- Aug 12, 2009
What Mambo said. Carlos time IMO is a warning flag. It is why I think he was juicing in 08. Explained his Alpe performance and his chrono against Evans. Also explains his less than perfect performances later. Carlos put 2 minutes into everyone else.Mambo95 said:It's worth including the 2008 times:
Sastre: 39' 31
Sanchez (2nd): 41' 34
Back to the original times posted by Greg. All they show is the advancement of epo detection and doping protocols by WADA and the AFLD. Epo test comes in, the best way to boost your performance on a blood level is taken away. Microdosing and autologuous blood doping became the new norm. In a way, it explains how times have dropped from Lance's hey day and Riis stellar year in 96. Also why nobody touches Pantani in climbing prowess, despite the howls you hear in the Clinic. Anyone needing an update on that ask BroDeal about 99.
Even last years Tour times were down significantly on performances a decade ago. Are they still too high? Floyd is the anomaly, but the times for the others isn't there. I remember Floyd smacked everyone senseless that day. Was it Evans and Kloden who were the last to be dropped? Even if that is the case, Cadel still went up easily a minute faster than he did in 2008 (correct me if I am wrong I may be) if my recollections are accurate. I thought Cadel lost about 2 minutes to Floyd that day. Using Cadel as the benchmark, I'd happily wager a lot changed between 2006 and 2008. Heck I only need watch the big doping catches/busts to know something did. It also explains why many believed Cadel was a shoe in to win in 08. By 2006 and 2007 standards/times, he should have...but I think the level of doping permitted had dropped, to this day. Sure they're still doping but it isn't as beneficial as it was. I'm not saying the BioPassport is foolproof, it isn't, but I am saying it is working to a degree.
Look at the only times know for Lemond and Hinault in 1986. Around 48 minutes. Tour went over 21 stages back then though, 24 days. That is further pain, so times would be slightly slower if all other things are equal to today (they aren't). Add in Hinault and Lemond rode the entire ascent of the Alpe and half the prior col alone. It is likely they went a bit slower than they could have. Compare to these days and Gregs figures. In last years Dauphine AC and Brajkovic went up over 42 minutes. Close to 43. The Evans group in 2008 went up in 41'30" to 41'50". Hence why I used him as my Benchmark. The explanation of the Floyd anomaly is pretty clear. He went for broke. Balls to the wall doping. Hence why he was busted. I remember talks of 14 other riders having "iffy" substances detected, but not over threshold so no reprimand. Floyd went way over the allowed protocols. That is why he won. That explained stage 17 in 2006. Nuff said on that. An anomaly explained by blatant doping. I'd also happily declare if Lance had have raced that year, Floyd would have spanked him in every stage bar one...his goof on stage 16 would have been punished.
Consider the caliber of riders today. AC is a better all round rider than Lance ever was. He isn't a one trick pony. Now see how fast he goes up this year if he races. How fast Andy Schleck goes up will be of interest as well. Then of course Evans plus Menchov and Sastre if a miracle happens and they race. What will happen in 2011 will be an indicator more or less of how much doping is going on today compared to recent years gone by, ie; how good the drugs are. Maybe then when they go slower people will stop the BS on these threads and realise things have changed on a numerical scale performance wise, meaning the doping has changed. Especially the "Evans is clean" crap, as I've always said, how did he keep up in 2006 and 2007 when others were blatantly doping. One also only needed to look at Lance, Levi and Kloden last year to note how things have changed. All much slower than recent years gone by. Do the math. Heck, Lance 'looked' cleaner last year than he ever has...now that is saying something.