Doping in XC skiing

[Alesle]

still uneasy after the finnish documentary accusations, the norwegians released en mass their haemoglobin values:

http://www.dagbladet.no/sport/2001/03/06/245493.html

i welcome this step in the right direction but a few comments must be made to put the step in the context:

1. these are the results of the quarterly 'health' checks, not the blood passport.
2. haemoglobin by itself (iow, without %rets) is hardly a reliable indicator of the absence of blood doping. in fact, numerous plasma expanders are a classic, fast and reliable masking method. (tyler called them 'speed bags' that take only 10-15 minutes)
3. while marit's values are there, the values everyone wants to see - northug's are curiously absent.

4. not trying to diminish the norwegian step, but as we well know from the dark past, such proven dopers like armstrong, rasmussen and scores of others
have also published their values (in fact, in much greater detail) while they were certifiably doping.

That article is more than 10 years old, so it's not particularly surprising Northug isn't mentioned there...

 

[python]

I think your narrative might be a bit off. Isn't this stuff from the year 2001?

indeed the article and the blood values are from 2001. i agree, upon re-reading my introduction could have been misleading, but wasn't the halonen documentary that produced the media storm in norway deriving it's impetus from the doping revelations of the same time frame ? that's why i thought the values and my comments (except the one regarding northug) seemed relevant.

 

[python]

That article is more than 10 years old, so it's not particularly surprising Northug isn't mentioned there...

'curiously absent' was obviously the wrong phrase to use.

 

[maltiv]

still uneasy after the finnish documentary accusations, the norwegians released en mass their haemoglobin values:

http://www.dagbladet.no/sport/2001/03/06/245493.html

i welcome this step in the right direction but a few comments must be made to put the step in the context:

1. these are the results of the quarterly 'health' checks, not the blood passport.
2. haemoglobin by itself (iow, without %rets) is hardly a reliable indicator of the absence of blood doping. in fact, numerous plasma expanders are a classic, fast and reliable masking method. (tyler called them 'speed bags' that take only 10-15 minutes)
3. while marit's values are there, the values everyone wants to see - northug's are curiously absent.

4. not trying to diminish the norwegian step, but as we well know from the dark past, such proven dopers like armstrong, rasmussen and scores of others
have also published their values (in fact, in much greater detail) while they were certifiably doping.

Well, most of the guys here would have been suspended today since the limit is now at 17. So it's very curious that such a large amount were, at one point or another, above the current maximum limit.

 

[romnom]

indeed the article and the blood values are from 2001. i agree, upon re-reading my introduction could have been misleading, but wasn't the halonen documentary that produced the media storm in norway deriving it's impetus from the doping revelations of the same time frame ? that's why i thought the values and my comments (except the one regarding northug) seemed relevant.

Well other than Northug and blood passports sure it's quite interesting. I wouldn't link the article with the documentary though, it's obviously a response to the 2001 scandal. Not really current but certainly worth the look. The documentary isn't really about the 2001 scandal but the history of Finnish XC doping in general. Mixing the two just doesn't look right to me.

 

[python]

The documentary isn't really about the 2001 scandal but the history of Finnish XC doping in general. Mixing the two just doesn't look right to me.

it sounds like you are misreading or reading too wide. I clearly indicated where my emphasis was and where the connection to the film applied - the norwegian reaction to doping accusations in the film. Thus the blood values of the norwegian skiers from the period are more than relevant.

That's why I corrected my first post and used the phrase 'film impetus derived from...' I hope you are no longer mixed

 

[Tubeless]

You’re working on your smoke signal skills?

In 2001 only two labs could detect Homohes (Finland and Germany). Do you actually think Norwegians controlled the Finnish lab? Finnish labs warn the Norwegian and forget about their own. There is no limit your BS. Bet you don’t even believe it yourself but you’re on an agenda.
Furthermore if the biggest wax team gets it slightly wrong (pre prep/wax problems) and the second biggest wax team gets it right someone is doped. Add to that that they had it fixed Petter’s skis after a couple of events. Your knowledge of ski prepping is embarrassing. If you ever want to know you should find out what skies each Norwegian used during the 50 km in Holmenkollen 2011 (they could change skis 4 times during the race). Then you find out that size and pooling your recourses do make a difference.
Why don’t you check out Sture Sivertsen blood values? When you have maybe it becomes clear that there may be rotten apples everywhere but definitively not everyone in the Norwegian team. I think Sivertsen is happy about the altitude for the Falun WC and Lillehammer Olympics.

It seems you're (intentionally) misunderstanding my point. I am simply saying that it's patently obvious to most that the Norwegians doped along with all the other top nations during the 1990's when there was no EPO test and no Hb limits in place. Norwegians have countered that no, their success was due to superior stone grinding and waxing and that can explain how they were able to keep up with EPO-doped Russians, Finns, Italians and Kazakhstanis from circa 1994 to 2000.

Let's take the 1994 Lillehammer World Champs as an example, and use the 30 km freestyle event so that kick wax considerations don't give anyone an excuse to dismiss the conclusions:

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

The nearly 4-minute margin from 1st to the possibly first clean athlete in 12th place is frankly eye-catching - more than 5%. Top 2 are Norwegians and places 3-7 and 9-11 are known dopers. Superior skis? Or superior "preparation" and great skis?

Regarding the Lahti 2001 episode, it's already been pointed out that the Finns suspect that other teams got an explicit warning from their own member of the FIS medical commission that plasma expanders will be tested (they were banned just the year before) - but that the Finnish representative Tapio Wideman was either left out of the loop, or mislead to believing the testing would not take place in Lahti.

And before you dismiss my qualifications to comment on this topic, I'll just point out that I was at the Vancouver Olympics as a coach for one of the national teams, and no it was not the Finnish team.

 

[Tubeless]

Well other than Northug and blood passports sure it's quite interesting. I wouldn't link the article with the documentary though, it's obviously a response to the 2001 scandal. Not really current but certainly worth the look. The documentary isn't really about the 2001 scandal but the history of Finnish XC doping in general. Mixing the two just doesn't look right to me.

FIS has a program that allows skiers to apply for a "naturally high Hb exemption" that allows racing above the 17 g/l limit for men and 16 g/l limit for women. To qualify, you must submit historical data for your Hb values dating all the way back to teenage years. And here's the curious rule: if any 2 values differ by more than 10% in your adult data, the exemption will be denied. No exceptions. FIS considers such a swing in values a sign of possible blood manipulation.

Almost all the listed Norwegians in the referenced article would be suspect based on this rule.

 

[the sceptic]

The nearly 4-minute margin from 1st to the possibly first clean athlete in 12th place is frankly eye-catching - more than 5%. Top 2 are Norwegians and places 3-7 and 9-11 are known dopers. Superior skis? Or superior "preparation" and great skis?

These kind of huge gaps should be pretty telling. This never happens anymore.

What does everyone think of Muhlegg in the 90s? Is it possible that he was clean? or did he dope on his own with the rest of the Germans being clean?

 

[python]

FIS has a program that allows skiers to apply for a "naturally high Hb exemption" that allows racing above the 17 g/l limit for men

iirc, daehlie's natural haemoglobin was posted at around 16 to17. This would almost certainly mean that he had to have an exemption.

I don't recall any public controversy though. Also, I think (though not sure) the limit for man in 2001 was 17.5.

 

[Tubeless]

iirc, daehlie's natural haemoglobin was posted at around 16 to17. This would almost certainly mean that he had to have an exemption.

I don't recall any public controversy though. Also, I think (though not sure) the limit for man in 2001 was 17.5.

The FIS started enforcing the Hb limit at the 1997 Trondheim World Champs. The initial limit was a ridiculously high 18.5 g/l for men. And curiously, FIS still allowed the use of plasma expanders until 2001 - which reportedly all teams were using, ostensibly to get around the predictably timed Hb test before the race.

Gradually, the limit was lowered to 17.5 in 2001 and to the eventual value of 17.0 today.

FIS is perhaps not as bad as UCI but they were clearly aware of what was going on in elite skiing and for years took only baby steps to protect the sport from scandals - not from doping. There's a story from the Salt Lake Olympics in 2002 where many positives were swiped under the carpet for fear of a huge scandal. The new EPO test that caught Muehlegg, Danilova and Lazutina was performed only for 16 athletes due to the expense / complication of shipping the samples to Europe for testing - and yielded 3 positives.

 

[romnom]

FIS has a program that allows skiers to apply for a "naturally high Hb exemption" that allows racing above the 17 g/l limit for men and 16 g/l limit for women. To qualify, you must submit historical data for your Hb values dating all the way back to teenage years. And here's the curious rule: if any 2 values differ by more than 10% in your adult data, the exemption will be denied. No exceptions. FIS considers such a swing in values a sign of possible blood manipulation.

Almost all the listed Norwegians in the referenced article would be suspect based on this rule.

That's quite interesting. At least Bjorgen shines with her solid and stable blood values on that list. Good to focus on the positives. Funny that if you ignore the low values and just look the high vs normal values the 10% is still a pretty tough limit for many of the listed athletes.

it sounds like you are misreading or reading too wide. I clearly indicated where my emphasis was and where the connection to the film applied - the norwegian reaction to doping accusations in the film. Thus the blood values of the norwegian skiers from the period are more than relevant.

That's why I corrected my first post and used the phrase 'film impetus derived from...' I hope you are no longer mixed

I should probably just thank for the link and let it be. I just don't think you're being clear. The original version with the link was pretty absurd and maintaining the whole 'film deriving impetus from...' line of thinking is pretty useless. The documentary and the article are both directly relevant to the current discussion and Norwegian XC skiing. Where the film derives impetus from and the timing of the article adds very little into it as far as I can see. Unless for the sake of cosmic symmetry you want to go the full circle. Might be worth it to be honest. I usually fail to understand the cosmic side of things. Anyway, thanks for the link, it really is interesting stuff.

 

[python]

.



I should probably just thank for the link and let it be.

that is right. Yet you chose to continue to engage in pointless comments even after I clarified myself several times. Absurd is york thick headed insistence on what the point of my post was even after several light headed clarifications.

I usually fail to understand the cosmic side of things. Anyway, thanks for the link, it really is interesting stuff.

i can see why you fail, but seeing you contradicting your own understanding of my post twice in the same post in the same breath while keep uttering insincere thank you, tell me you are not interested in the substance of the discussion.

 

[romnom]

that is right. Yet you chose to continue to engage in pointless comments even after I clarified myself several times. Absurd is york thick headed insistence on what the point of my post was even after several light headed clarifications. i can see why you fail, but seeing you contradicting your own understanding of my post twice in the same post in the same breath while keep uttering insincere thank you, tell me you are not interested in the substance of the discussion.

The thank you was actually sincere. As for the rest, you're right, it's pointless.

 

[Velo1ticker]

The nearly 4-minute margin from 1st to the possibly first clean athlete in 12th place is frankly eye-catching - more than 5%. Top 2 are Norwegians and places 3-7 and 9-11 are known dopers. Superior skis? Or superior "preparation" and great skis?

So when FIS are debating spending cuts for the wealthy teams they (FIS) do not know what they are talking about?
http://sport.aftenposten.no/sport/langrenn/article259515.ece

Åge Skinstad in an interview today gave five reasons why Norwegians dominate:
More talent to choose from with 140000 skiers above 13 years.
Higher status to be a skier in Norway than in other countries will lead to better talents choosing CX. Different training philosophy with less high intensity training.
Continuous improvement of ski prep, like the advantage they had 1991 with stone grinding.
Altitude training from 1989 and onwards.
Some think dope up skiers improve their training methods however, how can for example the Italians know what’s working or not when their improvement are due to doping? How many XC skiers in Italy? How much do they spend on development?
http://www.dagbladet.no/2012/11/30/sport/langrenn/age_skinstad/24615627/

 

[Bavarianrider]

If the Norwegians were not on Epo in the 90es i will walk nude to the North Pole.

 

[Tubeless]

So when FIS are debating spending cuts for the wealthy teams they (FIS) do not know what they are talking about?
http://sport.aftenposten.no/sport/langrenn/article259515.ece

Åge Skinstad in an interview today gave five reasons why Norwegians dominate:
More talent to choose from with 140000 skiers above 13 years.
Higher status to be a skier in Norway than in other countries will lead to better talents choosing CX. Different training philosophy with less high intensity training.
Continuous improvement of ski prep, like the advantage they had 1991 with stone grinding.
Altitude training from 1989 and onwards.
Some think dope up skiers improve their training methods however, how can for example the Italians know what’s working or not when their improvement are due to doping? How many XC skiers in Italy? How much do they spend on development?
http://www.dagbladet.no/2012/11/30/sport/langrenn/age_skinstad/24615627/

And these were the reasons given for Lance's dominance at his 7 tour wins:

1. Unique physiology, top junior racer, high natural VO2Max
2. Best support system around, singular focus on winning TdF
3. Countless hours in the wind tunnel, superior riding position
4. Altitude training in the rockies, alps, pyrenees
5. Best training program designed by famous coach Chris Carmichael

And these unique advantages that were only available to Lance gave him the edge he needed to beat everyone else in top 10 in the mountains and time trials - even though each and every rival was doped to the max with EPO, HgH, Testosterone and blood transfusions.

Have you read Tyler's book? EPO alone was known to give you an advantage of up to 5-7% in actual time improvement on the mountains.

Cycling has started to face its dark past with an admission that things weren't quite what it seemed from circa 1992 to 2006. It's sad to see that cross-country skiing in a certain Scandinavian country is still in total denial.

Today's situation is different and I am willing to believe that world cup races are being won clean. There's still doping happening, but the better testing and monitoring and the Hb limit enforcement is keeping things more in check. This was not the case during the wild 1990's.

 

[Bavarianrider]

And these were the reasons given for Lance's dominance at his 7 tour wins:

1. Unique physiology, top junior racer, high natural VO2Max
2. Best support system around, singular focus on winning TdF
3. Countless hours in the wind tunnel, superior riding position
4. Altitude training in the rockies, alps, pyrenees
5. Best training program designed by famous coach Chris Carmichael

And these unique advantages that were only available to Lance gave him the edge he needed to beat everyone else in top 10 in the mountains and time trials - even though each and every rival was doped to the max with EPO, HgH, Testosterone and blood transfusions.

Have you read Tyler's book? EPO alone was known to give you an advantage of up to 5-7% in actual time improvement on the mountains.

Cycling has started to face its dark past with an admission that things weren't quite what it seemed from circa 1992 to 2006. It's sad to see that cross-country skiing in a certain Scandinavian country is still in total denial.

Today's situation is different and I am willing to believe that world cup races are being won clean. There's still doping happening, but the better testing and monitoring and the Hb limit enforcement is keeping things more in check. This was not the case during the wild 1990's.

That's a typical reaction in small countries. Especially when it concerns their national sports.

 

[ophene]

And these were the reasons given for Lance's dominance at his 7 tour wins:

1. Unique physiology, top junior racer, high natural VO2Max
2. Best support system around, singular focus on winning TdF
3. Countless hours in the wind tunnel, superior riding position
4. Altitude training in the rockies, alps, pyrenees
5. Best training program designed by famous coach Chris Carmichael

This kind of reverse logic is everything that is wrong with this forum.

Armstrong doped, and he claimed he was innocent. Thus everyone who ever claimes they are innocent and gives similar explanations must be doped.

 

[Bavarianrider]

This kind of reverse logic is everything that is wrong with this forum.

Armstrong doped, and he claimed he was innocent. Thus everyone who ever claimes they are innocent and gives similar explanations must be doped.

The Norwegians dominated most of the 90es, although it is no secret that many of their competitors were heavily on EPO?
So what would have happened if the Norweginas had the same medication then them? Would they have won by 4 minutes and more in every race?

 

[Tubeless]

This kind of reverse logic is everything that is wrong with this forum.

Armstrong doped, and he claimed he was innocent. Thus everyone who ever claimes they are innocent and gives similar explanations must be doped.

To be fair you can apply that logic to Petter Northug or Marit Bjorgen. Both are a bit too dominant not to raise suspicions, but their best argument for being clean is that their rivals are not known dopers.

Recent events in cycling have confirmed that there was simply no way to compete against blood-doped athletes clean - especially in the 1990's when skiers were known to dope themselves to a Hb of 20 and above. No EPO test existed. There were no Hb limits in cross-country skiing until 1997 - and even then the limit was set to a ridiculously high 18.5 g/l and the use of plasma expanders was permitted.

An objective analysis of the Norwegians beating confirmed dopers from other nations during the wild 1990's will conclude they were all dirty. It was the era of great benefits, no adverse consequences from easy-to-use and easily-available EPO. You would have been stupid not to "equalize" the playing field in the quest for medals and success - the specific objective of each national team. No one is accusing anyone in the birth-nation of cross-country skiing for being dumb.

 

[maltiv]

And these were the reasons given for Lance's dominance at his 7 tour wins:

1. Unique physiology, top junior racer, high natural VO2Max
2. Best support system around, singular focus on winning TdF
3. Countless hours in the wind tunnel, superior riding position
4. Altitude training in the rockies, alps, pyrenees
5. Best training program designed by famous coach Chris Carmichael

Indeed, the "excuses" are quite similar. But to be fair, some of the competitive advantage Norwegians have is, in difference to Armstrong, actually real. The budget of the Norwegian team is more or less 10 times as high as anyone else's. It's as if Team Sky were competing against continental teams...

Still, that shouldn't be nearly enough to even out the difference between a clean athlete and a guy on EPO, at least not in the 90's. But nowadays, with primarily micro-doses being used, who knows. I also don't think Northug's is dominating to a ridiculous degree, he clearly has his limits.

Bjørgen has no competition really, there are about 15 girls who actually take the sport seriously and 6 of them are from Norway. The others are either not talented enough, or ridiculously bad technically (Kowalczyk). So I'm not really sure if she really is that good or if everyone else just sucks.

 

[Nicko.]

It seems you're (intentionally) misunderstanding my point. I am simply saying that it's patently obvious to most that the Norwegians doped along with all the other top nations during the 1990's when there was no EPO test and no Hb limits in place. Norwegians have countered that no, their success was due to superior stone grinding and waxing and that can explain how they were able to keep up with EPO-doped Russians, Finns, Italians and Kazakhstanis from circa 1994 to 2000.

Let's take the 1994 Lillehammer World Champs as an example, and use the 30 km freestyle event so that kick wax considerations don't give anyone an excuse to dismiss the conclusions:

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

The nearly 4-minute margin from 1st to the possibly first clean athlete in 12th place is frankly eye-catching - more than 5%. Top 2 are Norwegians and places 3-7 and 9-11 are known dopers. Superior skis? Or superior "preparation" and great skis?

...snip...

I tend to agree with this.
Just how bad was the era when "the greatest of them all" was great? And how great must he have been to be so successful in that era?

Here's a simple medal count for "the greatest" compared to the whole male Swedish XC national team, with some pertinent events time-stamped:

BTW1, the medals for Sweden in 93 and 98 came in the least VO2max-correlated event, the 50k. And in 98 there was a huge weather/starting order correlation.

BTW2, Sweden seems to make improvements the year after a major anti-doping advancement. For one year. Go figure.

 

[Cloxxki]

Normally, the fastest biathlete can match and beat the fast XC specialists in skating. Martin Fourcade was no-where close recently in the XC WC 15km. Interesting or coincidence? He did win at the next biathlon WC.

I can't get over the relative improvement by the American ski girls. It's more than a few percent. More than a boost of confidence. More than an added year of experience. More than a new training method. More than all combined.

Some interesting changes between countries year-on-year so far. Russian men outstanding, women much less so.

 

[Pazuzu]

I tend to agree with this.
Just how bad was the era when "the greatest of them all" was great? And how great must he have been to be so successful in that era?

Maybe I'm naive, but I tend to belive Daehlie, Alsgaard & the rest were able to be successful skiing paniagua. Through better ski prep, superior technique, smart altitude training, and use of 'altitude tents' (which was allowable) - they were able to compete successfully against their doped competitors.

Keep in mind Tyler Hamilton stated that in the EPO era it was still possible for clean riders to beat doped riders in one day classic events. But it was the grand tours - day after day of grinding it out - that it was impossible for a clean rider to beat his doped competitors. Back in the 90s then there was no 'Tour de Ski' as there is now.