Doping in XC skiing

[ingsve]

Oh, come on! Skiers had been on EPO for at least 10 years and Mühlegg had been suspected of EPO before. He was not the only EPO-doper in Salt Lake, nor was it the first time he took EPO. Your explanation for Mühlegg's ludicrous dominance over his rivals is totally implausible.

The special thing about Mühlegg in 2002 though was that he used Aranesp (Darbepoetin) the second generation of EPO and it was so new that he might have been the only one or one of very few who was on it. His ludicrous dominance could simply be an attest to how superior the second generation EPO was.

 

[BullsFan22]

We're talking about a peer-reviewed scientific article here so any bias you are hinting at would constitute scientific fraud and would suggest incompetence on the part of the journal and the peer-review process.

Maybe so. But you can never tell these days. Look at some of things that are being covered up in Freiburg, Helsinki, and Vienna! There is a great connection (well, there was) between the Austrian ski and biathlon teams and the Austrian cyclists. They both worked with the same doctors and labs and thus were able to manipulate the same way, before getting caught (and rightfully so). I'd hate to have this be witch hunt of sorts, but in these sort cases, it needs to be. Going back to Norwegian ski team, Marit Bjorgen reminds me of Marita Koch and Jarmila Kratochvilova. I am sure you know who they are/were.

 

[ingsve]

One thing that I would really, really find out is: what's up with Espen Harald Bjerke?
He is said to have 96 in VO2-max, second highest ever!

"The test was however a small step backwards for Espen Harald Bjerke. He was tested at 96 milliliter this spring, a result that tied Bjorn Daehlie's best ever result. Later this summer he was tested at 86 and his recent test was 91, which was the second highest test result. "
http://166.70.245.87/training2589.html

And Espen hasn't won squat, before or after.

Is the norwegian machines sucky beyond belief? Or Is it indicative of doping? If not why hasn't Bjerke won scores and scores of medals? Can VO2-max really fluctuate this much? Was "96" a fluke?

Björndalen (nearest Mühlegg i Salt Lake City, worlds most winning winter, male, athlete) "only" got 86 (anyone know if he has done better since?)..

I don't know, does it smell fishy?

Well, VO2Max isn't the only thing needed to win races. You need to actually put the training in, have good technique, be able to push yourself when the lactic acid is pumping through your legs etc so there can be lots of reason why Bjerke never materialized as a top rider. He was a good talent and rode a lot in the world cup but never took that final step.

 

[ingsve]

Speaking of Northug, how come he was able to go from 61st in the national championships to World champion in one month?

Or the magical peak by Alsgaard in 2003 when he finished 46th in the World cup yet won an individual world title?

He is known to "softpedal" through a race if he isn't part of the fight for the win. You'll probably never see him pushing himself to exhaustion for a 10th place. If he's out of contention he will more likely drop off and finish outside the top 30. You could compare it to a rider dropping back to the grupetto if they get dropped on a climb.

 

[ingsve]

Going back to Norwegian ski team, Marit Bjorgen reminds me of Marita Koch and Jarmila Kratochvilova. I am sure you know who they are/were.

So that would mean you think she's on anabolic steroids or what?

 

[BullsFan22]

So that would mean you think she's on anabolic steroids or what?

Something like that. She looks more like a woman than those two, but her muscles are just a little to big for my liking.

 

[maltiv]

Something like that. She looks more like a woman than those two, but her muscles are just a little to big for my liking.

When it comes to Norwegian athletes I usually am so biased that I assume they are clean. Marit Bjørgen on the other hand...

 

[ingsve]

When it comes to Norwegian athletes I usually am so biased that I assume they are clean. Marit Bjørgen on the other hand...

But do you have any other reason to think that except that she has rather well-defined muscles?

For those that don't know who we're talking about:

 

[Cloxxki]

I don't think those muscles are well defined, just blown up. Also other pictures I've seen, plain bulky. Such muscle should drag on aerobic performance, yet that's where she seems to excel, skiing away from a field. Something is awefully efficient about her. Oh, she picks her races also. Seasons even it seems.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

Remember that the first EPO test came out for the Sydney summer Olympics in 2000. There were several athletes caught for EPO in 2001 in various sports. The Lahti cross-country World Championships doping scandal in 2001 scared off many national ski teams from EPO and related masking agents (the Finns were caught for a plasma expander HEMOHES).

The recent Landis revelations also suggests that cyclists switched from EPO back to autologous blood doping at the 2001 Tour de France - Landis claimed Armstrong was caught for EPO at the 2001 Tour de Suisse, and would have not made the same mistake again, after paying off UCI with a generous "donation". Micro-dosing of EPO is a more recent phenomenon.

Muehlegg, Lazutina and Danilova tested positive for Darbepoetin, a synthetic variant of EPO. This drug was brand new, developed by Amgen and approved by FDA in September 2001. The athletes believed, incorrectly, that there was no test for this drug yet at the 2002 Olympics.

It is against this background that I am speculating there were probably few EPO users at the 2002 winter games. Plenty of blood dopers, yes, but using the traditional transfusion method. I did hear that IOC sent only 16 samples to be tested for Darbepoetin - and came back with 3 positives, so there's that possibility that others used it and got lucky (Ivanoff of Russia, winner of 50km classic is one such possibility).

But if you look at the results for the various races, there are only a few similar "superhuman" performances that smell doping-assisted. So it's possible that only Muehlegg and the Russians were on Darbepoetin and the Austrians, Italians and Estonians were on supplemental blood. The rest quite possibly raced clean.

http://www.fis-ski.com/uk/604/1228.html?event_id=8481&cal_suchsector=CC

First of all, it's not likely that someone transfusing but not taking EPO would reach an Hb as high as Mühlegg's and secondly, did you even read the study posted in the OP? Mean retics were higher than normal in 2001-2002. This suggests EPO still ruled over transfusions. Compare the results with those in 05-06 and 06-07 when mean retics were lower than the population average (while Hb was higher).

Therefore, this indicates that a
change has occurred since 2001–2002 in the way an
undefined number of not only cross-country skiers
but also cyclists have used blood doping. A likely
explanation is that the use of the more potent form of
rhEPO, Darbepoetin, has decreased. Darbepoetin is
detectable for a longer period in the urine than
rhEPO because of a higher potency and is therefore
more difficult to administer (Morkeberg et al.,
2007). The high number of high %rets (42%) during
the 2001–2002 season (Table 2) might be explained
by Darbepoetin abuse that season. A change in
the type of blood-boosting substances used and the
way it is administered, in combination with an
increased use of blood transfusions during the following
period in a subpopulation of the athletes, are
likely explanations for the observed increase in [Hb]
and decrease in %rets from 2003 to 2004 and
onwards.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

This was unprecedented and has been matched only by the entire German team taking spots 1-5 at the World Cup in Vernon in December 2005. Similarly unremarkable conditions for waxing: -2.2C and cloudy. The German team was linked in this time frame to being a customer of the Humanplasma operation in Austria.

I don't know whether those germans doped or not, but I think the Humanplasma allegations against the germans are very weak, because they are contradicted by the information given by credible sources.

The lab issued a press release in which they:

* Admitted to performing transfusions on ~30 athletes from both winter- and summer sports between 2003 and the 2006 winter olympics (it has been confirmed by Kohl that the labs involvement ceased after Turino).

* Admitted its involvement in the austrian doping scandal at the 2006 olympics.

* Named the organizers responsible for setting up appointments for the athletes at the lab and picking up the concentrates. They were Walter Mayer, Stefan Matschiner and Martin Kessler (a rowing coach).

* Denied that any german athlete visited the lab.

They weren't asked about it or anything and I struggle to see why an austrian lab would go out of their way to protect a bunch of german skiers but not austrian skiers or top cyclists.

Furthermore, we can take a look at what is known about the clientele. The reports spoke of 10 cyclists (5-6 have been named by investigators) and 4 rowers (only the coach has been named - by the lab.). We also know that at least 7 austrian winter sport athletes (the 6 caught in Turino plus Christian Hoffman), 2 triathletes (Weiss, Hütthaler) and one runner (Graf) were customers. So the media rumours that 20/30 were from DSV are clearly false.

 

[Tubeless]

I don't know whether those germans doped or not, but I think the Humanplasma allegations against the germans are very weak, because they are contradicted by the information given by credible sources.

The lab issued a press release in which they:

* Admitted to performing transfusions on ~30 athletes from both winter- and summer sports between 2003 and the 2006 winter olympics (it has been confirmed by Kohl that the labs involvement ceased after Turino).

* Admitted its involvement in the austrian doping scandal at the 2006 olympics.

* Named the organizers responsible for setting up appointments for the athletes at the lab and picking up the concentrates. They were Walter Mayer, Stefan Matschiner and Martin Kessler (a rowing coach).

* Denied that any german athlete visited the lab.

They weren't asked about it or anything and I struggle to see why an austrian lab would go out of their way to protect a bunch of german skiers but not austrian skiers or top cyclists.

Furthermore, we can take a look at what is known about the clientele. The reports spoke of 10 cyclists (5-6 have been named by investigators) and 4 rowers (only the coach has been named - by the lab.). We also know that at least 7 austrian winter sport athletes (the 6 caught in Turino plus Christian Hoffman), 2 triathletes (Weiss, Hütthaler) and one runner (Graf) were customers. So the media rumours that 20/30 were from DSV are clearly false.

Ok, I had not seen that report. They may not have been humanplasma customers but clean they were not. The fact that Germany dominated men's xc-skiing from 2004 to 2007 with four consecutive world cup titles (Sommerfeld, Teichman, Angerer, Angerer) is a coincidence, good coaching, superior skis - or the best medical program?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_FIS_Cross-Country_World_Cup_champions

There were lots of rumors in this time frame that the Germans had found our a new method to affect the oxygen affinity / dissociation curve which helps increase the oxygen saturation % from lungs to blood as well as more complete release of oxygen from blood to muscles.

http://www.ventworld.com/resources/oxydisso/dissoc.html

German biathletes and cross-country skiers training on early snow in Finland during these years were observed never to ski slowly, i.e. slow-long-distance which is the bread & butter of traditional training programs for most endurance sports. Once a coach from another nation thought they had an easy day, but was later proven wrong as the Germans had simply been warming up for their daily intensity workout.

Edit: This research suggests HGH helps not only recovery but also increases 2,3-BPG which in turn will move the hemoglobin dissociation curve left, with the desired effect on oxygen utilization - and hence VO2Max. A doping test for HGH was developed just this year.

http://themedicalbiochemistrypage.org/glycolysis.html

 

[San Carlo]

The video from 1991 Val di Femme relay race is a bad example to support your argument. Skaanes skis away from the rest of the field in an uphill section,

It is true that there's little direct evidence to suggest that Dahlie, Ulvang or other Norwegians doped in the 1990's. But you must also realize that saying these guys consistently beat known dopers just by having fast skis and superior technique sounds a lot like a certain Texan claiming he was the best because he was most focused, gifted and was on his bike 7 hours a day.

Good skis are also better uphill, but it is also clear that he is much better downhill.
Comparing with Lance and cycling is wrong. XC skiing is very different. A well-trained XC-skier can do Alp d'Huez on 45min, with minimal cycling training. For example less than 1500km.
In XC-skiing you are useless even if you are in an extremely good shape if you haven't grown up XC-skiing. Just look at swimming. Even if people have been using doping in swimming for many years, those records are crushed because of better swimming suits.

The Norwegian would have won a lot more if the sport had been doping free. Italy winning the relay at Lillehammer. Austria in Ramsau in 1999. And many other results from those championships. The Norwegians did not perform very well in the championships compared to many of the more suspicious athletes.

 

[BroDeal]

For those that don't know who we're talking about:

Lady looks like a dude.

That yellow wristband shows where "her" ethics lie.

 

[Tubeless]

Good skis are also better uphill, but it is also clear that he is much better downhill.
Comparing with Lance and cycling is wrong. XC skiing is very different. A well-trained XC-skier can do Alp d'Huez on 45min, with minimal cycling training. For example less than 1500km.
In XC-skiing you are useless even if you are in an extremely good shape if you haven't grown up XC-skiing. Just look at swimming. Even if people have been using doping in swimming for many years, those records are crushed because of better swimming suits.

The Norwegian would have won a lot more if the sport had been doping free. Italy winning the relay at Lillehammer. Austria in Ramsau in 1999. And many other results from those championships. The Norwegians did not perform very well in the championships compared to many of the more suspicious athletes.

You're assuming the rest of us know nothing about cross-country skiing?

That video is at best inconclusive. It's possible Skaanes had the best combination of kick & glide, but you were trying to make the point that Norwegians were suprierior since no one else knew anything about stone-grinding. As you surely know, kick waxing and stone grinding have nothing to do with one another.

You seem to be making a blanket statement on behalf of the entire Norwegian cross-country skiing. Best skis, guaranteed to have not doped. Even Bjorn Dahlie would be able to vouch only for Bjorn Dahlie. There has been team-organized doping in skiing and there have also been individuals doing their own thing. Same as pro cycling and any other sport.

One comparison we can use from cycling is that it was not possible to beat dopers riding clean during the wild 1990's. A well-accepted rule-of-thumb (back when there we no Hb limits) is that EPO gives you a 5% performance advantage. Are you saying that Dahlie was such an unusual, gifted individual that he would have been 5% ahead of everyone else if doping had not exisited? With doping all around, he had to settle to being just the best, winning by a mere few seconds.

This 30km freestyle race from 1994 Olympics in Lillehammer is a good example. We know Myllyla (3rd) took EPO. Most likely Isometsa (6th) and Rasanen (11th) as well. Botvinov of Austria (4th) and Smirnov (10th) of Kazakhstan were considered amongst the biggest dopers of the time. Muehlegg (9th) is a giveaway. You're implying (and I am agreeing) that Italians doped - that takes care of DeZolt (5th) and Fauner (7th). The only clean skiers in top 11, according to you, would have been Alsgaard (1st by a mile) and Dahlie (2nd by another mile).

http://www.fis-ski.com/uk/604/610.html?sector=CC&raceid=457

The time difference from Alsgaard to Myllyla (known doper) is just about the same as Muehlegg's winning margin on the same distance at the 2002 games. And all thanks to stone-grinding? Sure.

The first likely clean skier (Forsberg of Sweden, 12th) was 3:44 behind Alsgaard - and would you be surprised to find find out that's just about 5%?

 

[BullsFan22]

You're assuming the rest of us know nothing about cross-country skiing?

That video is at best inconclusive. It's possible Skaanes had the best combination of kick & glide, but you were trying to make the point that Norwegians were suprierior since no one else knew anything about stone-grinding. As you surely know, kick waxing and stone grinding have nothing to do with one another.

You seem to be making a blanket statement on behalf of the entire Norwegian cross-country skiing. Best skis, guaranteed to have not doped. Even Bjorn Dahlie would be able to vouch only for Bjorn Dahlie. There has been team-organized doping in skiing and there have also been individuals doing their own thing. Same as pro cycling and any other sport.

One comparison we can use from cycling is that it was not possible to beat dopers riding clean during the wild 1990's. A well-accepted rule-of-thumb (back when there we no Hb limits) is that EPO gives you a 5% performance advantage. Are you saying that Dahlie was such an unusual, gifted individual that he would have been 5% ahead of everyone else if doping had not exisited? With doping all around, he had to settle to being just the best, winning by a mere few seconds.

This 30km freestyle race from 1994 Olympics in Lillehammer is a good example. We know Myllyla (3rd) took EPO. Most likely Isometsa (6th) and Rasanen (11th) as well. Botvinov of Austria (4th) and Smirnov (10th) of Kazakhstan were considered amongst the biggest dopers of the time. Muehlegg (9th) is a giveaway. You're implying (and I am agreeing) that Italians doped - that takes care of DeZolt (5th) and Fauner (7th). The only clean skiers in top 11, according to you, would have been Alsgaard (1st by a mile) and Dahlie (2nd by another mile).

http://www.fis-ski.com/uk/604/610.html?sector=CC&raceid=457

The time difference from Alsgaard to Myllyla (known doper) is just about the same as Muehlegg's winning margin on the same distance at the 2002 games. And all thanks to stone-grinding? Sure.

The first likely clean skier (Forsberg of Sweden, 12th) was 3:44 behind Alsgaard - and would you be surprised to find find out that's just about 5%?

Great post.

 

[sadfitty]

Haha, tubeless, you know really don't know anything... 5% advantage over Forsberg from skis and Aalsgard's superior technique is easily possible. Technically Alsgaard was a decade ahead of his time. In fact, all the others skiers look awkward, Alsgaard's technique wouldn't have looked out of place in Vancouver 2010...

 

[San Carlo]

You're assuming the rest of us know nothing about cross-country skiing?

That video is at best inconclusive. It's possible Skaanes had the best combination of kick & glide, but you were trying to make the point that Norwegians were suprierior since no one else knew anything about stone-grinding. As you surely know, kick waxing and stone grinding have nothing to do with one another.

You seem to be making a blanket statement on behalf of the entire Norwegian cross-country skiing. Best skis, guaranteed to have not doped. Even Bjorn Dahlie would be able to vouch only for Bjorn Dahlie. There has been team-organized doping in skiing and there have also been individuals doing their own thing. Same as pro cycling and any other sport.

One comparison we can use from cycling is that it was not possible to beat dopers riding clean during the wild 1990's. A well-accepted rule-of-thumb (back when there we no Hb limits) is that EPO gives you a 5% performance advantage. Are you saying that Dahlie was such an unusual, gifted individual that he would have been 5% ahead of everyone else if doping had not exisited? With doping all around, he had to settle to being just the best, winning by a mere few seconds.

This 30km freestyle race from 1994 Olympics in Lillehammer is a good example. We know Myllyla (3rd) took EPO. Most likely Isometsa (6th) and Rasanen (11th) as well. Botvinov of Austria (4th) and Smirnov (10th) of Kazakhstan were considered amongst the biggest dopers of the time. Muehlegg (9th) is a giveaway. You're implying (and I am agreeing) that Italians doped - that takes care of DeZolt (5th) and Fauner (7th). The only clean skiers in top 11, according to you, would have been Alsgaard (1st by a mile) and Dahlie (2nd by another mile).

http://www.fis-ski.com/uk/604/610.html?sector=CC&raceid=457

The time difference from Alsgaard to Myllyla (known doper) is just about the same as Muehlegg's winning margin on the same distance at the 2002 games. And all thanks to stone-grinding? Sure.

The first likely clean skier (Forsberg of Sweden, 12th) was 3:44 behind Alsgaard - and would you be surprised to find find out that's just about 5%?

If you don't agree that the Norwegians had superior skis very often in the 90's, because of stone grinding but also on kick waxing, yes, then I don't think you know much about XC skiing. Ski preparation was a lot more professional in Norway compared to the competitors, and also had a much bigger budget.

I guaranteed that there is no systematic doping now.

And again, you can't use the same "rules" comparing XC-skiing and cycling. Thomas Alsgaard had superior skis on that 30km. Dæhlie was very angry after loosing that race, and the first thing he wanted to do after that race was to go out and test his skis against Alsgaard.

Skating was a pretty new discipline in 94. And Alsgaard was one of the few that had skated all his life. No wonder he could beat a 40-year-old De Zolt even without EPO.

You also have to look at the culture. XC skiing in Norway can't be compared to any other country when it comes to popularity of the sport and the number of active athletes on a high level.

Do you think Per Elofsson doped in Lahti 2001? He did beat cheaters like Isometsä. Take a look this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulWT-HlE8xA and enjoy watching a clean athlete beating dopers. And if you don't agree that Elofsson have a much better technique than Isomatsä and Muhlegg, then you don't know much about XC skiing.

Elofsson did manage to come back after the Olympics in 2002. He won the world championship in 2003 even if he wasn't in top shape. The reason? He had the best skis. Take a look: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot1KTAgp4fQ&NR=1

 

[Tubeless]

Haha, tubeless, you know really don't know anything... 5% advantage over Forsberg from skis and Aalsgard's superior technique is easily possible. Technically Alsgaard was a decade ahead of his time. In fact, all the others skiers look awkward, Alsgaard's technique wouldn't have looked out of place in Vancouver 2010...

Torgny Mogren of Sweden, who placed 24th in that race in 1994 was considered by many at the time to have one of the best ski-skating techniques around. Forsberg was also known as a good "technician" as were most Swedes. Alsgaard was good technically, but not leaps and bounds ahead of everyone else. Having even a 1% advantage with technique over the rest of best in the world would be significant.

Muehlegg proved to all of us in 2002 that technique does not matter if you've got enough boost from doping. Alsgaard was in that race, and placed 12th, curiously 5.7% behind Muehlegg. Superior technique no more? As I noted earlier, the introduction of the EPO test in 2000 / 2001 scared most skiers off that drug for fear of getting caught. I'm willing to believe that Norwegians raced clean in 2002.

 

[Tubeless]

If you don't agree that the Norwegians had superior skis very often in the 90's, because of stone grinding but also on kick waxing, yes, then I don't think you know much about XC skiing. Ski preparation was a lot more professional in Norway compared to the competitors, and also had a much bigger budget.

I guaranteed that there is no systematic doping now.

And again, you can't use the same "rules" comparing XC-skiing and cycling. Thomas Alsgaard had superior skis on that 30km. Dæhlie was very angry after loosing that race, and the first thing he wanted to do after that race was to go out and test his skis against Alsgaard.

Skating was a pretty new discipline in 94. And Alsgaard was one of the few that had skated all his life. No wonder he could beat a 40-year-old De Zolt even without EPO.

You also have to look at the culture. XC skiing in Norway can't be compared to any other country when it comes to popularity of the sport and the number of active athletes on a high level.

Do you think Per Elofsson doped in Lahti 2001? He did beat cheaters like Isometsä. Take a look this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulWT-HlE8xA and enjoy watching a clean athlete beating dopers. And if you don't agree that Elofsson have a much better technique than Isomatsä and Muhlegg, then you don't know much about XC skiing.

Elofsson did manage to come back after the Olympics in 2002. He won the world championship in 2003 even if he wasn't in top shape. The reason? He had the best skis. Take a look: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot1KTAgp4fQ&NR=1

It's not fair to say that skating was "a pretty new discipline" in 1994. It had been around for 10 years by that time.

Ski-skating started in the spring of 1984 during the polar-cup in northern Finland. Ove Aunli of Norway won a few races without kick wax and proved that it can be done consistently. Of course, American Bill Koch had done it for years, but never managed to win a world cup so others discounted it as a curiousity until someone was unbeatable with the technique.

Thanks for the video links. I am willing to believe Elofsson raced clean and specifically in Lahti 2001. And he was great technically, like most Swedes (I've always thought the Swedes have the best skating technique around). Elofsson also had better skis than Isometsa, on this video that's pretty obvious.

But things had started to change in that time frame (2001-2002) cutting into the advantage of the dopers. Hb limits were introduced. EPO test was around. The Finns were caught positive for plasma expander - not EPO - and it's possible the Finns had used the less effective autologous blood transfusion, vs. EPO for fear of testing positive. Plasma expanders were banned in 2001 - but the Finns believed incorrectly that FIS would not be testing for them.

Contrast this with 1994. EPO was around and its effect was well understood. There was no EPO test. There were no Hb limits and no Hb testing. It was common knowledge that many teams were doping. Anyone wanting to compete had to go along. There would be no consequences. For Norwegians to dope at home soil would be easy, and convenient. Somehow the myth has endured that you could win clean during those years - it's probably because there has been little open information exchange, such as this type of forum to discuss the facts - and fiction !

Regarding Alsgaard vs. Dahlie, gaining 47 seconds advantage over 30km with better skis sounds more plausible. Not 4 minutes.

 

[roundabout]

to get back to cycling for a bit, here are some hematocrit numbers for skiers in 1992-1993 courtesy of our favourite cycling doping doc

Albarello

41.6 in November, 47.7 in January, 53.6 in February

De Zolt

43.6-52-53.1

Fauner


45.1-55.1

Vanzetta

45.3-48.1

yet these guys only won a paltry relay silver

here's a link with slightly different numbers, but the same implication

http://archiviostorico.corriere.it/2003/marzo/25/CONTENUTO_DEI_FILE_co_0_030325115.shtml

 

[Tubeless]

to get back to cycling for a bit, here are some hematocrit numbers for skiers in 1992-1993 courtesy of our favourite cycling doping doc

Albarello

41.6 in November, 47.7 in January, 53.6 in February

De Zolt

43.6-52-53.1

Fauner


45.1-55.1

Vanzetta

45.3-48.1

yet these guys only won a paltry relay silver

here's a link with slightly different numbers, but the same implication

http://archiviostorico.corriere.it/2003/marzo/25/CONTENUTO_DEI_FILE_co_0_030325115.shtml

You can see that Vanzetta was their weak link...

 

[ingsve]

yet these guys only won a paltry relay silver

One thing that is never discussed in these types of discussions is what someone could have achieved without doping.

So let's say EPO gives a 5% boost but a 5% boost from what? It's almost like it's assumed that everyone would be at the same level if it wasn't for doping. That's an assumption that I simply don't buy.

I don't know who cheated and who was clean in 92 or 94 for example (except the cases that are known). But assuming that everyone that beats or is equal to known dopers are also doping is a logical fallacy. I don't think it's possible to draw that type of conclusion just based on who beat who in a specific race.

One that we can look at however is how the italians resuts varied with their documented increase in crit values. All four italians went from being well outside the top 10 or even top 20 during december 92 to having almost exclusively top 10 results in january and february.

If we instead look at the other top riders Dählie, Ulvang and Smirnov who many people think were clean we see that they were all good all season long. If anything their results were perhaps even better in the beginning of the season than during january and february.

But what does that mean? Were the italians simply doping for the world championships while the others were doping all season long? Or was it simply that they were merely top 30 riders who had to dope to be as good as the top of the sport?

I'm not saying I know the answer but I think it demonstrates that the notion that to beat a doper you have to dope is not as certain as some people might think.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

Ok, I had not seen that report. They may not have been humanplasma customers but clean they were not. The fact that Germany dominated men's xc-skiing from 2004 to 2007 with four consecutive world cup titles (Sommerfeld, Teichman, Angerer, Angerer) is a coincidence, good coaching, superior skis - or the best medical program?

Well, the germans stepped up in 02-03 and if you look at fig. 1 in the FIS-study presented in the TS, you'll find that 02-03, 03-04 and 04-05 are clearly the cleanest years from the 90's to 2007. Mean retics were 1.1% and mean Hb was below 15.0 g/dl in two of those years. So dominating (which is a bit of a stretch imo) in that period of time isn't THAT fishy. Certainly not like dominating in the 90's.

As for 05-06 and 06-07, they were clearly fine years for transfusions, as evident by Hb jumping and retics dropping, but it should be noted that the germans as a team declined significantly post 04-05. In fact, they went from having 3 guys in the top 5 to having just one in the top 17 in 05-06 and 1 in the top 13 in 06-07. For comparision, Sweden had 4 top 10'ers in -06 while Norway had 3 in -06 and 6(!) in -07.

The one german top guy was world cup winner Tobias Angerer, who was blacklisted by FIS if you believe the rumours... But one guy at the top doesn't really imply a team-wide program. Certainly not with some novel drug only they had access to. On the other hand, they were suspiciously succesful at the 2007 worlds, but that is probably a better indication of good, old autologous blood doping if anything...

There were lots of rumors in this time frame that the Germans had found our a new method to affect the oxygen affinity / dissociation curve which helps increase the oxygen saturation % from lungs to blood as well as more complete release of oxygen from blood to muscles.

Okay, this is something I find difficult to believe, both because I've never heard about any drug like that - not even in cycling - and for reasons I've already explained. Did they all grow a moral compass after -05, except for Angerer, or did everyone else start using this super-secret drug that has somehow remained unknown?

German biathletes and cross-country skiers training on early snow in Finland during these years were observed never to ski slowly, i.e. slow-long-distance which is the bread & butter of traditional training programs for most endurance sports. Once a coach from another nation thought they had an easy day, but was later proven wrong as the Germans had simply been warming up for their daily intensity workout.

I really don't see the connection to doping here. I believe all teams do high-intensity workouts and I know the swedes certainly do a quite a bit of it. The germans do a lot of distance training in the summer.

Edit: This research suggests HGH helps not only recovery but also increases 2,3-BPG which in turn will move the hemoglobin dissociation curve left, with the desired effect on oxygen utilization - and hence VO2Max. A doping test for HGH was developed just this year.

http://themedicalbiochemistrypage.org/glycolysis.html

Well, thats interesting, but don't you find it strange then that no study has managed to show that HGH improves aerobic capacity?
Nevertheless, HGH is probably the easiest drug to aquire, use and get away with so I'm guessing most of the dopers are on it.

 

[roundabout]

That's the whole point. The clean skiers have to be really good and have the equipment just right to be able to beat dopers specifically peaking for big events with hematocrits in the mid 50's.

on an unrelated note, how was it possible that the women part of the USSR/Russia teams was so much better than their male counterparts