• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

How can you tell a rider is clean?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
ravens said:
My comments were restricted to the drugs and the correlation to the outcome of the event. The rest of that seems better discussed on a different thread. I disagree to some extent, and agree to some. But it's all a bit off topic to really dig in right here.

I went off on a tangent...Sorry. Clean riders in my opinion would not "look" very likeable personality wise. Good people can often be quite abrasive (vice versa is also true in low intelligence phychopaths.)

There are PLENTY of good people who are dopers also. What I'd look for personality wise in somebody who does not desire or create sympathy for themselves. then I'd look at their pedaling action and their consistency.

MOST IMPORTANTLY > A clean rider is not in the top 50 places of the Tour de France and not top 30 places in a one day classic or World Championships, Olympic TT, Road Race. Matt Decanio tells of finishing 17th at the U-23 World Championships TT while clean. It wouldnt have been on the board for the elite mens event. Thats my personal opinion of course, you can believe whatever makes you feel best.
 
BigBoat said:
Greg Lemond WON the TDF in 1990 at 30 years old...The next year he got his *** handed to him on a platter by 6 riders and by 1992 he was dropped by the pack and couldnt finish the TDF at 32 years of age...The reason for this wasnt because he was a doper, it was the advent of r-EPO (a recumbant way to help Kidney dialasis patients and many others build red blood cells.) Blood doping and epo was completely uncommon to pro cycling before this...but after 1991 all in the pros knew about it.

Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgtxhgrL-1s

Watch THIS:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiCIJ2JewPE

Yeah, it's amazing to watch the 1990 and 1991 Tours and watch the list of Conconi's riders dominate the race where they'd either been talented domestiques or guys you never heard of the previous few years. Indurain, Bugno, Chiapucci. Watching the whole thing change in just a year is really shocking in hindsight. Those guys stole a sport.

All the guys who were at the top in the 80's just got shelled completely.
 
Jul 24, 2009
351
0
0
Visit site
ravens said:
It gets harder and harder to justify continued interest in pro-cycling. Especially at the GT level.

I'm clearly in the minority, but I myself am not disinclined to be interested in cycling because of the doping issues. I can still respect the sport irrespective of the doping.
 
May 18, 2009
79
0
0
Visit site
wattage said:
If their threshold power is 6w/kg or less. Anything above 6w/kg is suspicous.

This is quite a stupid comment. It shows a lack of experience in this field. having a threshold power above 6w/kg is is very reasonable. You have to remeber that these riders are lean as and have trained 24+ hours a week every week for at least 5+years. I can see no reason whyt they can't put out high numbers.

An example, at the start of our 09 road season, prior to starting any form of intensity training (ie coming out of base kms) for the 5 min ergo test i was putting out abit above 400 W (SRM), as i was around 60kg at the time means i was around 6.6w/kg. Now granted this was 5 mins, not 40 mins, but i think it illustrates my point. I was racing U19, had just finished school a couple months before and wasn't at race weight yet, nor trained specifically to incrase these numbers. Unfortunately i got sick shortly after this so don't have peak season data, but maybe in 4 months i could give you te numbers which prove that it is more then possible to hold 6+w/kg for long climbs etc.
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
Visit site
sars1981 said:
I'm clearly in the minority, but I myself am not disinclined to be interested in cycling because of the doping issues. I can still respect the sport irrespective of the doping.

+1

As someone who trains and races, I can still appreciate the mountain of work that goes into winning any protour race, from the training side and the administrative side. PEDs or no, these guys do this full-time, and that only adds to the mystique for me.
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
Visit site
red_flanders said:
Yeah, it's amazing to watch the 1990 and 1991 Tours and watch the list of Conconi's riders dominate the race where they'd either been talented domestiques or guys you never heard of the previous few years. Indurain, Bugno, Chiapucci. Watching the whole thing change in just a year is really shocking in hindsight. Those guys stole a sport.

All the guys who were at the top in the 80's just got shelled completely.

You also see it nowadays. Notice how many guys are elite, cream of the crop riders when on top teams with access to the best stuff, and then when they go down to smaller teams with less than ideal "preparation" they don't do half as well.
 
issoisso said:
You also see it nowadays. Notice how many guys are elite, cream of the crop riders when on top teams with access to the best stuff, and then when they go down to smaller teams with less than ideal "preparation" they don't do half as well.

Did someone mention Popo? What a worthless sack that guy was when it came to supporting Evans.
 
ambrose said:
An example, at the start of our 09 road season, prior to starting any form of intensity training (ie coming out of base kms) for the 5 min ergo test i was putting out abit above 400 W (SRM), as i was around 60kg at the time means i was around 6.6w/kg. Now granted this was 5 mins, not 40 mins, but i think it illustrates my point. I was racing U19, had just finished school a couple months before and wasn't at race weight yet, nor trained specifically to incrase these numbers. Unfortunately i got sick shortly after this so don't have peak season data, but maybe in 4 months i could give you te numbers which prove that it is more then possible to hold 6+w/kg for long climbs etc.

Maybe if 6 W/kg is nothing to you then instead of posting on cycling forums, you should be racing pro.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
issoisso said:
You also see it nowadays. Notice how many guys are elite, cream of the crop riders when on top teams with access to the best stuff, and then when they go down to smaller teams with less than ideal "preparation" they don't do half as well.
Yeah thats true...Maybe that will happen with Contraman.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
Waterloo Sunrise said:
1 hour output in peak conditions, fully rested, at over 6W/KG is perfectly possible for talented fully trained riders.
B as in B, S as in S.... ;)
Get on a bike and see how long YOU can do that for.
 
May 18, 2009
3,757
0
0
Visit site
BroDeal said:
Did someone mention Popo? What a worthless sack that guy was when it came to supporting Evans.

What was the deal in 2003 I think when he was on that lower level team and did so well?
 
Nov 17, 2009
221
0
0
Visit site
From Sportsscientist.com

There are people (experts in the sport) who believe that the upper limit of performance should lie around 5.6 to 5.8 W/kg on a longer climb.
If you guys crack 6w/kg easily being clean, you should dominate the Tour with the right medical program.
 
BigBoat said:
I think I can HELP here.......Riders who are doped on EPO or blood transfusions have a certain "Jacked" look to them. They DO NOT drop cadence or drop cadence very little 30-40 minutes into a long time trial. They will go from an "average" man to suddenly a "jacked" man...SUSTAINABLE POWER OUTPUT per kilo on climbs, look at that. If a 25 year old can only muster 5.5 watts per kilo and suddenly is developing 6.5 watts per kilo chances are close to 100% that your dealing with a doper.

Greg Lemond WON the TDF in 1990 at 30 years old...The next year he got his *** handed to him on a platter by 6 riders and by 1992 he was dropped by the pack and couldnt finish the TDF at 32 years of age...The reason for this wasnt because he was a doper, it was the advent of r-EPO (a recumbant way to help Kidney dialasis patients and many others build red blood cells.) Blood doping and epo was completely uncommon to pro cycling before this...but after 1991 all in the pros knew about it.
BigBoat said:
I am a little confused as to why you think Lemond could get an 8th in the Tour (presumably clean), yet in pretty much all your other post you say there is no way a rider can get into the top thrity clean. I know Lemond was an amazing talent but back in the days of little or no testing surely it would have been even harder to compete with the EPO brigade.

I am also a little curious about Charly Mottet, the story goes he was a clean rider yet he finished the 1990 tour fourth and went onto win major races well into the Nineties. Either Charly somehow got away with a clean image or it was possible to keep up with doped riders.

You are right about the cadence thing. Watching the tours from the eighties you see the top riders like Lemond and Fignon struggling like an everyday rider.
 
wattage said:
If you guys crack 6w/kg easily being clean, you should dominate the Tour with the right medical program.
Hey, maybe you are onto something. In the past that was the number everybody had in their head now it has increase to 6.4 W/kg lately. Maybe not to a fresh legs 1 hr record, but for a second and third week of the Tour in the mountains. Merckx was around 6.3-6.4 W/kg for the hour record, remember, and that was before EPO. But never for the Tour.

Here:

Escarabajo said:
I found this chart in the Science of the Sport. You can be the judge:

Tour%2Bwinner%2Bpower%2Bto%2Bweight.gif


This is based on climb performances. Here is the complete link if you want to read some more:

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2009/07/tour-de-france-2009-power-estimates.html

evolution_20060711180734.jpg
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
Visit site
uphillstruggle said:
I am also a little curious about Charly Mottet, the story goes he was a clean rider yet he finished the 1990 tour fourth and went onto win major races well into the Nineties. Either Charly somehow got away with a clean image or it was possible to keep up with doped riders.

He won the Dauphine. Thats it. Nothing else after the EPO age started. And even that was at the start of it, before it was in full swing
 
uphillstruggle said:
I am a little confused as to why you think Lemond could get an 8th in the Tour (presumably clean), yet in pretty much all your other post you say there is no way a rider can get into the top thrity clean. I know Lemond was an amazing talent but back in the days of little or no testing surely it would have been even harder to compete with the EPO brigade.

...
Don't be confused no more.

I'll answer you with a question: Do you think that when EPO was introduced the riders would take the same doses in 1991, 1992 as in years 1995 forward? Having the knowledge that if you took a big dose it could kill you overnight? Take a look at the charts above. I think the answer is pretty obvious.

Remember, the EPO dosification was improved over the years. As riders increased the doses the Doctors took other measures to mitigate the blood thickening.
 
Jan 18, 2010
277
0
0
Visit site
Maybe you can spot clean riders when they retire "early".
How about Will Frischkorn as an example? Seemed like he could have had a few more years as a good domestique if the peloton were clean.
 
May 18, 2009
3,757
0
0
Visit site
Escarabajo said:
Hey, maybe you are onto something. In the past that was the number everybody had in their head now it has increase to 6.4 W/kg lately. Maybe not to a fresh legs 1 hr record, but for a second and third week of the Tour in the mountains. Merckx was around 6.3-6.4 W/kg for the hour record, remember, and that was before EPO. But never for the Tour.

Here:



evolution_20060711180734.jpg

These graphs are interesting, and I have seen them before but I guess I never studied them too much. Maybe the context of this thread has made me look at them in a different light.

Lemond claims the introduction of EPO and other PED's in the early 90's was his downfall. But, Indurain's power to weight ratio in 1991 was about .5 w/kg less than GL's the year before, and even in 1992 it was almost .8 w/kg lower than GL's in 1990. Is this right?????

The winner in 1993 had the same numbers as GL in 1990. It would seem to me that GL started losing after 90 because of a dropoff in his performance, and Indurain was lucky to be the strongest in a "dead" time in 91/92. Obviously something started happening in 1993.....for one Rominger came on the scene and upped the "ante".

BTW Mottet won the world's I think in 1994.
 
ChrisE said:
...

Lemond claims the introduction of EPO and other PED's in the early 90's was his downfall. But, Indurain's power to weight ratio in 1991 was about .5 w/kg less than GL's the year before, and even in 1992 it was almost .8 w/kg lower than GL's in 1990. Is this right?????

The winner in 1993 had the same numbers as GL in 1990. It would seem to me that GL started losing after 90 because of a dropoff in his performance, and Indurain was lucky to be the strongest in a "dead" time in 91/92. Obviously something started happening in 1993.....for one Rominger came on the scene and upped the "ante".

...
I agree with you on this. I think GL downfall was not only the introduction of EPO in the Peloton.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=1860
 
May 18, 2009
3,757
0
0
Visit site
One thing to keep in mind here is Indurain's riding style. He would conserve in the mountains. Those low numbers are significant, but I am sure that may have played a part. Other than Bugno the only person he feared in the TT (after GL cracked) after the start of his reign that could climb was 93, and Bugno was not as good of climber as Rominger IMO.
 

TRENDING THREADS