Bratam said:
The 1997 TDF saw the introduction of the 50% hematocrits level. The majority of the field are on EPO at 46-50% and Jan destroys the field to win. There is little doubt Jan would have destroyed Riis in 1996 as well had the field been forced to stay under the 50% level in that year And that is before we even get to the Armstrong years. You really think Jan Ullrich would not have won a Tour on a level playing field (ie, no doping) ? In other words, you must be saying that he was a strong responder to doping.
I personally find it difficult to come up with names that would/could have beaten him.
RaceRadio is saying a few things:
1. HCT : VO2Max ratio- that Jan benefited from maximizing O2 extraction to achieve superior Aerobic outcomes, but still no one seems to know Jan’s VO2Max, not his annual HCT values? Do people have access to Jan’s UCI historical blood profiles, I cannot find them? A man who had no reason to lie stated that Jan’s was never above 43, and that statement was reiterated by JV/F. Andreu.
2. Muscular propensity (Lean body Mass)-that Jan was more muscular and thus EPO and Autolog BBoosting would maximize that asymmetric M>Fat ratio.
-my questions would be …I thought the urban myth was that Jan was always overweight?
-Yes Muscles consume more O2 but having more muscular mass would also deplete the O2 quicker so what is the ratio to Muscular build to O2 consumption…does it really benefit them? Wouldn’t Jan have consumed preferentially more O2 dragging his muscular body (and don’t forget his fatness) over all those Cols, thus reducing the benefit of EPO (at HCT of 43) and BB?
-Everyone seems to forget that Fat is highly vascular and although it doesn’t consume as ‘much’ O2 as Muscle it still does. So which is it, he was Muscular and fat? Muscular and lean?
3. PreTdF training – the urban myth is that he never trained hard, never was ready in time, was fat and just ‘juiced’ preTour to achieve greatness. Yet Jef d'Hont, Aldag, T. Hamilton, Landis and others…describe how in awe they were of his ‘athleticism’. No doubt he was doping like the rest and no doubt the other TdF contenders didn’t race much before the tours, that’s a draw. I especially like how Paul S and Phil L would describe how the crack in Jan’s lower lip was due to him being sick or ‘cramming’ his training prior to the TdF.
4. Super-responder – I guess this gets back to point 1. I think the first question to answer is…was his HCT always at 43 in competition? If so, there is no possibility to being a super-responder or even responder to EPO unless his natural HCT is significantly lower than 43; not likely. Yes, he would still benefit from Autol BB but how much difference would that make against someone who elevated their HCT from 42 to 49 AND BBoosted? If his HCT was above 43 then which tours was that?
Frankly I don’t know what the answers are, but what I have had enough is that Jan was always (i) Fat, (ii) never trained (iii) physiologically benefitted from being more muscular (iv) a super-responder …? Show me the data. Was Jan able to maximize his O2 extraction in ways that were superior to all the rest helping his fat undertrained body compete?
The answer is probably somewhere in the middle, and in that scenario it would appear that he was more gifted as the other riders had a similar variation or collection of the above factors; and Jan still beat them. He didn’t beat LA for reasons like UCI corruption, not doping dangerously, the TTTs and sharing his teammates efforts to assist Zabel.
These are just my questions and thoughts. In some silly way I am trying to make sense of the doped races I unfortunately watched and wasted my time viewing. I hope to eventually find out what various riders biometric and blood profiles were to compare all those stage wins and MTFs. Does anyone have access to those values or are we just going to passing back and forth ... "my people said his HCT was 43, well mine say they were 48"? Until that happens ...
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram