Indurain's physiology

[Sophistic]

The EPO Generation began in 97?Its well documented that the whole craziness started around 1990. Steven Rooks said he got 2nd in 88 clean but got on the juice in 90 because the pace of the gc guys went to a total different level after EPO got into the peloton.
Big Mig was on the stuff as much as every other gc guy was and since there were no hematocrit thresholds, his physiology stats dont matter anyway.
With a hematocrit of 55, lots of current pro riders would have crazy Vo2max numbers.

 

[The Hitch]

You're making some good points.
But why are you Spanish always taking these things personally?
Spanish sports would have done itself a big favor by properly clearing up the Fuentes-case.... Since they preferred to cover it up, Spanish sports is now basically reaping what it sowed...

By winning everything?

I hope one day the dark background of Spanish sport will get unveiled, but at the moment, i think they would laugh at your comment unfortunately.

 

[buckwheat]

I think Mig was always dirty, but he always showed the tour and the sport some respect by not doing as Riis did at Hautacam or what LA did at Sestriere. In 1990 at Luz Ardiden mig and everyone else should have known it was his for the taking. I don't buy the loyal to delgado explanation for him not contending earlier, it was just a matter of him not wanting to look like a douche, nevermind getting caught.

One of the few meaningful statements in the whole thread.

About the only positive thing that can be said about Indurain is that he ruled the sport quietly.

He wasn't bragging about winning a thrown fight.

The apologists are fans of the equivalent of John Cena, or the Harlem Globetrotters. That's what level pro cycling is on now. Wake up.

 

[JA.Tri]

@Aguirre

An Indurain thread appearing on the Clinic does not categorically qualify him as a doper. Any thread that discusses a cyclist's (any cyclist, even GLM) physiology will appear in The Clinic because at least one poster will raise the spectre of doping.

Much of what is said is speculation. Ultimately until proven positive, we are simply placing a probability on any given cyclist being a clean or doped rider. This probability does not necessarily reflect the reality of any individual's actual status.

Therefore please don't take it personally...some of us are not sure of MI's clean/doped status...and me I just love physiology and MI was the reason for that affection.

 

[blutto]

grow a thicker skin

1989

http://www.cyclismag.com/photos/lemond1989_20060711180727.jpg

1994

http://www.cyclismag.com/photos/indurain1994_20060711180721.jpg

...interesting graphs...but do keep in mind that those number differences, while numerically large, represent only about a 10% increase in performance..

...that could possibly be explained as a result of the better equipment that was being introduced at the time...lighter stiffer bikes were definitely a way to get up a mountain faster ( and this efficiency increase is not well mapped by wattage charts )...and better stiffer wheels really affect rolling resistance especially when weight distribution is disproportionately placed on the real wheel ( again the wattage charts dont reflect that accurately )....

...and then there are the better training regimes that began to be used at the time...the team that I was on at the time took full advantage of all of these advances and we got proportionately faster ( at least our time trial times seemed to reflect the advantages those advancements promised )...

...this is not meant to discount the possibility that PEDs were in use...and it also doesn't take into account the particular ways those races unfolded...GLs team, while good ( they were, I believe, 5th in the 89 TTT...) were nothing compared to the train that Indurain had at his disposal...

...the charts are nice but the reality they are supposed to represent is way too complicated to draw from them slam-dunk conclusions....

Cheers

blutto

 

[Mich78BEL]

all of this is just speculation, its possible he doped but we'll never now for shure, so i think just let it rest

 

[blutto]

One of the few meaningful statements in the whole thread.

About the only positive thing that can be said about Indurain is that he ruled the sport quietly.

He wasn't bragging about winning a thrown fight.

The apologists are fans of the equivalent of John Cena, or the Harlem Globetrotters. That's what level pro cycling is on now. Wake up.

...you have to remember this was Indurain in 90 and not Greg LeMond in 85

...for some people loyalty and honour mattered...and dare I say these people probably sleep well at night while others haunted by the possibility of being hounded by their own projections disguised as nightmares not so much....

Cheers

blutto

 

[blutto]

I think Mig was always dirty, but he always showed the tour and the sport some respect by not doing as Riis did at Hautacam or what LA did at Sestriere. In 1990 at Luz Ardiden mig and everyone else should have known it was his for the taking. I don't buy the loyal to delgado explanation for him not contending earlier, it was just a matter of him not wanting to look like a douche, nevermind getting caught.

you have to remember this was Indurain in 90 and not Greg LeMond in 85

...for some people loyalty and honour mattered...and dare I say these people probably sleep well at night while others haunted by the possibility of being hounded by their own projections disguised as nightmares not so much....

Cheers

blutto

 

[WonderLance]

Example his VO2 max was 96, the average professional athlete has a VO2 max of 75. That advantage alone is AMAZINGLY advantageous. His natural body was enough of a drug to let him destroy everyone.

Just like a certain other rider who had amazing phyziology including VO2 of about 102 and muscles that dont lactate, yet everyone around here just can deal with that.

 

[JA.Tri]

Yes much of the threads of this type feature speculation.

For me the benefit of such threads is that there is something new that either leaves me a little better informed* or provides a different view/opinion that I had previously not considered.

*Informed: used advisedly...sometimes this means further research required by self.

The advantage of all this: we all have a slightly broader perspective in future discussions.

 

[JA.Tri]

@WonderLance

I do not recall seeing 102 Max VO2 for (?) LA. Rather than take this further off track...Please PM reference/circumstance.

ta js

 

[Le breton]

...........
1994

http://www.cyclismag.com/photos/indurain1994_20060711180721.jpg

I am (slightly, see last paragraph below) puzzled by the 1994 graph you quote above.
Portoleau is usually the guy who does the calculations for cyclismag.
In the book he wrote with VAYER in 2002 ("Pouvez-vous gagner le Tour"), he quotes the following values for Indurain based on a total weight of 89 kg (81 kg +8 kg)

Luz ardiden 37:40 472watts
alpe d'huez 39:30 481 watts
Val Thorens 20:40 455 watts (finish at 2325m a.s.l.)
Avoriaz 33:24 490 watts (last climb of the TT started in Cluses)

The best performance by Indurain on a last climb of a mountain stage is quoted at a power of 512 watts for the 45:40 it took him to climb LA PLAGNE in 1995, (in hot pursuit of Zulle if I remember correctly)
That same year he blasted up Alpe d'Huez in 38:10 (500 watts), 1:20 slower than Pantani, I was watching at hairpin #1.

Assuming those 500 watts to be correct ( I didn't check the calculation), that is 6.17 watts/kg at the end of a hard mountain stage.

In all likelihood, 500 watts corresponds to a VO2 of about 6,25 l/mn, ie 77 ml/mn.kg. Therefore to a VO2 max most likely higher than 86 ml/mn.kg (climb at no more than 90% of VO2 max).

In his bio Indurain was quoted as having a VO2 max of 88.

These numbers are not my numbers, but the ones I read where mentioned.
They are very different from the ones shown in you graph, which probably means that the ones in your graph must be the normalized values for a 78 kg (70+8) racer

The fact that he was able to ride last mountain passes at the same power output as in a one-hour world record attempt is pretty indicative of likely use of EPO.

 

[WonderLance]

@WonderLance

I do not recall seeing 102 Max VO2 for (?) LA. Rather than take this further off track...Please PM reference/circumstance.

ta js

Nah man. people just can deal with the FACTS. Some riders are just awesome.

 

[Race Radio]

all of this is just speculation, its possible he doped but we'll never now for shure, so i think just let it rest

Thomas Davy's swore testimony is "Speculation"?

 

[Race Radio]

...interesting graphs...but do keep in mind that those number differences, while numerically large, represent only about a 10% increase in performance..

...that could possibly be explained as a result of the better equipment that was being introduced at the time...lighter stiffer bikes were definitely a way to get up a mountain faster ( and this efficiency increase is not well mapped by wattage charts )...and better stiffer wheels really affect rolling resistance especially when weight distribution is disproportionately placed on the real wheel ( again the wattage charts dont reflect that accurately )....

...and then there are the better training regimes that began to be used at the time...the team that I was on at the time took full advantage of all of these advances and we got proportionately faster ( at least our time trial times seemed to reflect the advantages those advancements promised )...

...this is not meant to discount the possibility that PEDs were in use...and it also doesn't take into account the particular ways those races unfolded...GLs team, while good ( they were, I believe, 5th in the 89 TTT...) were nothing compared to the train that Indurain had at his disposal...

...the charts are nice but the reality they are supposed to represent is way too complicated to draw from them slam-dunk conclusions....

Cheers

blutto

10% is MASSIVE in professional sports and those numbers are over 10% We are not talking about weekend warriors who just discovered intervals, these are highly trained professional.

I was racing pretty much full time those years. The only thing that gave riders a 10% improvement came in a needle.

 

[blutto]

The EPO Generation began in 97?Its well documented that the whole craziness started around 1990. Steven Rooks said he got 2nd in 88 clean but got on the juice in 90 because the pace of the gc guys went to a total different level after EPO got into the peloton.
Big Mig was on the stuff as much as every other gc guy was and since there were no hematocrit thresholds, his physiology stats dont matter anyway.
With a hematocrit of 55, lots of current pro riders would have crazy Vo2max numbers.

...there are a few things that I find interesting...

...firstly...the timeline of Rooks admitted drug use...in 88 he was clean...in 90 he is on the scene with a well thought out functional drug program...( that, on the one hand provided a performance increase and given the back-story of EPO use doesn't kill him...)...now here is what I would like to know...what could have happened in 89 that so got his attention that it inspired him and his co-conspirators to develop that particular drug program in conjunction with his Tour plans...

...the other thing that should be said is that EPO was officially introduced in Europe in late 88 ( and drug trial samples apparently available sometime before that )...around that time drug distributors were already pitching that drug to cycling organizations ( the reference for this was actually introduced into this forum a couple of months ago...I cant seem to find it today...sorry.. )...

Cheers

blutto

 

[blutto]

10% is MASSIVE in professional sports and those numbers are over 10% We are not talking about weekend warriors who just discovered intervals, these are highly trained professional.

I was racing pretty much full time those years. The only thing that gave riders a 10% improvement came in a needle.

...funny I was racing in those days too...and I remember when the guy who was usually my minute man in the local time trials showed up with some v-section rims on his wheelset (as opposed to the box sections that were the norm in those days )...those wheels were worth 30 odd sec in a 15 km time trial ( and be aware that 30 sec is a huge number requiring mucho watts when you are banging on 27.5 mph )...as a result I couldn't him catch as was usually the case until I got similar wheels...now that is admittedly a small sample set but that experience was replicated often in this area in the ensuing months...

Cheers from your special little fella friend

blutto

 

[ergmonkey]

Regarding Big Mig (whom I admire tremendously), I'll steal the sentiments of another of my favorite riders, Jan Ullrich:

If you can't look at what was going on in cycling at the time (and the doctors with whom Indurain was working) and put two and two together, then you are beyond help.

 

[Aguirre]

True.
Berzin also won clean before the EPO generation, and then he quickly faded away because he couldn't keep up with the dopers. The same happened to most of his teammates, that's why Batik was mediocre compared to Gewiss (they were clean at Gewiss). The EPO generation began in 1997.

How ignorant can you be?

I'm ignorant????? ja, ja, ja, ja. Considering Berzin won Indurain in Giro 1994, and Berzin and the rest of the Gewiss was on EPO, that beautifull stage with the Mortirolo and Pantani, and maybe Indurain was o wasn't on EPO or whatever (consider Unzue's and Echavarri's parcours...), well, lets go backwards and let's periodize EPO exactly at the point of Fignon decadence (as he explains in his book, did you read it? I mean, 1991, 1992, etc.

So, listen this doesn't proove anything!!!!!!!!! it's like saying since then everybody is dirty and before, in the 80's, they were angels...

there are rules in cycling and one says that if a rider is not caught with doping you cannot proove he was doped, simply like this. You cannot condem a rider who was never tested positive, because then you have to judge those were caught, starting from Eddy.

And big Miguel was not caught, if you think Lemond and Fignon Roche and Kelly were angels in the 80's and then Bugno, Indurain, Chiapucci and Bartoli just cheaters... worst for you.

I'm pretty amazed how little cycling culture leads to such poor thinking

Miguel was simply the best of his generation

 

[ergmonkey]

I'm pretty amazed how little cycling culture leads to such poor thinking

Miguel was simply the best of his generation

Again, you miss the point. Big Mig was the best of his generation; Armstrong was the best of his generation. Both doped. I'm not painting a world of sinners and saints here, nor are most of the other posters.

This thread is purportedly about whether Indurain was clean. PERIOD. Not the moral ramifications (if any) of the answer to this question.

 

[BroDeal]

Miguel was simply the best of his generation

That generation was the uncontrolled hematrocrit generation, and he conveniently retired so that he would not have to race in the 50% hematocrit rule generation.

Indurain clean.? The rider who went through an entire list of dope doctors, starting with Conconi? That is really funny.

Gullible people are funny.

 

[nevada]

Can the mods shut this blasphemous thread !

 

[Aguirre]

That generation was the uncontrolled hematrocrit generation, and he conveniently retired so that he would not have to race in the 50% hematocrit rule generation.

Indurain clean.? The rider who went through an entire list of dope doctors, starting with Conconi? That is really funny.

Gullible people are funny.

AH, OK, I have to admit that the only riders clean in the WHOLE history of cycling are... Voeckler and Ofredo... goodnight folks!

 

[Race Radio]

...funny I was racing in those days too...and I remember when the guy who was usually my minute man in the local time trials showed up with some v-section rims on his wheelset (as opposed to the box sections that were the norm in those days )...those wheels were worth 30 odd sec in a 15 km time trial ( and be aware that 30 sec is a huge number requiring mucho watts when you are banging on 27.5 mph )...as a result I couldn't him catch as was usually the case until I got similar wheels...now that is admittedly a small sample set but that experience was replicated often in this area in the ensuing months...

Cheers from your special little fella friend

blutto

Really, you used 2.5 kilo deep section wheels to climb Alp d'huez?

Did you even read the graphs? They referred to climbing, not TT. There was no equipment modifications during that period that could account for a 15% increase in climbing output.

 

[Race Radio]

...there are a few things that I find interesting...

...firstly...the timeline of Rooks admitted drug use...in 88 he was clean...in 90 he is on the scene with a well thought out functional drug program...( that, on the one hand provided a performance increase and given the back-story of EPO use doesn't kill him...)...now here is what I would like to know...what could have happened in 89 that so got his attention that it inspired him and his co-conspirators to develop that particular drug program in conjunction with his Tour plans...

...the other thing that should be said is that EPO was officially introduced in Europe in late 88 ( and drug trial samples apparently available sometime before that )...around that time drug distributors were already pitching that drug to cycling organizations ( the reference for this was actually introduced into this forum a couple of months ago...I cant seem to find it today...sorry.. )...

Cheers

blutto

In his book Rooks says he started doing EPO when the Gewiss train started winning all the races (Argentin, Berzin, Furlan). That would have been in '94.