Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1042 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re:

glassmoon said:
More and more it looks like that extra puffs theory is just cover up for something worse (bad blood bag?) It just doesn't add up the other way.
They've never expected the aaf to show up, now they are willing to get low punishment for extra puffs instead of blood doping questions/accusations imho.
I'd be surprised at a blood bag (for many reasons) mainly due to the Merkcx Index post detailing the numbers & calcs (a really good one). I would say possibly more likely *** up on pill dosage, but who knows.
 
Re:

MartinGT said:
I am sure I've read that pill form is banned. Is it banned in competition only?
I'm not sure (too lazy to look - sorry), but it would at least be a way of pushing the boundaries especially if there is no way of distinguishing between the two at testing stage ...
 
Re: Re:

TheSpud said:
glassmoon said:
More and more it looks like that extra puffs theory is just cover up for something worse (bad blood bag?) It just doesn't add up the other way.
They've never expected the aaf to show up, now they are willing to get low punishment for extra puffs instead of blood doping questions/accusations imho.
I'd be surprised at a blood bag (for many reasons) mainly due to the Merkcx Index post detailing the numbers & calcs (a really good one). I would say possibly more likely **** up on pill dosage, but who knows.
Does MI"s post address the possibility that it was a combo of inhaled Salbutamol and a Salbutamol contaminated BB?
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
TheSpud said:
glassmoon said:
More and more it looks like that extra puffs theory is just cover up for something worse (bad blood bag?) It just doesn't add up the other way.
They've never expected the aaf to show up, now they are willing to get low punishment for extra puffs instead of blood doping questions/accusations imho.
I'd be surprised at a blood bag (for many reasons) mainly due to the Merkcx Index post detailing the numbers & calcs (a really good one). I would say possibly more likely **** up on pill dosage, but who knows.
Does MI"s post address the possibility that it was a combo of inhaled Salbutamol and a Salbutamol contaminated BB?
I think it does - it talks about the volumes of blood ie 500ml likely bag size compared with 7l of normal blood and how the concentration in the bag would have to be huge. Also likely if it was a bag, then more likely nowadays to be a frozen spun mixture, etc. Its on the 'Salbutamol' post he started - a great thread.

IF Sky were doing that then I'd be hugely surprised that they would *** that up, indeed its such a well known issue that I'd be surprised if any team got that wrong.
 
brownbobby said:
MartinGT said:
Dawgs just been on sports personality. Same old. Yeh I've had asthma all my life and I've never taken more puffs than I should. Blah blah blah
Just tried to cast my vote for my man. Number not recognised?

I knew they'd fix it to stop him winning :(
He wouldn't win anyway - many others well above him in the pecking order (Lewis H, Harry Kane, etc.). He's no Brad Wiggins in terms of popularity.
 
TheSpud said:
brownbobby said:
MartinGT said:
Dawgs just been on sports personality. Same old. Yeh I've had asthma all my life and I've never taken more puffs than I should. Blah blah blah
Just tried to cast my vote for my man. Number not recognised?

I knew they'd fix it to stop him winning :(
He wouldn't win anyway - many others well above him in the pecking order (Lewis H, Harry Kane, etc.). He's no Brad Wiggins in terms of popularity.
I was kidding, wouldn't vote for no dopers. Mo Farah gets my vote :D
 
brownbobby said:
TheSpud said:
brownbobby said:
MartinGT said:
Dawgs just been on sports personality. Same old. Yeh I've had asthma all my life and I've never taken more puffs than I should. Blah blah blah
Just tried to cast my vote for my man. Number not recognised?

I knew they'd fix it to stop him winning :(
He wouldn't win anyway - many others well above him in the pecking order (Lewis H, Harry Kane, etc.). He's no Brad Wiggins in terms of popularity.
I was kidding, wouldn't vote for no dopers. Mo Farah gets my vote :D
:D
 
Re: Re:

ClassicomanoLuigi said:
]More and more it looks like that extra puffs theory is just cover up for something worse (bad blood bag?)
I'd be surprised at a blood bag (for many reasons) mainly due to the Merkcx Index post detailing the numbers & calcs (a really good one). I would say possibly more likely **** up on pill dosage, but who knows.
Does MI"s post address the possibility that it was a combo of inhaled Salbutamol and a Salbutamol contaminated BB?
I think it does - it talks about the volumes of blood ie 500ml likely bag size compared with normal blood and how the concentration in the bag would have to be huge.
Yes, the reasoning by MerckxIndex and other medically-inclined people was: that to come up with an additional 1000+ ng/ml in the urine, the amount of salbutamol in the blood bag would have to be so massive that it's unlikely. Froome's typical blood volume is probably about 4.5 liters, and if a typical transfusion were 500ml, then there would be a dilution of 1:10 or more.

People such as Jörg Jaksche came out immediately with the idea of blood transfusion, because it's hard to imagine how Sky could blunder so badly on day-to-day doping, and because transfusion fits the context of the racing situation. By analogy with the Contador case of clenbuterol coming back to haunt him when they forgot the possibility of residual drug in the blood bag. But it's not really the same because Contador's clenbuterol was measured in the picogram range, the trace amounts were enough to get Contador busted

Suppose that Froome was supposed to take a certain number of 2-milligram salbutamol tablets, but he was given 4-milligram tablets by mistake, and additionally was puffing his inhaler or something.
Botching the dose of some salbutamol tablets is a leading theory right now
(a) - yes 4.5l rather than 7l is much more likely (I was thinking in terms of pints)
(b) - In terms of Berty he was under the legal limit for clen wasn't he (or it wasn't established at the time, or something)? Were the plasticizers ever confirmed officially?

If they do test and find plasticizers for Froome then its game over. Do / can they regularly test for those?
 
There is no legal limit for clenbuterol. Any amount of it is a doping offence. If I recall correctly, the story at the time was that there was so little of it in his blood that only one lab in the world was able to actually detect it in his sample, but since it was there and the contaminated beef cover story wasn't believed, he got slapped with a ban.
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
I doubt they still test for plasticizers.
Its a legal nightmare as all you can prove is someone might eat a lot of seafood.
 
Re: Re:

ClassicomanoLuigi said:
]More and more it looks like that extra puffs theory is just cover up for something worse (bad blood bag?)
I'd be surprised at a blood bag (for many reasons) mainly due to the Merkcx Index post detailing the numbers & calcs (a really good one). I would say possibly more likely **** up on pill dosage, but who knows.
Does MI"s post address the possibility that it was a combo of inhaled Salbutamol and a Salbutamol contaminated BB?
I think it does - it talks about the volumes of blood ie 500ml likely bag size compared with normal blood and how the concentration in the bag would have to be huge.
Yes, the reasoning by MerckxIndex and other medically-inclined people was: that to come up with an additional 1000+ ng/ml in the urine, the amount of salbutamol in the blood bag would have to be so massive that it's unlikely. Froome's typical blood volume is probably about 4.5 liters, and if a typical transfusion were 500ml, then there would be a dilution of 1:10 or more.

People such as Jörg Jaksche came out immediately with the idea of blood transfusion, because it's hard to imagine how Sky could blunder so badly on day-to-day doping, and because transfusion fits the context of the racing situation. By analogy with the Contador case of clenbuterol coming back to haunt him when they forgot the possibility of residual drug in the blood bag. But it's not really the same because Contador's clenbuterol was measured in the picogram range, the trace amounts were enough to get Contador busted

Suppose that Froome was supposed to take a certain number of 2-milligram salbutamol tablets, but he was given 4-milligram tablets by mistake, and additionally was puffing his inhaler or something.
Botching the dose of some salbutamol tablets is a leading theory right now
Hmm, they only transfuse 500ml? Thought it would be more. Than, yes, the blood bag theory is kinda falling apart with that...
 
Re:

Saint Unix said:
There is no legal limit for clenbuterol. Any amount of it is a doping offence. If I recall correctly, the story at the time was that there was so little of it in his blood that only one lab in the world was able to actually detect it in his sample, but since it was there and the contaminated beef cover story wasn't believed, he got slapped with a ban.
I'm sure they only detected it because it went to a different lab that tests below a certain level than normal. I maybe wrong like.
 
Re: Re:

glassmoon said:
ClassicomanoLuigi said:
]More and more it looks like that extra puffs theory is just cover up for something worse (bad blood bag?)
I'd be surprised at a blood bag (for many reasons) mainly due to the Merkcx Index post detailing the numbers & calcs (a really good one). I would say possibly more likely **** up on pill dosage, but who knows.
Does MI"s post address the possibility that it was a combo of inhaled Salbutamol and a Salbutamol contaminated BB?
I think it does - it talks about the volumes of blood ie 500ml likely bag size compared with normal blood and how the concentration in the bag would have to be huge.
Yes, the reasoning by MerckxIndex and other medically-inclined people was: that to come up with an additional 1000+ ng/ml in the urine, the amount of salbutamol in the blood bag would have to be so massive that it's unlikely. Froome's typical blood volume is probably about 4.5 liters, and if a typical transfusion were 500ml, then there would be a dilution of 1:10 or more.

People such as Jörg Jaksche came out immediately with the idea of blood transfusion, because it's hard to imagine how Sky could blunder so badly on day-to-day doping, and because transfusion fits the context of the racing situation. By analogy with the Contador case of clenbuterol coming back to haunt him when they forgot the possibility of residual drug in the blood bag. But it's not really the same because Contador's clenbuterol was measured in the picogram range, the trace amounts were enough to get Contador busted

Suppose that Froome was supposed to take a certain number of 2-milligram salbutamol tablets, but he was given 4-milligram tablets by mistake, and additionally was puffing his inhaler or something.
Botching the dose of some salbutamol tablets is a leading theory right now
Hmm, they only transfuse 500ml? Thought it would be more. Than, yes, the blood bag theory is kinda falling apart with that...
I thought that was the 'usual' dose.

I wonder how it would work if you put in 100ml every / every other night? Enough of a boost? Low enough not to trigger the blood passport? I cant see how that would trigger a salbutamol test (as per Merkcx Index).
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
A marginal gains approach to pills would probably be a huge amount of different pills for what not.

Some non banned, some with a limit for testing.

Perhaps a sleepy moment in packaging and adminestering gave two of one instead of one of each in this case.

An innocent human error. But the risk of a marginal "little bit of everything" regime.
 
Re:

mrhender said:
A marginal gains approach to pills would probably be a huge amount of different pills for what not.

Some non banned, some with a limit for testing.

Perhaps a sleepy moment in packaging and adminestering gave two of one instead of one of each in this case.

An innocent human error. But the risk of a marginal "little bit of everything" regime.
That's what I'm leaning towards. It fits Ochams Razor better than anything else to my eye, & explains a lot of the subsequent reaction.

Froome either took two, instead of one pills, or the pill didn't metabolize as expected, so the spike happened later & was detectable, or something like that.

Then he was left coming up with BS excuses like the Doctor telling him to take 3 or 4 huffs right before the drug control so, he wouldn't be coughing during interviews :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

As we've seen before, Sky have no problem throwing MDs in front of the Bus to save their stars !
 
Nov 29, 2010
2,326
0
0
Re: Re:

keeponrollin said:
Froome either took two, instead of one pills, or the pill didn't metabolize as expected, so the spike happened later & was detectable, or something like that.
To repeat what's been said before they can test for oral vs inhalation.
 
Re: Re:

deValtos said:
keeponrollin said:
Froome either took two, instead of one pills, or the pill didn't metabolize as expected, so the spike happened later & was detectable, or something like that.
To repeat what's been said before they can test for oral vs inhalation.
But this is the UCI & Sky we're taking about here; isn't it ??

You know; the ones who only released the fact that there was an AAF, when they knew it was going to be on the front pages the next day ?
 
Re: Re:

TheSpud said:
red_flanders said:
TheSpud said:
glassmoon said:
More and more it looks like that extra puffs theory is just cover up for something worse (bad blood bag?) It just doesn't add up the other way.
They've never expected the aaf to show up, now they are willing to get low punishment for extra puffs instead of blood doping questions/accusations imho.
I'd be surprised at a blood bag (for many reasons) mainly due to the Merkcx Index post detailing the numbers & calcs (a really good one). I would say possibly more likely **** up on pill dosage, but who knows.
Does MI"s post address the possibility that it was a combo of inhaled Salbutamol and a Salbutamol contaminated BB?
I think it does - it talks about the volumes of blood ie 500ml likely bag size compared with 7l of normal blood and how the concentration in the bag would have to be huge. Also likely if it was a bag, then more likely nowadays to be a frozen spun mixture, etc. Its on the 'Salbutamol' post he started - a great thread.

IF Sky were doing that then I'd be hugely surprised that they would **** that up, indeed its such a well known issue that I'd be surprised if any team got that wrong.
I'm not convinced the discussion on concentration addressed the possibility I suggested. The got something wrong, not sure what is most or least likely.
 
Re: Re:

deValtos said:
keeponrollin said:
Froome either took two, instead of one pills, or the pill didn't metabolize as expected, so the spike happened later & was detectable, or something like that.
To repeat what's been said before they can test for oral vs inhalation.
It's also been pointed out in more than one post that even when the salbutamol is inhaled, some of it ends up being swallowed, which I can say makes sense to me as someone who has been using a variety of asthma medication for twenty years now.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY