Is Philippe Gilbert Doping?

[Mrs John Murphy]

Willy Voet's book talks about Kelly's doping.

The question about Kelly's doping would be when did he start using EPO? I'm thinking here about the PDM incident.

 

[pmcg76]

Question is whether Kelly was clean then.

Probably not so I don't really get the comparison.

Nobody is really suggesting Kelly was clean. The reasoning is this, people are suggesting that Gilbert must be on some amazing **** to be so dominant, maybe some new fangled oxygen rich drug.

I simply made the point the last rider to have such dominance in the classics was Kelly in the 80s before the arrival of blood doping drugs. Hfer made the point in another thread that he feels cycling pre EPO was more believable but has a hard time in believing in Gilbert.

Throw in the fact that people believe this years Tour was more akin to pre EPO Tours, I am merely making the same comparison for the classics as for the Tour.

 

[pmcg76]

The question about Kelly's doping would be when did he start using EPO? I'm thinking here about the PDM incident.

Kellys best years were clearly 84-89, only from 89 was he at PDM. Therefore Kelly's best years pre-date EPO.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

My question was when did Kelly start using EPO? Was it when he joined PDM (which is the notorious incident) or was he using it before?

 

[roundabout]

Nobody is really suggesting Kelly was clean. The reasoning is this, people are suggesting that Gilbert must be on some amazing **** to be so dominant, maybe some new fangled oxygen rich drug.

I simply made the point the last rider to have such dominance in the classics was Kelly in the 80s before the arrival of blood doping drugs. Hfer made the point in another thread that he feels cycling pre EPO was more believable but has a hard time in believing in Gilbert.

Throw in the fact that people believe this years Tour was more akin to pre EPO Tours, I am merely making the same comparison for the classics as for the Tour.

Point is that Kelly quite likely wasn't dominant in the classics because of his natural talent. 'Quite likely' because I don't know what the competition was using but it's quite reasonable to think that Kelly himself was a charger. So it is likely that the last 1-day wonder had an advantage over the competition and yet he is used as an example to make Gilbert seem more believable. You can understand my confusion here.

Also with the cleaning up that it seems you believe in and the constraints of the passport it's quite disingenuous to suggest, nay, erect a straw man that Gilbert is on some EPO-like wonderdrug. I have no time to look for exact quotes but I'd be surprised if anything relating to the so called 'amazing **** new fangled oxygen rich drug' will turn up in this thread.

As for the classics, there have been some pretty competitive times posted on the climbs which in no way were slower than those posted in the last 5-7 years and some were even faster. And yet in the final of these races a lot of the time Mr. clean is the one who has the most left in the tank.

 

[pmcg76]

Point is that Kelly quite likely wasn't dominant in the classics because of his natural talent. 'Quite likely' because I don't know what the competition was using but it's quite reasonable to think that Kelly himself was a charger. So it is likely that the last 1-day wonder had an advantage over the competition and yet he is used as an example to make Gilbert seem more believable. You can understand my confusion here.

Also with the cleaning up that it seems you believe in and the constraints of the passport it's quite disingenuous to suggest, nay, erect a straw man that Gilbert is on some EPO-like wonderdrug. I have no time to look for exact quotes but I'd be surprised if anything relating to the so called 'amazing **** new fangled oxygen rich drug' will turn up in this thread.

As for the classics, there have been some pretty competitive times posted on the climbs which in no way were slower than those posted in the last 5-7 years and some were even faster. And yet in the final of these races a lot of the time Mr. clean is the one who has the most left in the tank.

Well, that is exactly my point, what is the difference between Kelly/his opposition and Gilbert/his opposition, we dont know. I am not the one suggesting Gilbert has some big doping advantage over his opponents because he keeps winning yet that is what is being suggested based on his performances. Both riders were dominant in their respective era's.

As usual, I will keep an open mind until further more solid evidence against Gilbert comes to light. There is a big difference between stating someone is clean or dirty based on winning races as oppossed to being open minded about either possobility.

 

[pmcg76]

My question was when did Kelly start using EPO? Was it when he joined PDM (which is the notorious incident) or was he using it before?

As I said Kelly joined PDM in 89 but his best years were pre 89 and before EPO was in use. Kelly had a good 89 season but a relatively poor 90 season partly because he crashed out of Flanders breaking his collarbone. He also missed the classics season in 91 due to injury, then was going well at the Tour before the Intralipid affair but came back to have a godd end of season winning Lombardy/Nissan Classic. He moved to Festina for 92.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Yes, but that isn't what I asked. I asked (if anyone knows) when Kelly first started using EPO? If you don't know then fine just say.

 

[andy1234]

Yes, but that isn't what I asked. I asked (if anyone knows) when Kelly first started using EPO? If you don't know then fine just say.

When do you think he first started using EPO?

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

When do you think he first started using EPO?

No idea, that's why I'm asking.

 

[andy1234]

No idea, that's why I'm asking.

OK, then why ask a question no one has the answer to?

If Kelly's best seasons had anything to do with EPO, then he was by far and away the earliest adopter in any sport.

 

[pmcg76]

OK, then why ask a question no one has the answer to?

If Kelly's best seasons had anything to do with EPO, then he was by far and away the earliest adopter in any sport.

Plus, he would have been using it before it even existed.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

But then someone might know the answer or be able to bring more light to the question.

Maybe Kelly was an early user of EPO. I've no idea. Maybe he was using it for the first time when the 'incident' took place.

Maybe someone can give a timeline of EPO usage and blood doping in the peloton. (We know for example that there was blood doping c1984 in US cycling - when did that cross over to European road racing?)

 

[pmcg76]

But then someone might know the answer or be able to bring more light to the question.

Maybe Kelly was an early user of EPO. I've no idea. Maybe he was using it for the first time when the 'incident' took place.

Maybe someone can give a timeline of EPO usage and blood doping in the peloton. (We know for example that there was blood doping c1984 in US cycling - when did that cross over to European road racing?)

I thought you were an expert on all doping related matters. This has been discussed plenty of times on here. 1990 seems to be the common ground although even then it was only a handful of riders, maybe the odd one in 89 also.

PDM rider Johannes Draaijer died suddenly in early 1990 and there was suspicions surrounding his death. If PDM were using EPO then, they clearly had not mastered it and that death must have scared them quite a bit. The so called Intralipid affair was 91 when PDM were stomping it at the Tour before they all went out sick. They didnt have any really suspicious performances in 92 before the team folded.

They did have a reputation as a major doping team but I think that applied to most Dutch teams of the time.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Simmer down tiger. It is always worth going back over old debates in case new material has come to light.

Other sources I've read have given 87/88. CN give 1988 as the date of the first person being banned for EPO (the irony of the first and second stories being together isn't lost on me). Voet I think suggests Geert Van de Walle death in Nov 88 as being EPO related but can't say for certain and this is the earliest of the 'unexplained heart attacks'.

 

[ChrisE]

I thought we established it had to at least be 1991 when EPO was introduced, or when Andy Hampsten stopped performing well. It is a meandering fanboy calendar exercise, this tricky EPO use by the peloton is.

 

[Bumeington]

Point is that Kelly quite likely wasn't dominant in the classics because of his natural talent. 'Quite likely' because I don't know what the competition was using but it's quite reasonable to think that Kelly himself was a charger. So it is likely that the last 1-day wonder had an advantage over the competition and yet he is used as an example to make Gilbert seem more believable. You can understand my confusion here.

Also with the cleaning up that it seems you believe in and the constraints of the passport it's quite disingenuous to suggest, nay, erect a straw man that Gilbert is on some EPO-like wonderdrug. I have no time to look for exact quotes but I'd be surprised if anything relating to the so called 'amazing **** new fangled oxygen rich drug' will turn up in this thread.

As for the classics, there have been some pretty competitive times posted on the climbs which in no way were slower than those posted in the last 5-7 years and some were even faster. And yet in the final of these races a lot of the time Mr. clean is the one who has the most left in the tank.

What climb times are you aware of apart from Mur de Huy?

 

[AussieGoddess]

so after reading all of this .... the only actual evidence here is his results.

He has got better fairly evenly over the last years .... and has won races that suit his abilities that he trains exclusively for, against riders who generally target other things (beat the Schlecks at LBL, Scarponi at GdL, Baredo at San Sebastian)

Yeah - hes had a fantastic season. But its not totally unexpected

 

[hrotha]

I thought we established it had to at least be 1991 when EPO was introduced, or when Andy Hampsten stopped performing well. It is a meandering fanboy calendar exercise, this tricky EPO use by the peloton is.

Introduction is not the same as spread. Late 80s seems to be when the drug was in the testing stage in the Dutch peloton, 1990-1991 when its scientific use at the top started, 1994-1995 when it became almost universal.

 

[andy1234]

Simmer down tiger. It is always worth going back over old debates in case new material has come to light.

Other sources I've read have given 87/88. CN give 1988 as the date of the first person failing a test for EPO (the irony of the first and second stories being together isn't lost on me). Voet I think suggests Geert Van de Walle death in Nov 88 as being EPO related but can't say for certain and this is the earliest of the 'unexplained heart attacks'.

Hilarious. In 1988 a rider was banned for using EPO???
Who? And How?
Short of the rider, him or herself, telling the testers about a drug they wouldnt have a test for, and would not even have heard of....

 

[rata de sentina]

I've no idea.

At last! Some self awareness.

 

[ChrisE]

so after reading all of this .... the only actual evidence here is his results.

He has got better fairly evenly over the last years .... and has won races that suit his abilities that he trains exclusively for, against riders who generally target other things (beat the Schlecks at LBL, Scarponi at GdL, Baredo at San Sebastian)

Yeah - hes had a fantastic season. But its not totally unexpected

Aren't results the strongest circumstantial evidence there is?

You list 4 riders out of 100's. If he is clean we must surmise the rest are at least mostly clean, can't we? How can a clean rider beat doped riders? I have been consistent on this forum by saying regardless of the PED that is extremely difficult. That is an opinion only, and I don't buy the "nobody else in the peleton trains for classics" argument you put forth either, no matter how much of a goddess you are. Too bad he won't ride the Vuelta and win a couple of stages, then win the worlds and Lombardy against riders who have other goals. I mean, its right there for the taking.

I personally think things are cleaner now than before, but I scratch my head at a person getting huge results all spring and into the summer, riding a GT, then winning another classic a week later. I am extremely skeptical that is possible if there is either consistency in PED use/non use in the peloton if he is clean. I am curious about how much he has been tested OOC.

 

[Swabian Lass]

I personally think things are cleaner now than before, but I scratch my head at a person getting huge results all spring and into the summer, riding a GT, then winning another classic a week later. I am extremely skeptical that is possible if there is either consistency in PED use/non use in the peloton if he is clean. I am curious about how much he has been tested OOC.

Agreed. I'd like to believe that he's clean, but then I'm a bit naive like that. The consistency across the year is just so amazing. If he continues to win like this next year it will become unbelievable.

 

[ChrisE]

Agreed. I'd like to believe that he's clean, but then I'm a bit naive like that. The consistency across the year is just so amazing. If he continues to win like this next year it will become unbelievable.

You would like to believe he is clean?

I think that all depends on the attitude of the rider thus how well he is liked. If Gilbert was a *** then ironically he would not have as many people giving him the benefit of the doubt. His results are stupid from the end of last year. That is a fact, no matter how cool he is.

 

[AussieGoddess]

Aren't results the strongest circumstantial evidence there is?

You list 4 riders out of 100's. If he is clean we must surmise the rest are at least mostly clean, can't we? How can a clean rider beat doped riders? I have been consistent on this forum by saying regardless of the PED that is extremely difficult. That is an opinion only, and I don't buy the "nobody else in the peleton trains for classics" argument you put forth either, no matter how much of a goddess you are. Too bad he won't ride the Vuelta and win a couple of stages, then win the worlds and Lombardy against riders who have other goals. I mean, its right there for the taking.

I personally think things are cleaner now than before, but I scratch my head at a person getting huge results all spring and into the summer, riding a GT, then winning another classic a week later. I am extremely skeptical that is possible if there is either consistency in PED use/non use in the peloton if he is clean. I am curious about how much he has been tested OOC.

I listed the riders he finished in front of. All riders who were using those races as training for something else or having GT's as their major goals. The training for GT's is different than just training for one day races .... so I do think it is different.

Yes he rode the TdF ....was good early but considerably tired throughout the race as you would expect.

Cavendish wins too - all season long. Cav did both the Giro and the Tour (well, half the Giro anyway) ... won a heap of stages in each. Rode in spring and did ok as well. Cancellara had an incredibly great year last year (and yes he had the same accusations ) - but my point is, its not unheard of to actually win because you have good form, talent and smarts.

I am not saying he is clean. Just that I am not willing to say he is not based only on the fact that he wins.


(ETA - as for riding Vuelta, he is riding Eneco, Hamburg and the Canadian classics instead - then worlds and Lombardy (more UCI points - he wants to be world no 1).

If he wins all of those, maybe we will talk