Everyone is doping...care to comment

[karlboss]

Posted in another post and was surpirsed by the silence that followed. Anyone care to comment.

For me if the whole top 10 is doping it wouldn't surprise me, but i think if you take the best guy's performance minus the benefit from doping anyone who finishes there be just as talented and not doping, let alone more talented and not doping.

For example Pantani's record (36'50") up to alpe d'huez doped to the gills add 10% and 40'31 (play with numbers as you like you'll see my point) and anyone who can do this time, is possibly as talented as Pantani, just clean. The climb was timed in 1990 when lemond won the tour the fastest were between 40'30 and 42" So it fits right? Do you know who else managed this time? The groups that finished behind Sastre at the 2008 tour. Sastre was 39'30". So if the best guys in the world go to the Tour and perform as guys did before the spread of EPO...surely they could be clean right?

Apply the same logic to verbier and the Evans Kloden Armstrong is about there.

So...is it conceivable someone top 10 of the tour is clean?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Posted in another post and was surpirsed by the silence that followed. Anyone care to comment.

For me if the whole top 10 is doping it wouldn't surprise me, but i think if you take the best guy's performance minus the benefit from doping anyone who finishes there be just as talented and not doping, let alone more talented and not doping.

For example Pantani's record (36'50") up to alpe d'huez doped to the gills add 10% and 40'31 (play with numbers as you like you'll see my point) and anyone who can do this time, is possibly as talented as Pantani, just clean. The climb was timed in 1990 when lemond won the tour the fastest were between 40'30 and 42" So it fits right? Do you know who else managed this time? The groups that finished behind Sastre at the 2008 tour. Sastre was 39'30". So if the best guys in the world go to the Tour and perform as guys did before the spread of EPO...surely they could be clean right?

Apply the same logic to verbier and the Evans Kloden Armstrong is about there.

So...is it conceivable someone top 10 of the tour is clean?

It is one of the 'myths' about this forum - that 'we' think everyone is doping. Yes, some people say that - but out of a forum with 11,000 members it is hardly representative.

We know that there is a serious problem within Pro cycling - but I also believe there are some/many who are relatively clean - what numbers or who they are I do not know.

Not bursting your bubble, because I appreciate your post but I don't put a lot of value in VAM or timed climbs because there are so many variables. As a quick example - Sastre attacked early in AdH in '08, everyone waited as opposed to not following, ie it does not mean more people could not have gone with CS. This lead to a more defensive pace on the climb.

 

[Runitout]

So...is it conceivable someone top 10 of the tour is clean?

It's conceivable but highly unlikely. If you were a betting man, the odds are not worth putting money on.

If anyone in the top ten actually is clean - chapeau bas. You have my deepest respect.

edit - I am convinced that there are clean riders in the peloton. I just think it's more likely than not that the top riders are not clean. Just look at the results sheet for LBL or the Grand Tours over the last twenty years. Kind of speaks for itself, no?

 

[Ferminal]

It is one of the 'myths' about this forum - that 'we' think everyone is doping. Yes, some people say that - but out of a forum with 11,000 members it is hardly representative.

We know that there is a serious problem within Pro cycling - but I also believe there are some/many who are relatively clean - what numbers or who they are I do not know.

Not bursting your bubble, because I appreciate your post but I don't put a lot of value in VAM or timed climbs because there are so many variables. As a quick example - Sastre attacked early in AdH in '08, everyone waited as opposed to not following, ie it does not mean more people could not have gone with CS. This lead to a more defensive pace on the climb.

People can put in different efforts on earlier days (i.e. how do you account for Sastre holding on to the back of the bunch previously). Programs may not be in perfect alignment (we know Kohl messed up his bag the day before).

 

[karlboss]

It is one of the 'myths' about this forum - that 'we' think everyone is doping. Yes, some people say that - but out of a forum with 11,000 members it is hardly representative.

We know that there is a serious problem within Pro cycling - but I also believe there are some/many who are relatively clean - what numbers or who they are I do not know.

Not bursting your bubble, because I appreciate your post but I don't put a lot of value in VAM or timed climbs because there are so many variables. As a quick example - Sastre attacked early in AdH in '08, everyone waited as opposed to not following, ie it does not mean more people could not have gone with CS. This lead to a more defensive pace on the climb.

I was hoping the title would be enough to get people to read. I know views vary from dopers always get caught to every pro dopes, even the every pro dopes will concede there are guys not doping in the pro peloton.
On VAM...it certainly isn't the be all and end all, wind and tactics are the biggest confounders. However if folks can use it as a guide for rider X is doping, I can use it as an equally loose guide for rider Y might not be.

 

[TomasC]

For me if the whole top 10 is doping it wouldn't surprise me, but i think if you take the best guy's performance minus the benefit from doping anyone who finishes there be just as talented and not doping, let alone more talented and not doping.

Have you thought about the possibility they might be less talented and doping?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I was hoping the title would be enough to get people to read. I know views vary from dopers always get caught to every pro dopes, even the every pro dopes will concede there are guys not doping in the pro peloton.
On VAM...it certainly isn't the be all and end all, wind and tactics are the biggest confounders. However if folks can use it as a guide for rider X is doping, I can use it as an equally loose guide for rider Y might not be.

One of the points I look at is what the riders who have confessed say - as an example Jörg Jaksche said he rode the 99 Tour 'clean', which probaly means he was doped up until just before the race began but not during the race. Sure, he finished 80th but he still finished.

"You have to put in more effort, recovery is slower. I couldn't hang on and felt unnecessary. At the end, I was afraid of getting dropped at railroad bridges."

Agree on the VAM - which is why I do not use it - although Pantanis time is ridiculous.

 

[karlboss]

One of the points I look at is what the riders who have confessed say - as an example Jörg Jaksche said he rode the 99 Tour 'clean', which probaly means he was doped up until just before the race began but not during the race. Sure, he finished 80th but he still finished.


Agree on the VAM - which is why I do not use it - although Pantanis time is ridiculous.

From one year to another it is less valid, but what about say contador to kloden on verbier?

 

[Ferminal]

From one year to another it is less valid, but what about say contador to kloden on verbier?

Wouldn't Contador have to beat Klöden by 25% if you were trying to show that Klöden was clean?

There's a lot more between Alberto and Andreas than dope.

Now it gets back to your point sort of... How competitive would a clean Contador be against someone not-"as"-good (as himself) but juiced appropriately.

 

[Cerberus]

From one year to another it is less valid, but what about say contador to kloden on verbier?

It says Contador is the better climber. Of cause you could tell that just from watching the race.

 

[Martin318is]

I agree with a few others above - unless you can set some specific parameters, VAM is meaningless as an indicator. Some would include:

*All riders commit to ride at 100% and leave nothing in reserve for summit sprints or 'tomorrow's stage' etc
*Each rider gets to ride completely on their own with no lead or following cars or fans on side of road
*Same bikes/wheels/etc
*Exact same weather conditions - ie they would need to ride at the same time (not possible)
*Same lead up - days rest etc
*etc

Its an interesting idea - I mean most agree that Pantani's time can't be done undoped.... but what would that mean his actual time would have been on that day? Would he even have been within 5mins? I don't know...

 

[Ferminal]

What about the "race against the truth"?

The differences are much less than 10% between all the key GC players.

 

[karlboss]

I agree with a few others above - unless you can set some specific parameters, VAM is meaningless as an indicator. Some would include:

*All riders commit to ride at 100% and leave nothing in reserve for summit sprints or 'tomorrow's stage' etc
*Each rider gets to ride completely on their own with no lead or following cars or fans on side of road
*Same bikes/wheels/etc
*Exact same weather conditions - ie they would need to ride at the same time (not possible)
*Same lead up - days rest etc
*etc

Its an interesting idea - I mean most agree that Pantani's time can't be done undoped.... but what would that mean his actual time would have been on that day? Would he even have been within 5mins? I don't know...

VAM is not meaningless as an indicator, it is far les than perfect, like Vo2 related to cycling performance.

Well many studies have found the benefit of EPO to be 10% or a little more, so Pantani would have ridden almost 4 minutes slower...the time of the guys I referred to in 1990.

Ferminal, doesn't work as position ie drag is more confounding and the relationship between speed and power is lesss linear. Mountain TT's would be good to look at. Of note: people ride about the same time for a mountain time trial or during a road race.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

From one year to another it is less valid, but what about say contador to kloden on verbier?

Again too many variables for me personally - Kloden lost 1:29 in 5.6km but he was pacing LA for most of it.

However, when you see Michael Rasmussen overtaking Valverde and putting in a solid time in a TT or Ricco riding away from everyone as he did, it does raise 'suspicions'.

 

[karlboss]

Again too many variables for me personally - Kloden lost 1:29 in 5.6km but he was pacing LA for most of it.

However, when you see Michael Rasmussen overtaking Valverde and putting in a solid time in a TT or Ricco riding away from everyone as he did, it does raise 'suspicions'.

Replace the name Kloden with Armstrong then, my point is even more valid for the guy sitting on. I know some will read this as me thinking Armstrong and Kloden are clean, so think Evans who struggled on that stage and a number of people think he may be clean.

 

[python]

I agree with a few others above - unless you can set some specific parameters, VAM is meaningless as an indicator. Some would include:

*All riders commit to ride at 100% and leave nothing in reserve for summit sprints or 'tomorrow's stage' etc
*Each rider gets to ride completely on their own with no lead or following cars or fans on side of road
*Same bikes/wheels/etc
*Exact same weather conditions - ie they would need to ride at the same time (not possible)
*Same lead up - days rest etc
*etc

Its an interesting idea - I mean most agree that Pantani's time can't be done undoped.... but what would that mean his actual time would have been on that day? Would he even have been within 5mins? I don't know...

bingo ! it's called a mountain time trial.

i keep a rather extensive data base of vams and watts for various riders. but only some reach the pedigree sufficient to perform a credible analysis. vams from mountain time trials is one of those. verifiable power files is another.

even then, one has to be very careful before drawing a meaningful conclusion (for example surface condition on many mountains in europe are not paved towards the top). finally, a comparison to carry any scientific weight, should be expressed in statistical terms (standard deviation multiplier)

that's why i dont take part in this type of threads (and i dont mean it personally or condescendingly) garbage in, garbage out.

too much slop and smoke in the speculation and people find all sorts of reasoning to fit in their own beliefs. whatever they are.

well, but that's human nature so it's ok.

 

[Jonathan]

Again too many variables for me personally - Kloden lost 1:29 in 5.6km but he was pacing LA for most of it.

However, when you see Michael Rasmussen overtaking Valverde and putting in a solid time in a TT or Ricco riding away from everyone as he did, it does raise 'suspicions'.

This made me think about pure climbers performing well in TTs. Notable examples are Pantani in 1998, Simoni in the 2003 Giro and Heras in the 2005 Vuelta. When Pantani returned to the Tour in 2000, he could still climb well, but was nowhere in the TTs. It's almost as if the climbers can make a bigger difference there with doping.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Replace the name Kloden with Armstrong then, my point is even more valid for the guy sitting on. I know some will read this as me thinking Armstrong and Kloden are clean, so think Evans who struggled on that stage and a number of people think he may be clean.

As I said I do not use climbs or VAM because there are too many variables and ways to interpret or misinterpret performances.

Quite easily, we can come up with a myriad of ways to explain a position, off the top of my head - LA was 38 and 3 years out of the sport - AC had only put in one short attack prior to Verbier so would be relatively fresh for the second MTF.

 

[poupou]

Well many studies have found the benefit of EPO to be 10% or a little more

No, it's much more if a good doping program is applied.
And even with an average doping program, in the 3rd week of a GT, that makes bigger difference on clean athlete than at the beginning

 

[TShame]

I think a lot of fans are doping.
Seriously, I think some dope in the off season to build strength.
However, when you look at one country's runners suddenly several seconds faster than their rivals.....it is doping. Why then is no one caught. They are transfusing their own blood. I think this is the only lesson that Vino learned during his suspension. The fact that there are several nicknames for autologous transfusion is furthur proof that it is becoming common practise.

 

[Green Tea]

My mums doping. Shes a Tesco checkout operator.

 

[karlboss]

No, it's much more if a good doping program is applied.
And even with an average doping program, in the 3rd week of a GT, that makes bigger difference on clean athlete than at the beginning

So your take on Verbier would be everyone was doped to stay within 10% because if they weren't they would have lost by more, the bio passport is ineffective in keeping doping less than 50% Hct and ascent times on the same climb are influenced by too much to be useful for comparison?

 

[klmorgan]

Posted in another post and was surpirsed by the silence that followed. Anyone care to comment.

For me if the whole top 10 is doping it wouldn't surprise me, but i think if you take the best guy's performance minus the benefit from doping anyone who finishes there be just as talented and not doping, let alone more talented and not doping.

For example Pantani's record (36'50") up to alpe d'huez doped to the gills add 10% and 40'31 (play with numbers as you like you'll see my point) and anyone who can do this time, is possibly as talented as Pantani, just clean. The climb was timed in 1990 when lemond won the tour the fastest were between 40'30 and 42" So it fits right? Do you know who else managed this time? The groups that finished behind Sastre at the 2008 tour. Sastre was 39'30". So if the best guys in the world go to the Tour and perform as guys did before the spread of EPO...surely they could be clean right?

Apply the same logic to verbier and the Evans Kloden Armstrong is about there.

So...is it conceivable someone top 10 of the tour is clean?

It is possible that there are some who are clean, however the spectre of drugs continues to raise its head.

Are we claiming that all team members use drugs, just because someone else of lesser talent in the team is (e.g. Evans and Hincapie as of Frei's positive test)? Is it team policy to force it on individuals, or is it individuals trying to maintain a standard to keep their living?

Where do we stop with the speculation.

We know that riders are tested throughout the season and off-season, and more are being caught, however as they say the takers are always ahead of the testers.

We have to have a positive view that there are those in the top 10 clean, otherwise we cannot keep the enjoyment of the sport as we do.

Cycling, also has to address the view about retrospective testing for samples already taken, and how far back this will go and its effect on the record books. Do we asume that the record books are provisional until the retrospective testing period (for new substances) has expired. Are we always going to question the results of individuals who are caught dopping.

 

[ellenbrook2001]

doping

okie yes they all taking somenthing????????what they take secret can we say dope dont know if the rigth word,they must perform or no job or peanut contract or no sponsor all those riders have family,kids,loan car ect??? how they can get the money then??????????
the only scenario i can recall for EVAN BASSO too be almost equal at LANCE ARMONSTRONG he was caugth too take what ever the name?????hmmmm so how can we justified all this hes so weird but they riders give us a such beautiful race so enjoyed i just have a blind eyes.those days money hes a dirty business the more we get the more we want the human been those days want too show what they got what ever they have too do????????? then my final say and hope many understand how those riders suffer on the bike how they have too endure the pain barrier just too try too stay on the whell or finished the race>>>?????

 

[Le breton]

Parpaillon anyone?

bingo ! it's called a mountain time trial.

....
even then, one has to be very careful before drawing a meaningful conclusion (for example surface condition on many mountains in europe are not paved towards the top).

Agreed, mountains don't tend to be paved, but how about mountain passes? Would you care to name a few of these MANY unpaved passes of the TdF or the Giro?