Ferarri: Armstrong Could've Reached The Same Level W/O Doping

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
gregkeble said:
Exactly!! Shame that most will not spot this huge flaw in Ferrari's little PR post for LA
The post has truthiness to the casual reader and sports writers who don't bother to check their stories. At some point, someone is going to refer to it like Ed Coyle's "research" on Wonderboy.

That said, I'm very interested in the beginning of the post regarding the use of drugs in cycling prior to EPO. The fundamental problem is you don't know what's true or artfully re-constituted fact to meet his agenda.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
0
0
Those of you seeking answers need to read up on the matter in past threads, its all been covered to death and I'm not going to rehash or find obvious links. Read up.
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
Mar 12, 2010
545
0
0
thehog said:
Do you ever bother to read other threads?

This has been posted 28 times and discussed.

You've done this four times now.
This from the guy that starts a new Wiggins thread every time he changes his underwear :rolleyes:
 
v

ElChingon said:
Those of you seeking answers need to read up on the matter in past threads, its all been covered to death and I'm not going to rehash or find obvious links. Read up.
This(especially about:Lemond/Hampsten/Bauer/Phinney doping........it's all been covered).
 
airstream said:
Sorry but these guys rode in the era of 250 km stages, lesser team tactics building, lesser progressive cycling equipment and with lots of early attacks. I can not believe it was possible to race clean back then.
Airstream, why don't you ask the pro's on this forum who raced at that time, what was possible doing it clean pre-EPO. You might be enlightened.
 
Jul 28, 2009
296
0
0
Benotti69 said:
As for Hampsten and Bauer, no, but LeMond has been so vocal codemning dopers that if he did dope that someoen would've dropped the bomb on him. Been plenty of opportunity to do it to the guy, but no one has so I think we can assume he was a true natural talent.

LeMonds power outputs are the measurement of clean cycling. Why is that?
Depends on your definition of fact. I'm not questioning that Lemond was a true natural talent, but to claim he is dope free (what in my mind means never taking a banned substance knowingly, no matter how much or little impact the dope actually has) based on that nobody ever dropped the bomb on him is quite a leap of faith for me. Never a pill or gel-lotion or an injection?
 
Roninho said:
Depends on your definition of fact. I'm not questioning that Lemond was a true natural talent, but to claim he is dope free (what in my mind means never taking a banned substance knowingly, no matter how much or little impact the dope actually has) based on that nobody ever dropped the bomb on him is quite a leap of faith for me. Never a pill or gel-lotion or an injection?
If you have evidence claiming otherwise, why not post it? Otherwise, please read past threads, LeMond is clean
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Sorry to take it off topic and not talk about Greg Lemond, but a couple of thoughts.

1. What a load of utter crap!
2. Altitude training (Hgb) effects last around the same time as the training conducted (?). So a 3 week training camp, followed by the traditional 2 week pre-Tour taper, then week 1 & 2 at the tour (ie 4 weeks), means you have diddly squat enhancement available, not to mention the plasma expansion slapping you around. Compare this physiologically depressed state with someone getting a bag on or just before the second rest day (as evidenced in LAs, Wiggins x 2 and Ryder), or continual EPO micro-dosing for the 3 weeks. No comparison.
3. How can Ferrari claim a similar effect given LA doped AND did altitude training?
4. How ironically helpful for Wiggins' claim of clean Tour + 2012 domination based purely on altitude training effects. This claim by Ferrari if anything made me think of Hog's oft repeated assertions. Given LA had already confessed, why on earth would Ferrari come out and say this? He's banned from training anyone. It makes very little sense to me.
 
Jul 12, 2012
649
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Sorry to take it off topic and not talk about Greg Lemond, but a couple of thoughts.

1. What a load of utter crap!
Not totally true.

Dear Wiggo said:
2. Altitude training (Hgb) effects last around the same time as the training conducted (?). So a 3 week training camp, followed by the traditional 2 week pre-Tour taper, then week 1 & 2 at the tour (ie 4 weeks), means you have diddly squat enhancement available, not to mention the plasma expansion slapping you around. Compare this physiologically depressed state with someone getting a bag on or just before the second rest day (as evidenced in LAs, Wiggins x 2 and Ryder), or continual EPO micro-dosing for the 3 weeks. No comparison.
Ferrari should have said "hypoxic exposure" rather than "altitude training." Using a hypoxic chamber, simulated altitude exposure could be maintained until the Tour began. Side note - plasma volume expansion actually increases performance when done to a proper level.


Dear Wiggo said:
3. How can Ferrari claim a similar effect given LA doped AND did altitude training?
He provided a theoretical comparison to EPO micro-dosing, which, assuming that Armstrong is a responder to hypoxic exposure, is reasonable. However, hypoxic exposure cannot match the effect of higher EPO doses. In addition, as I mentioned, hypoxic exposure does not provide uniform results: it works very well for some, OK for others, and some are non-responders.

My guess is Armstrong was merely using hypoxic exposure to mask EPO use, even as a complete Red Herring.

Dear Wiggo said:
4. How ironically helpful for Wiggins' claim of clean Tour + 2012 domination based purely on altitude training effects. This claim by Ferrari if anything made me think of Hog's oft repeated assertions. Given LA had already confessed, why on earth would Ferrari come out and say this? He's banned from training anyone. It makes very little sense to me.
There is more than one way to skin a cat. In addition, where Ferrari is spot-on is that 10%+10%+10% does not equal 30% -- there is a limit to performance enhancement from doping.

Are there any gray-area or currently legal methods, that when combined with others, could still offer significant performance enhancement? Yes, given:

1) The individual is a responder;

2) His "trainers" really, really know what they are doing...
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Turner29 said:
Side note - plasma volume expansion actually increases performance when done to a proper level.
So you expect increased or static performance during the Tour?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Turner29 said:
Not totally true.
LA used Testosterone in training, as well as EPO and blood transfusions, during the Tour.

If you seriously think this could all be replaced with hypoxic methods then. Ugh.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Turner29 said:
Ferrari should have said "hypoxic exposure" rather than "altitude training." Using a hypoxic chamber, simulated altitude exposure could be maintained until the Tour began. Side note - plasma volume expansion actually increases performance when done to a proper level.
I would have though hypoxic exposure for sufficient periods of time to maintain an increase in Hgb would be counter productive to recovery?

Why else would people do a 2 week sea-level taper pre-Tour?
 
Jul 12, 2012
649
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
I would have though hypoxic exposure for sufficient periods of time to maintain an increase in Hgb would be counter productive to recovery?

Why else would people do a 2 week sea-level taper pre-Tour?
Does not exclude using a hypoxic chamber. In addition, altitude training does not cause an increase in performance. However, "training low, sleeping high" does...
 
Jul 12, 2012
649
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
LA used Testosterone in training, as well as EPO and blood transfusions, during the Tour.

If you seriously think this could all be replaced with hypoxic methods then. Ugh.
I did not say that. I am saying that there are methods in today's environment, that could provide substantial performance enhancement.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Turner29 said:
Does not exclude using a hypoxic chamber. In addition, altitude training does not cause an increase in performance. However, "training low, sleeping high" does...
Yep well aware of training low sleeping high.

Why don't people just stay at altitude until the start of the tour then? Why go to sea level and use a hypoxic chamber?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Turner29 said:
I did not say that. I am saying that there are methods in today's environment, that could provide substantial performance enhancement.
What I said was, "reaching the same level without doping (test + epo + cort)" is BS.

What you said is, "not entirely true".

Same level, is what I am calling BS. Not substantial, not some, same.
 
Jul 12, 2012
649
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
That said, I'm very interested in the beginning of the post regarding the use of drugs in cycling prior to EPO. The fundamental problem is you don't know what's true or artfully re-constituted fact to meet his agenda.
Are you talking LeMond? If so, I agree...

I am also very curious about the do[ping methods in the pre-EPO era, including the level of blood doping. Keep in mind that doping in that era was relatively unsophisticated; therefore, results probably had significant variation.

Just look at Armstrong and the effects of an unsophisticated doping program (Motorola) and a sophisticated one (USPostal).
 
Jul 12, 2012
649
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
What I said was, "reaching the same level without doping (test + epo + cort)" is BS.

What you said is, "not entirely true".

Same level, is what I am calling BS. Not substantial, not some, same.
I will go back to the given example and I agree with Ferrari in that a person who is a responder to hypoxic exposure can expect the same effect as micro-doping EPO. This is a scientific fact. 1990s EPO dosing, absolutely not.

I would also go back to the tried and true Sodium Phosphate, which is highly effective so long as plasma volume is maintained.

Of course, the most fascinating gray-area method is normobaric hypoxia, which could be used to maintain hypoxic exposure effects during the course of a Tour.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Turner29 said:
I will go back to the given example and I agree with Ferrari in that a person who is a responder to hypoxic exposure can expect the same effect as micro-doping EPO. This is a scientific fact. 1990s EPO dosing, absolutely not.

I would also go back to the tried and true Sodium Phosphate, which is highly effective so long as plasma volume is maintained.

Of course, the most fascinating gray-area method is normobaric hypoxia, which could be used to maintain hypoxic exposure effects during the course of a Tour.
So normobaric hypoxia has no negative impact on recovery? Assuming you've got your Hgb up sufficiently before hand through which ever means?

To be pedantic, Ferrari is refuting test+epo+blood transfusions.

To wit,
Therefore Armstrong would have achieved the same level of performance without resorting to doping, also thanks to his talent which was far superior to the rivals of his era.”
Test during training would be so off the scale in terms of recovery enhancement that I really struggle to see how you'd beat that using "natural" methods.

One of the last Sky articles I read said they didn't even do altitude training (LHTL) for the Hgb increase.
 
Jul 12, 2012
649
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
So normobaric hypoxia has no negative impact on recovery? Assuming you've got your Hgb up sufficiently before hand through which ever means?

To be pedantic, Ferrari is refuting test+epo+blood transfusions.

Test during training would be so off the scale in terms of recovery enhancement that I really struggle to see how you'd beat that using "natural" methods.

One of the most recent Sky articles I read said they didn't even do altitude training (LHTL) for the Hgb increase.
To be pedantic, while in his example Ferrari is medically correct, I do not trust his word or motives regarding doping.

I also do not trust anything anyone associated with Sky says about their training. However, there are practical issues regarding hypoxic training...
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Turner29 said:
To be pedantic, while in his example Ferrari is medically correct, I do not trust his word or motives regarding doping.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Test is unbeatable in my book. Particularly given its ease of use. And Lance's "talent" weren't nothin special as far as I can tell via the stats collected by Coggan's PhD supervisor. Unless by "talent" he means "responder to doping". I think Floyd 2006 is the best example of test' help.


Turner29 said:
I also do not trust anything anyone associated with Sky says about their training. However, there are practical issues regarding hypoxic training...
Practical issues? You still didn't say whether it impacts recovery at all. Does it?
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Turner29 said:
Depends upon the individual, exposure level and duration.
Studies I've read (abstract at any rate) indicates 3-4 hours was not enough. They ended up doing 14 hours / day or so. Not sure if that is even doable in a tour, so much phaffing around with transfers, etc.

I don't think I saw any studies where they did 14 hrs/day for 2-3 weeks to boost Hgb then followed with 3-4hrs / day maintenance though, that'd be interesting.

Did you see that study where altitude training (LHTL) was found to increase testosterone production? I went looking after reading Aldo Sassi apparently saying that was one effect of altitude training to a journalist who was discussing Sky's altitude training camps (the same guy who said they don't care about Hgb increases).

Seemed really strange. Noone else mentions it - not even our resident PhD, Sky-loving residents.

It felt more likely to me that riders were using it to help with recovery when training at altitude and the researchers were just recording test levels, and not looking or able to differentiate exo from endo-genous.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY