How can you tell a rider is clean?

[Digger]

RR has good info on this but Indurain was a client of Conconi. RR what was the name of the guy who dealt first hand with Indurain as regards doping him? Spanish guy also. He worked in conjunction with Conconi. FFS to anyone who thinks he was clean. He dominated in an era where the 50% rule wasn't even in place. He beat guys like Pantani, Ugrumov, Chiapucci, Berzin, Roche, Rominger, Leblanc and Virenque - ALL EPO users. Indurain was a huge beneficiary of EPO because of his muscular physique.

 

[Oldman]

I assume you got that from Wikipedia; I haven't looked real hard for the details of the performances in each stage. Indurain's wiki entry says he developed bronchitis after the prologue, and he uncharacteristically lost the prologue.

Even so here we have a guy who won the tour in 95, world TT in 95, DL in 96, Olympic TT in 96, then abruptly retires at the end of 96 at the age of 32, when his TdF performance could have been explained by bronchitis. That makes no sense, unless like you imply he saw the "new" doping methods and wanted no part of it.

Or he wanted to protect a lifelong legacy by not getting busted and had enough of the program that he was on. It was pretty obvious that Delgado was charging while Indurain was teamed up. Rominger and a few others started to fade out at the same time and I suspect they saw no upside and much exposure from long term endorsement profitability.

 

[karlboss]

Some of the graphs include a many riders and performances. While one performance could be skewed by a tailwind for example it's just not plausible that suddenly, around the time EPO is introduced, tailwinds become dramatically more common in the Tour de France.

The most any of these bars took into account was 5 climbs. I'd say one significant tailwind would skew one year. The trend still holds. My point is this graph (science in sport) is less than 100% accurate. I'd maybe give it 90% which still says holds value. Make your own assumptions as the author suggests

The comparison isn't valid. People gain abnormal height due to certain defects in their body. The 8'11" guy for example had "hypertrophy of his pituitary gland which results in an abnormally high level of human growth hormone.". Such gigantic height kills the victims of cause.

If a comparable performance enhancing condition existed then if it had no serious side effects it would spread to the entire human population through natural selection.

Would it? How long would this take? Somehow this gene would have to be proved to be superior, maybe the assosiated ego would make it almost irrevlevant and very rare.

If it also carried serious side effects, it would be diagnosed and recorded by modern science. If it had I'd have head about it, just like I've heard about the conditions that make people abnormally tall, or abnormally small.

Maybe it carries a serious side effect of liver failure, and we missed it making assumptions. Maybe science knows everything already.

The fact is that science tells us that EPO can give very large performance gains. You cannot cancel out that fact by dreaming up a hypothetical super mutation, based on the fact that some people are really tall.

I haven't. I'm saying as good as some riders are, if they dope, maybe there are still better riders out there. Who really knows where the line is and what is possible.

 

[R.0.t.O]

I assume you got that from Wikipedia;

I don't have perfect recall so I checked a few matters (couldn't remember if there was a flat ITT before the Val d'Isere TT) but funnily enough I watched the race. On the TV. It was quite a big deal at the time.

I haven't looked real hard for the details of the performances in each stage. Indurain's wiki entry says he developed bronchitis after the prologue, and he uncharacteristically lost the prologue.

which would be an odd thing to say, since he also lost the prologue in 1991, 1994 and 1995.

Even so here we have a guy who won the tour in 95, world TT in 95, DL in 96, Olympic TT in 96, then abruptly retires at the end of 96 at the age of 32, when his TdF performance could have been explained by bronchitis. That makes no sense, unless like you imply he saw the "new" doping methods and wanted no part of it.

Look, you have to remember that Indurain is a very different character to a more-recent multi-time TdF winner. He is a much more unassuming guy, much less egotistic, much less self-centred, much less need to be the centre of attention. He had won 5 TdF's and equaled the records of the greatest in history. He's not focused on 'leaving a legacy' or being seen as the greatest of all time; he's taking a more internal satisfaction in his victories. Watching at the time it didn't appear that the motivation was there in the same way as before.

Of course Telekom and Festina were taking things to a new level of sophistication as I said, but this wouldn't have been unusual or unexpected. Indurain stepped up when the Ferrari-powered Rominger came to the Tour in 93, he would have had no qualms stepping up to deal with Riis and Ullrich if he was younger and had the motivation. He would have done what was necessary. Indurain was a great champion, he knew it, and he took a quiet confidence from it. He had equaled the legends of the past and a new generation was coming through; he saw that it was time to make a dignified departure from the scene.

 

[issoisso]

According to his brother Prudencio, he got really ticked off at Banesto for forcing him to do the Vuelta while still having bronchitis "He felt like he was breathing through a straw" that he refused a contract renewal and retired.

ONCE still tried to bring him back at the start of 97 but he wanted insane amounts of money.

 

[R.0.t.O]

Rominger and a few others started to fade out at the same time and I suspect they saw no upside and much exposure from long term endorsement profitability.

Tony the Tiger was 36 when he retired. Not surprising that his form was falling away. The modern pharmaceuticals may make it look like you can still be GC competitive in your late thirties but historically this is not the case. He was the ultimate Ferrari client. He would have had no fear of stepping up the programme to stay competitive if it was possible and he was sufficiently motivated.

[Indurain] saw that in 1997 there would be a 50% hematocrit limit and wanted no part of that.

Not impossible. I think that a lack of motivation was the over-riding issue, but the two things can go together - you need to be extra-motivated to go through the process of redesigning your doping programmes, taking the extra risk (not of getting caught, but of the new protocol not being as effective.)

RR has good info on this but Indurain was a client of Conconi. RR what was the name of the guy who dealt first hand with Indurain as regards doping him? Spanish guy also. He worked in conjunction with Conconi. FFS to anyone who thinks he was clean. He dominated in an era where the 50% rule wasn't even in place. He beat guys like Pantani, Ugrumov, Chiapucci, Berzin, Roche, Rominger, Leblanc and Virenque - ALL EPO users. Indurain was a huge beneficiary of EPO because of his muscular physique.

Of course. When have we ever seen a guy the size of Indurain climb like that? EPO was a huge advantage because the limitation of getting enough oxygen to keep big muscles firing suddenly goes away.

 

[issoisso]

Tony the Tiger was 36 when he retired. Not surprising that his form was falling away. The modern pharmaceuticals may make it look like you can still be GC competitive in your late thirties but historically this is not the case. He was the ultimate Ferrari client. He would have had no fear of stepping up the programme to stay competitive if it was possible and he was sufficiently motivated.

A heavy crash with broken bones and a long projected recovery period didn't help either. Still, he wasn't the same by then. His peak was 93-94

 

[ChrisE]

Of course. When have we ever seen a guy the size of Indurain climb like that? EPO was a huge advantage because the limitation of getting enough oxygen to keep big muscles firing suddenly goes away.

Indurain had alot of results before he started winning tours. From Avenir in 86, San Sebastion, PN, his 90 TdF, etc. he was always a talent, and showed climbing prowess prior to the introduction of EPO into the peloton.

It's not like this guy came out of the blue as a potential GT rider like Riis or even LA. And, if these graphs are to be believed the only thing that has been tossed around about the low numbers in 91 and 92 is maybe his GT racing strategy and lack of competition. Regardless of who he was associated with, I still say it is possible he won his first 2 or 3 tours clean or somewhat clean. YMMV.

 

[Oldman]

Indurain had alot of results before he started winning tours. From Avenir in 86, San Sebastion, PN, his 90 TdF, etc. he was always a talent, and showed climbing prowess prior to the introduction of EPO into the peloton.

It's not like this guy came out of the blue as a potential GT rider like Riis or even LA. And, if these graphs are to be believed the only thing that has been tossed around about the low numbers in 91 and 92 is maybe his GT racing strategy and lack of competition. Regardless of who he was associated with, I still say it is possible he won his first 2 or 3 tours clean or somewhat clean. YMMV.

Probably Indurain was less programmed than others which is why he had some longevity. As for LA coming out of the blue; he had serious power numbers as an espoir but no discipline and plenty of ego. That usually doesn't bode well for a serious stage racer. As for how pristine his regimen was; things changed fairly soon after his first World's TTT according to teammates.

 

[Escarabajo]

These riders are not clean, you can tell by just looking at them:

This is after the race:

So pretty much riders for Paris-Roubaix go from Clean-Dirty-Clean again. It is a cyclic thing.

 

[BigBoat]

One More thing...

People who are on drugs get really really really skinny all of a sudden. HGH makes people vascular as hell in many cases. Watch for that. A "clean" rider is probably one of the less lean guys. Its actually tough as heck to get 5% fat...Most people thing they have lower fat than they really do.

 

[HelmutRoole]

These riders are not clean, you can tell by just looking at them:

This is after the race:

So pretty much riders for Paris-Roubaix go from Clean-Dirty-Clean again. It is a cyclic thing.

They have no shame. Look at them. Out there. Dirty, for the whole world to see.

Fvcking animals.

 

[eljimberino]

You can hardly tell who the rider is...

 

[D Avoid]

No mud marks or bad odours - shiny hair is a giveaway.

That is so off the wall, really fantastic , fluid movement from reality, straight out the window and into reality again, I cant find the seam, why don't you consider doing this on our page. I thought about competing against you directly , here but I would fail au miserable.

 

[Digger]

That is so off the wall, really fantastic , fluid movement from reality, straight out the window and into reality again, I cant find the seam, why don't you consider doing this on our page. I thought about competing against you directly , here but I would fail au miserable.

You need help man....cycling forums should not be important in your life at the moment.

 

[galaxy1]

Its actually tough as heck to get 5% fat...Most people thing they have lower fat than they really do.

...not if you ride as many kms as a pro, sorry.

 

[galaxy1]

Regardless of who he was associated with, I still say it is possible he won his first 2 or 3 tours clean or somewhat clean. YMMV.

I wouldn't like to guess whether he was clean or not, but Indurain had a couple of things going for him in the believability stakes.
* he had a heart and lungs demonstrably much bigger than everyone else - a genuine freak of nature
* at least some of his success was due to incredible time trialling technique and good tactics.

 

[D Avoid]

You need help man....cycling forums should not be important in your life at the moment.

Thank you very much for the offer.
I find it very interesting to observe that the reason BPC keeps coming back for more is that a number of primadonnas, quite high, are held back only by the shortage of starring roles available. In this scene he is guarenteed to prosper as all the tough desperados try to out do each other in attacking him and his low-gic. I now believe that he is not in fact the actual problem source, that is shared among some the more "enlightened" members, desperate to get to the top of the dopium.

 

[Digger]

Thank you very much for the offer.
I find it very interesting to observe that the reason BPC keeps coming back for more is that a number of primadonnas, quite high, are held back only by the shortage of starring roles available. In this scene he is guarenteed to prosper as all the tough desperados try to out do each other in attacking him and his low-gic. I now believe that he is not in fact the actual problem source, that is shared among some the more "enlightened" members, desperate to get to the top of the dopium.

He admitted to being a troll.
If you can identify so much with him, well that says alot about you.

 

[galaxy1]

The most any of these bars took into account was 5 climbs. I'd say one significant tailwind would skew one year. The trend still holds. My point is this graph (science in sport) is less than 100% accurate. I'd maybe give it 90% which still says holds value. Make your own assumptions as the author suggests

unfortunately tactics count for more than 10% variation as well. for example Pantani's style was extremely aggressive on the climbs, Indurain's was generally extremely conservative.

add 10% scientific error and 10% tactical error and you have 1W/kg of uncertainty. in other words over-analysing those graphs is meaningless.

 

[Escarabajo]

unfortunately tactics count for more than 10% variation as well. for example Pantani's style was extremely aggressive on the climbs, Indurain's was generally extremely conservative.

add 10% scientific error and 10% tactical error and you have 1W/kg of uncertainty. in other words over-analysing those graphs is meaningless.

This is completely wrong. The tactical error has not much effect in the calculation. Whether Pantani is aggressive or not will have an impact on his physiology but not as much on the power calculation. If I am calculating the power for Indurain I have to take into account his weight and whether he was drafting or following wheels or not. Whether he stands up or not has a kinetic effect on the calculation that is minimal, especially at low speeds. For all purposes the trend will look similar if not the same.

Second, where the 10% tactical error come from. Saying that is just rubbish. 10% is huge error. Based on what you are saying this. Excuse my reaction but we have to be careful when we post in this forum because a lot of people will read it in the future when they Google it and I don't want this to go unnoticed

 

[D Avoid]

He admitted to being a troll.
If you can identify so much with him, well that says alot about you.

Nice fail but I'll stick with what I've observed concerning the inadequacy of those , bin cluding yourself, who stake it all a little bit to seriously, thereby red ragging his bull.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Cool it guys. Drop the BPC-troll discussion and get back on topic.

Susan