one doper (apart from DM), Dan Martin beat that doper. If there were 20 (!DM), he beat all of them, too. If there were 40 (!DM), he beat all of them too.

The number of dopers is completely and utterly irrelevant. In fact, I don't even need to know how many there were to know Dan beat them all. I think there were some - listed in the other post with probabilities.

I am assuming here pmcg76 mentioned "you don't know how many were doing those things" for a reason.

It is an irrefutable fact that Dan beat all of them, no matter how many there were (0-200), so what was the reason pmcg76 mentioned it?

The only reason I can think of, is that perhaps he feels the entire field was clean, and therefore my argument (DM beat all the dopers and therefore is likely doped himself) is invalid, as there were no dopers. Otherwise, he may as well have said "You don't know when my pet dog was born" for all the relevance it adds. Unless (as previously stated) I am missing something.

I sure hope pmcg76 responds, instead of people who have threatened to "mod" me.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

But is this training prior to the race or also for the race? For instance, EPO would allow you to train much harder but it would make sense (to taper) this off closer to race day to avoid being flagged.

EPO is great for training. If you rely on using EPO during (or right before) a race, its probably too late.
But BBs appear more effective to do just before (or during if a stage race) a race.

From Hamiltons book:

I listened closely and in the following days found out that Ufe was 100 percent right. That knowledge changed my career. I hadnt realized it on Ventoux in 2000. The key to riding with a BB is that you have to push past all the warning signs, past all the usual walls. You get to that place beyond your edge, the place where youve fallen a thousand times, and all of a sudden you can hang there. Youre not just surviving; youre competing, making moves, dictating the race.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Even Marion Jones used EPO

I am guessing she took EPO as running action destroys RBCs when your feet hit the ground. EPO would help replenish them.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

If there are no dopers, Dan Martin won the race clean because there is no doubt in anyone's mind that you can beat clean riders when clean.

If there is one doper (apart from DM), Dan Martin beat that doper. If there were 20 (!DM), he beat all of them, too. If there were 40 (!DM), he beat all of them too.

The number of dopers is completely and utterly irrelevant. In fact, I don't even need to know how many there were to know Dan beat them all. I think there were some - listed in the other post with probabilities.

I am assuming here pmcg76 mentioned "you don't know how many were doing those things" for a reason.

It is an irrefutable fact that Dan beat all of them, no matter how many there were (0-200), so what was the reason pmcg76 mentioned it?

The only reason I can think of, is that perhaps he feels the entire field was clean, and therefore my argument (DM beat all the dopers and therefore is likely doped himself) is invalid, as there were no dopers. Otherwise, he may as well have said "You don't know when my pet dog was born" for all the relevance it adds. Unless (as previously stated) I am missing something.

You appear to think 'dope' is some magic dust that you sprinkle on and has a specific performance advantage that is guaranteed every time.

Different PEDs, different results in advantages gained.
Different amounts of the same PED, different results.
Different riders, different results.

If DM won the race clean - I would be certain that he beat doped riders.

I sure hope pmcg76 responds, instead of people who have threatened to "mod" me.

Why? I am allowed respond to you. If you have a problem with that, tough.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

EPO is great for training. If you rely on using EPO during (or right before) a race, its probably too late.
But BBs appear more effective to do just before (or during if a stage race) a race.

From Hamiltons book:

In Tyler's case that was also when the 50% rule was around but no passport. So, I am assuming he would jack his HCT to near that level (probably beyond his natural level) and it took his body and himself mentally a while to adjust to ride past what his body was used to. Iirc Blood doping also has a lot less down time then EPO i.e. You transfuse and you are pretty much good to go.

People may not buy into the passport completely but there is some proof that you are limited to how much you can dope. So I guess the question is how much can you get away with in a one day was (even if using BBs) and is this beyond what a clean rider could achieve.

Also, given the passport, if you are doping (albeit in smaller amounts) do you need to consistently dope to make sure there are not huge fluctuations (Whether those would be acted on is another matter).

 

[Dr. Maserati]

In Tyler's case that was also when the 50% rule was around but no passport. So, I am assuming he would jack his HCT to near that level (probably beyond his natural level) and it took his body and himself mentally a while to adjust to ride past what his body was used to. Iirc Blood doping also has a lot less down time then EPO i.e. You transfuse and you are pretty much good to go.

People may not buy into the passport completely but there is some proof that you are limited to how much you can dope. So I guess the question is how much can you get away with in a one day was (even if using BBs) and is this beyond what a clean rider could achieve.

Also, given the passport, if you are doping (albeit in smaller amounts) do you need to consistently dope to make sure there are not huge fluctuations (Whether those would be acted on is another matter).

Apologies - I took your questions more about what the different products can do without restriction.
I agree - the bio passport is not perfect but it would frustrate the ability to use with impunity, which lessens the performance advantage of it.

One interesting point that Tyler wrote in his book:

If I were given a choice between being three pounds lighter or having three more hematocrit points, I would take the lighter weight every time.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

If there are no dopers, Dan Martin won the race clean because there is no doubt in anyone's mind that you can beat clean riders when clean.

If there is one doper (apart from DM), Dan Martin beat that doper. If there were 20 (!DM), he beat all of them, too. If there were 40 (!DM), he beat all of them too.

The number of dopers is completely and utterly irrelevant. In fact, I don't even need to know how many there were to know Dan beat them all. I think there were some - listed in the other post with probabilities.

I am assuming here pmcg76 mentioned "you don't know how many were doing those things" for a reason.

It is an irrefutable fact that Dan beat all of them, no matter how many there were (0-200), so what was the reason pmcg76 mentioned it?

The only reason I can think of, is that perhaps he feels the entire field was clean, and therefore my argument (DM beat all the dopers and therefore is likely doped himself) is invalid, as there were no dopers. Otherwise, he may as well have said "You don't know when my pet dog was born" for all the relevance it adds. Unless (as previously stated) I am missing something.

I sure hope pmcg76 responds, instead of people who have threatened to "mod" me.

The argument used before, is to say that if you or I were in the race, doped to the max, DM could still beat us (I'm assuming). There could be many dopers in the race, but the fct that DM is ahead of them is not an indication of his guilt, in itself.

Benotti posted the list of ex and highly suspect dopers that have been very successful. But there are reasons for each one of them, even if still charging, to be considered different riders than when they went/go 100%, as pmcg pointed out.

 

[The Hitch]

Would Blood bags offer such a great improvement in one day races? I have always seen it as a tool for recovery more than anything else. Most people would go into a one day race fairly fresh and so their HCT would be close to 'normal' anyway. What kind of gains could be expected without flagging?

Victor Conte's training programme for 100m athletes involved regular epo use, weekly even iirc, as a recovery during training. I think it was Kelly White who said something along the lines of, it just makes you go faster. There's very little sporting activity blood doping couldn't help in.



Your right though in cycling it's far less effective in a 1 day race than in a gt.

Having said that Liege does take place 4 days after fleche, 7 after amstel. And liege winners have been some pretty major chargers in recent decades. Di Luca Vino Valverde all caught for blood doping.

 

[Race Radio]

But is this training prior to the race or also for the race? For instance, EPO would allow you to train much harder but it would make sense (to taper) this off closer to race day to avoid being flagged.

In the race. Yes, it helps you train harder but it really helps recover from hard efforts quickly, in seconds. I could write a thread on it but there is a huge advantage in TT's and sharp climbs. Of course in a long climb the help is quantifiable but in races that have short sharp efforts it really helps

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

One interesting point that Tyler wrote in his book:

Regarding that I would suggest that is because of the law of diminishing returns. I think JV commented that the gains in each HCT percentage is not linear but diminishes as you get higher. So going from 45% to 50% would make a bigger difference to the relative 55% to 60%.

Whereas with weight the loss the relative gain increases as you get lighter, no?

 

[red_flanders]

Serious question - why would you expect that? Particularly in a major one day race?

The standard has always been that new Pro's have to show themselves long before they are made a protected rider for such a big race.

Here is an interview with Martin from the end of his first year. It was all about putting in a full season to get used to the demands of being a Pro.

I think you're right in that no one should expect it of Martin for the reason you state, but the reason it's not a great comparison is that Lemond was a protected rider from the beginning of his career. Not THE protected rider, but a protected rider. He was brought on the team to be a winner, they knew what they had. He had a victory in the third month of his career.

Not comparable with Dan Martin. Things are so different now though, the overall level is so much higher that even if someone does have Hinalt/Lemond talent, they're not going to be as obvious. It is tricky or impossible to compare.

 

[Ferminal]

The whole one day/GT thing may not be so clear.

If you're only doping before a GT then Walsh is kind of correct, you'd think the benefits of that would wane over time. If you're doping during the race then it's to maintain your pre race power or even increase it.

If a clean rider can beat a doper on Day 1 then why not Day 15 provided the doper only does as much as he did before the race. If there's a loss of power over the course of a GT then the doper has to deal with that just as much as the clean rider, or maybe the doping becomes more effective in absolute terms. What if the clean rider has better natural "recovery"? Riders who are more likely to be perceived as clean because they fade as a GT goes on may actually just be dopers who don't go as hard during the race.

Only talking about blood doping of course as who knows how much everything else is used and how good it is.

In a one day race I guess the advantage is (ignoring tactics because we're talking about being the strongest rider) that you might catch a good day and the others on a bad day, whatever they are. In a GT having 4-5 days to win the race makes it more likely for this to balance out.

 

[GuyIncognito]

Tour de Suisse 1990

5. Etappe Bergzeitfahren Solothurn - Balmberg (12 km)
1. Erik Breukink (Ho) 26:59,20 (ø 26.680 km/h).
2. Daniel Steiger (Sz) 0:00,20.
3. Gianluca Pierobon (It) 0:02,30.

Tour de Suisse 1993

6. Etappe Bergzeitfahren Solothurn - Balmberg (12 km)
1. Zenon Jaskula (Pol) 24:31,83 (ø 28,351 km/h).
2. Pawel Tonkow (Russ) 0:15,50.
3. Davide Rebellin (It) 1:30,38

The times did start really going down in 1993. 1992 Tour was a peculiar route though. FGL, do you happen know what was the best Alpe time that year?

And for people who love to harp on about how it's not doping, it's riders becoming so much better over time, the winning times for that stage were similar to 1990 in the 60s and 70s. Heck, some were faster

 

[pmcg76]

If there are no dopers, Dan Martin won the race clean because there is no doubt in anyone's mind that you can beat clean riders when clean.

If there is one doper (apart from DM), Dan Martin beat that doper. If there were 20 (!DM), he beat all of them, too. If there were 40 (!DM), he beat all of them too.

The number of dopers is completely and utterly irrelevant. In fact, I don't even need to know how many there were to know Dan beat them all. I think there were some - listed in the other post with probabilities.

I am assuming here pmcg76 mentioned "you don't know how many were doing those things" for a reason.

It is an irrefutable fact that Dan beat all of them, no matter how many there were (0-200), so what was the reason pmcg76 mentioned it?

The only reason I can think of, is that perhaps he feels the entire field was clean, and therefore my argument (DM beat all the dopers and therefore is likely doped himself) is invalid, as there were no dopers. Otherwise, he may as well have said "You don't know when my pet dog was born" for all the relevance it adds. Unless (as previously stated) I am missing something.

I sure hope pmcg76 responds, instead of people who have threatened to "mod" me.

My point is simple, nobody really knows how many riders were on EPO in 1992, they can guess but it is just that, a guess.

Nobody knows how many riders were doing blood bags, EPO in 2013 so to say LeMond beat a few guys on EPO whilst Martin beat an entire field on BB/EPO is projecting something they wish to be true.

LeMond might have beaten riders on EPO in 92 and Martin the same in 13 but we have people arguing LeMond had the talent to do whilst Martin doesn't.

LeMonds amazing talent is based on his performances in the pre-blood vector doping phase.

But how exactly do you measure the natural talent level of a current rider if the belief is that blood vector doping is still the norm. Saying Martin didn't show up as early is neglible if everyone is still using BBs/EPO. Would LeMond have shown up as well if everyone were on BBs/EPO in his era? If his performances 91-94 are anything to go by then, No would be the answer. So how do you compare and contrast exaclty?

I don't doubt that LeMond was a better talent than Martin as a GC/TT rider but I believe that Martin is just as good a climber/one day rider as LeMond. I think even Van Diemen who coached both said that at some point. Even with all his talent LeMond did not win any classics and he did try, including L-B-L. So even with all his talent level, LeMond was still beatable in one day races by guys he would crush in a GT. Which again is my point, you might be a bigger talent or doped up but in a one day race's but there are too many mitigating factors at play that change the outcome in the favour of the weaker guy.