Everyone is doping? A Fallacy?

[TubularBills]

Interesting comment in response to the recent Globe and Mail Article:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor...ion-shifts-to-france/article1801111/comments/

" Zeno of Elea

9:08 PM on November 16, 2010

"For those of you who still can't get beyond Armstrong's PR message, please google Michael Ashenden and read his interview at nyvelocity. Ashenden helped develop the test for EPO. After reviewing the 1999 Tour De France urine samples. Of the 87 usable there were 13 positives for EPO. 6 of them belonged to Lance Armstrong. So not only was Lance doping, the new argument that everyone else was doing it is false too.

Like Ben Johnson before him, Armstrong tries to explain this away with a conspiracy theory that his samples were tampered with. Ashenden rips Armstrong's conspiracy theory defense apart too.

If you have a child who strives to compete in any athletic field, you should despise cynical drug cheats like Armstrong. When somebody robs a drug store for pseudoephedrine for their meth lab, we know what to call them. When somebody 'diverts' EPO or other prescription drugs for performance enhancement, the word's the same."

Old news but that's only 10% - Of course 99 is immediately after the Festina meltdown - but got me wondering what that number would be year on year and relative to the recent statements that "everybody dopes."

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/10/06/723445/italy-prosecutor-everyone-dopes.html

Might be very constructive (for the sport) to build the case year by year that dopers are the exception, not the majority.

Only if it is actually true of course.

Doping programs are expensive - Do the majority of riders receive salaries that justify/enable the cost vs. benefit. Do most teams have the Sponsorship to support systemic doping? Seems like Landis had to convince Phonak to underwrite his program and Hamilton spent 100K+ a year - wouldn't make sense for a bunch of domestiques, but makes sense for the team leaders and wanna be's - which supports the minority theory.

So what is the percentage today? 10% 20%, 50% or the proposed 100%?

and of course they're only testing the top finishers + randoms, which means it might be hard to quantify?

If it's been covered, so be it - if not, have at it. (checked the Ettori thread and it wasn't covered there)

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=10691&highlight=Ettore+Torri

 

[Roland Rat]

Sssshhhh.... the party line is that ALL pro cyclists dope.... deviate from that and you'll be ridiculed and then banished from these parts....

 

[Ferminal]

No one really knows, it's only the top echeloen that we can safely say "are all doing it".

Then all those naughty small fish who the UCI catch out, trying to cheat the more talented and harder working riders.

In the middle, sparkling clean.

 

[fatandfast]

this will always be the most confusing topic..Samples from,10 years ago,half a dozen agencies tasked(and paid) to test for banned substances. A decade later a US official with nothing to do with cycling goes back with the intent to reveal that Pharmstrong is a fake and a cheater..if it is or is not proven all the glad hands that gave Novitzky a happy greeting should be in the cell next to him..France has dirty blood from Lance and they were too busy to mention/imply this until now. The UCI should be getting disbanded if it turns out that LA is dirty.Nothing but criminals top to bottom

 

[andy1234]

No one really knows, it's only the top echeloen that we can safely say "are all doing it".

Then all those naughty small fish who the UCI catch out, trying to cheat the more talented and harder working riders.

In the middle, sparkling clean.

Wiggins and Millar are "top echelon", and theres no reason to believe they are not clean.
The sport was ,arguably, dirtier 10 years ago and there were a few clean riders winning top echelon events then. Hopefully the same is true now.

 

[jimmypop]

Sssshhhh.... the party line is that ALL pro cyclists dope.... deviate from that and you'll be ridiculed and then banished from these parts....

We can't win here. Say "Everyone dopes!", and people complain that we're not fairly assessing the riders individually. On the other hand, "Everyone dopes!" is the rationalization put forth to excuse riders who are caught.

 

[hrotha]

Wiggins and Millar are "top echelon", and theres no reason to believe they are not clean.
The sport was ,arguably, dirtier 10 years ago and there were a few clean riders winning top echelon events then. Hopefully the same is true now.

Funny, because Ashenden has questioned Wiggins' blood values during the 09 Tour. Oh but I guess he's British.

Anyway, just because people were scared to dope during the 99 Tour that doesn't mean they were clean. That just means they didn't want to carry their products with them. That study on EPO detection should have used samples from the Dauphiné.

 

[flicker]

We can't win here. Say "Everyone dopes!", and people complain that we're not fairly assessing the riders individually. On the other hand, "Everyone dopes!" is the rationalization put forth to excuse riders who are caught.

Hard to say. My guess it would be hard to turn pro and keep up the training schedule then race all over the place without doping. I look at some of the big rock stars, Elvis for instance who are caught in the doping lifestyle just to keep his wheels spinning. I also consider pain killers, sinus TUEs, sleeping potions dope when used without really being needed. As well of course PEDs.

 

[andy1234]

Funny, because Ashenden has questioned Wiggins' blood values during the 09 Tour. Oh but I guess he's British.

Anyway, just because people were scared to dope during the 99 Tour that doesn't mean they were clean. That just means they didn't want to carry their products with them. That study on EPO detection should have used samples from the Dauphiné.

What does Ashenden question about his values?

It has nothing to do with him being British, it has to do with a pedigre stretching back to being a world champion Junior. He is also one if the most outspoken riders on doping you will meet. Remind you of anyone?

Clean riders have won big races in the EPO era, just not The GC in the grand tours.

 

[The Devil]

I doubt very much that all the Pro Tour riders are resorting to doping. But I will add one thing. Bradley Wiggins fourth place finish in the 2009 Tour De France reeks of suspicion. Here is a guy I never in My wildest dreams imagined would be capable of such a result. Even though there is no direct proof of him doping. One has to question his result in the 2009 Tour. In 2006 he finishes 124th in the Tour. Withdraws in 2007. In 2008 he finishes 134th in the Giro. Then in 2009 there is an improvement as he places 71st in the Giro. Then for the first time in his career he rides Two grand tours in the same Year ( 2009 ) and of course he finishes 4 th position in the Tour De France. That is a monumental difference from his 124th place finish in 2006. Yes he trains harder to improve his climbing. He looses body weight and claims that because of these changes his climbing has improved. That is a load of rubbish Bradley. You either have the ability to climb or You don't. Losing some weight is not going to turn any one from a non climber into a super climber. It may help a little but 100 plus places in GC. Who are You trying to kid Mr. Wiggins. Only the naive will believe that.

 

[andy1234]

I doubt very much that all the Pro Tour riders are resorting to doping. But I will add one thing. Bradley Wiggins fourth place finish in the 2009 Tour De France reeks of suspicion. Here is a guy I never in My wildest dreams imagined would be capable of such a result. Even though there is no direct proof of him doping. One has to question his result in the 2009 Tour. In 2006 he finishes 124th in the Tour. Withdraws in 2007. In 2008 he finishes 134th in the Giro. Then in 2009 there is an improvement as he places 71st in the Giro. Then for the first time in his career he rides Two grand tours in the same Year ( 2009 ) and of course he finishes 4 th position in the Tour De France. That is a monumental difference from his 124th place finish in 2006. Yes he trains harder to improve his climbing. He looses body weight and claims that because of these changes his climbing has improved. That is a load of rubbish Bradley. You either have the ability to climb or You don't. Losing some weight is not going to turn any one from a non climber into a super climber. It may help a little but 100 plus places in GC. Who are You trying to kid Mr. Wiggins. Only the naive will believe that.

It might be more useful to check out Wiggins power values over the years.
They have been in the ballpark since 2000, but only applied to specific endurance work since late 2008.
Add in the weightloss and the performances are realistic.

Riding against a more dope restricted peloton must help too.

Of course i could be wrong...

 

[hrotha]

What does Ashenden question about his values?

It has nothing to do with him being British, it has to do with a pedigre stretching back to being a world champion Junior. He is also one if the most outspoken riders on doping you will meet. Remind you of anyone?

Clean riders have won big races in the EPO era, just not The GC in the grand tours.

My mistake, it wasn't Ashenden, it was Jakob Moerkeberg.
http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/armstrongs-bio-passport-critic-speaks

AS: Were you able to look at other values from the Tour?

JM: I've only seen Bradley Wiggins' values.

AS: Some have said that Wiggins' values are also suspicious. Do you agree with that?

JM: He hasn't published as many values, but his values are not following a pattern that you would expect from a physiological point of view.

 

[TubularBills]

I doubt very much that all the Pro Tour riders are resorting to doping. But I will add one thing. Bradley Wiggins fourth place finish in the 2009 Tour De France reeks of suspicion. Here is a guy I never in My wildest dreams imagined would be capable of such a result. Even though there is no direct proof of him doping. One has to question his result in the 2009 Tour. In 2006 he finishes 124th in the Tour. Withdraws in 2007. In 2008 he finishes 134th in the Giro. Then in 2009 there is an improvement as he places 71st in the Giro. Then for the first time in his career he rides Two grand tours in the same Year ( 2009 ) and of course he finishes 4 th position in the Tour De France. That is a monumental difference from his 124th place finish in 2006. Yes he trains harder to improve his climbing. He looses body weight and claims that because of these changes his climbing has improved. That is a load of rubbish Bradley. You either have the ability to climb or You don't. Losing some weight is not going to turn any one from a non climber into a super climber. It may help a little but 100 plus places in GC. Who are You trying to kid Mr. Wiggins. Only the naive will believe that.

Either that, or it was a combination of weight loss, peddling at a higher cadence, a superior VO2 Max and of course the infamous ovoid chainring...

--- but, still somewhat off topic. 1 additional rider won't impact the % much.

He would still be in the minority, i.e. leaders/protected riders whether he did or not. If we just subjectively count the top ten in GT's as Dopers, that's still just 5 to 10% of all riders (that compete in GT's and less in the general population of Pros).

 

[andy1234]

My mistake, it wasn't Ashenden, it was Jakob Moerkeberg.
http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/armstrongs-bio-passport-critic-speaks

Not an entirely convincing argument from a statistical viewpoint, mainly because there are non.

A relatively recent graduate in his field, it must also be noted.

 

[The Devil]

Add in the weightloss and the performances are realistic.

In am of the opinion that weight loss does not make that much of a difference. I am not an expert nor am I claiming to be. It is true that loosing some weight will improve Your climbing. But only marginally though. But in Bradley Wiggins case not that much. If it were the case that losing several pounds would turn a non climber, that never showed any promise to be a top climber, into a great climber, then it would be more evident in the Peloton. And it clearly is not. The margins between top riders Fitness levels vary at about 1% of each other. Of course fast twitch fibers and slow twitch fibers play there part in Your ability to Climb, V02 Max ect. I just find this gain By Bradley Wiggins somewhat suspicious. I would like to add that I feel no bias Toward Wiggins. It is something that need's an explanation. I have always put Bradley Wiggins result in 2009, on par with Bernard Kohl's 3rd place finish in the 2008 Tour. And we all know what happened there.

 

[JPM London]

I doubt very much that all the Pro Tour riders are resorting to doping. But I will add one thing. Bradley Wiggins fourth place finish in the 2009 Tour De France reeks of suspicion. Here is a guy I never in My wildest dreams imagined would be capable of such a result...
...
He looses body weight and claims that because of these changes his climbing has improved. That is a load of rubbish Bradley. You either have the ability to climb or You don't. Losing some weight is not going to turn any one from a non climber into a super climber. It may help a little but 100 plus places in GC. Who are You trying to kid Mr. Wiggins. Only the naive will believe that.

Don't forget that the '09 Tour has been widely criticised for being boring and it was ridden very defensively. He didn't really have to climb all that well and he's never been bad at TT - there's a lot of places to be won there.

My mistake, it wasn't Ashenden, it was Jakob Moerkeberg.
http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/armstrongs-bio-passport-critic-speaks

He's also the one who was critical of LA's 09 values - which LA heard and slapped JM on twitter.

I think in both instances it's often been cut out that JM also says that there's far from any proof that it was down to doping, merely that there were unusual values and it quite possible down to other factors as well. And I also seem to remember that Wiggins values were far more "normal" than Armstrong's were, but maybe someone can confirm/bust that??

 

[gobuck]

Originally Posted by The Devil

You either have the ability to climb or You don't. Losing some weight is not going to turn any one from a non climber into a super climber.



The higher your Vo2max, the faster you will climb. Vo2max is amount of O2 that your muscles can utilize divided by your weight. Less weight, faster climber. I am not saying he is or isn't a doper. I am saying that you are wrong about weight and vo2max.

 

[andy1234]

In am of the opinion that weight loss does not make that much of a difference. I am not an expert nor am I claiming to be. It is true that loosing some weight will improve Your climbing. But only marginally though. But in Bradley Wiggins case not that much. If it were the case that losing several pounds would turn a non climber, that never showed any promise to be a top climber, into a great climber, then it would be more evident in the Peloton. And it clearly is not. The margins between top riders Fitness levels vary at about 1% of each other. Of course fast twitch fibers and slow twitch fibers play there part in Your ability to Climb, V02 Max ect. I just find this gain By Bradley Wiggins somewhat suspicious. I would like to add that I feel no bias Toward Wiggins. It is something that need's an explanation. I have always put Bradley Wiggins result in 2009, on par with Bernard Kohl's 3rd place finish in the 2008 Tour. And we all know what happened there.

Weight loss can have a huge impact on climbing when everyone is on the limit. Losing over 5 kg in Wiggins case would have a significant effect if his power remained intact.

Another thing to consider is that many riders are capable of finishing within 10 mins of the winner of a tour mountain stage. There is little benefit in doing so, so they ride within themselves and aim for the time limit.

Going from the back of the field to the front is unbelivable, but in truth Wiggins was probably capable of much higher finishes, even without the weightloss and endurance focus.

 

[Altitude]

Yes, didn't you know that Lance reintroduced EPO to the professional peloton? Without Lance EPO is a non-issue.

 

[TubularBills]

7 out of 17 posts orbiting around Wiggins - maybe start another thread?

So this one can stay focused on the % of dopers in the Pro peloton.

Minority or Majority?

Thanks.

 

[Jukebox]

I have always put Bradley Wiggins result in 2009, on par with Bernard Kohl's 3rd place finish in the 2008 Tour. And we all know what happened there.

And to start Kohl was a much better climber. So if his gain from good climber to GC podium and KOM took CERA to achieve, what did Bradley's gain involve?

 

[andy1234]

7 out of 17 posts orbiting around Wiggins - maybe start another thread?

So this one can stay focused on the % of dopers in the Pro peloton.

Minority or Majority?

Thanks.

The point of bringing Wiggins into this is that if he is performing clean at his level, its possible that others are also.

 

[TubularBills]

The point of bringing Wiggins into this is that if he is performing clean at his level, its possible that others are also.

alright, I'll give it to you - carry on.

to paraphrase: Performing clean at a high level is possible (as perhaps exemplified by Bradley Wiggins) and supports the assertion that dopers are a minority in the peloton.

and as a bonus for playing the game:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/6...1-season-in-preparing-for-Tour-de-France.aspx

 

[hektoren]

Wiggins' form in '09 could very well be ascribed to his weight-loss, and his lack of form in '10 follow the norm just nicely. Your initial weight-loss is the quick-fix, whereas a year later, your body will have adapted to your new weight.

 

[JPM London]

7 out of 17 posts orbiting around Wiggins - maybe start another thread?

So this one can stay focused on the % of dopers in the Pro peloton.

Minority or Majority?

Thanks.

Minority... It seems to me that many riders are quite adamant and quite anti-doping. In the old days they didn't want to discuss it. Even if you look at how they respond to maybe being woken in the middle of the night a lot says "I wouldn't like it, but if we have to we have to" - that's quite an acceptance of something very invasive in my book. I think the riders and DS's are generally honest when saying the old ways have changed...