JV talks, sort of

[JV1973]

Do you think a 20% increase in sustainable power is possible in 5 weeks without doping, if the rider was previously training consistently, i.e. wasn't injured or sick? Because between Gila and the TDSuisse, that's roughly the improvement Armstrong made in 2010.

I've been around endurance sport most of my life and I have to say I've never seen a pupa to butterfly transformation like that before. Have you?

Just curious how you know this? For a 30-45min efforts about 8% would be due to Gila being at high altitude, but the remaining 12% increase is still too much, IMO.

Do you have SRM files showing this? Do the segments you're comparing have consistent time spans and corresponding heart rates (and corresponding temperatures to make sure the HR is correlating similarly?)

 

[D-Queued]

I think Lance was pretty slow in 2009-2010. Relative to his old self. I already said that in an interview with Jeremy Whittle at the time. And Lance got really ****ed. I think I had over 1000 nasty twitters from Lance-o-maniacs. Who now all hate him. Whichever way the wind blows....

As for Gripper and Tygart. Neither are hematologists. I would like to hear from the people that actually analyzed the data. Do I believe Anne is incorruptible? Yes. Just my belief. Not more.

Would be interesting to hear the reasons from the actual data analysts.

A further comment on Anne's observation(s), which were overstated in the above posts*, is that Lance returned to competition without having gone through the required baseline testing period.

With the assistance of the UCI, he broke at least one anti-doping rule whether he was doping or not, and we have no idea if this provided an opportunity for manipulation.

To simplify: He knowingly cheated in 2009 with the assistance of the UCI.

Between that and Lance's Caitlin deception, there was a lot of trickery going on.

Dave.

* Gripper did not claim that he was clean.

Here is the text from the CN article:

Armstrong claimed he raced clean in 2009 when he made a comeback, after promising his former wife Kristin that he would never "cross the line". Gripper, who managed the UCI's Biological Passport programme until 2010, insisted there was nothing unusual with his blood profile at the time. She believes the Biological Passport has greatly cleaned up cycling.

While that is one paragraph, there are at least four separate ideas that are not necessarily correlated:

- Armstrong (not Gripper) claimed he was clean (never claimed that before)
- Promised Kirstin he wouldn't cross the line
- Gripper saw nothing unusual (see JV's comments that she is not a hematologist)
- Gripper believes BP has greatly (note the two qualifications: believes and greatly - not knows and completely) cleaned things up

 

[Gregga]

I think Lance was pretty slow in 2009-2010. Relative to his old self. I already said that in an interview with Jeremy Whittle at the time. And Lance got really ****ed. I think I had over 1000 nasty twitters from Lance-o-maniacs. Who now all hate him. Whichever way the wind blows.

I'm not an hematologist, but reading the email exchanges between Armstrong and Ferrari, it is sometimes obvious what the program was for the TdF. In 2009 for example, Ferrari makes calculations of Armstrong's power improvement between the Giro and pre-Tour, something like 6%, JV, you know exactly how this kind of improvement can be achieved in 2 weeks, especially when HCT jumps from 38.2 to 45.7 at the same time (source)

2010 was the same, read here for example.

So, if Armstrong was slower in 2009-2010 than 1999-2005, it's just because of the bio passport, and also because of his age (-1% FTP per year above 30 y.o according to several studies I read) and lack of training during 3 years. Definitely NOT because he was clean.

He could achieve 6.5 w/kg pre comeback...
...5.6 at the 2009 Giro (maybe with EPO/GH before the race)
...5.9 at the 2009 TdF with transfusions before/during the race

I know this surely bother you JV, because your british guy was at the same level during that TdF, but you know numbers better than me...

 

[will10]

2010 was the same, read here for example.

That's a nice find, good work. Also see the retics jump from 0.62 to 1.3.

 

[JV1973]

I'm not an hematologist, but reading the email exchanges between Armstrong and Ferrari, it is sometimes obvious what the program was for the TdF. In 2009 for example, Ferrari makes calculations of Armstrong's power improvement between the Giro and pre-Tour, something like 6%, JV, you know exactly how this kind of improvement can be achieved in 2 weeks, especially when HCT jumps from 38.2 to 45.7 at the same time (source)

2010 was the same, read here for example.

So, if Armstrong was slower in 2009-2010 than 1999-2005, it's just because of the bio passport, and also because of his age (-1% FTP per year above 30 y.o according to several studies I read) and lack of training during 3 years. Definitely NOT because he was clean.

He could achieve 6.5 w/kg pre comeback...
...5.6 at the 2009 Giro (maybe with EPO/GH before the race)
...5.9 at the 2009 TdF with transfusions before/during the race

I know this surely bother you JV, because your british guy was at the same level during that TdF, but you know numbers better than me...

Not my British guy anymore. But, yes, Brad was 5.9w/kg in testing right before the Tdf in 09. CVV was 5.9w/kg before Tour in '08. Ryder was 5.9 before Giro in '11.... It's actually pretty consistent. But none could come close to 6.5. Not even Brad in '11.

Anyhow, yes, I'm aware that LA's '09 blood profile is whacky. For sure. And, yes, I'm aware that a 6% increase would be very similar to an increase caused by a transfusion.

Believe me, I'm not defending LA. I'm just curious as to what the experts would have to say on the blood profile, in detail. We haven't heard that yet. I would like to. I'm curious.

 

[Gregga]

Not my British guy anymore. But, yes, Brad was 5.9w/kg in testing right before the Tdf in 09. CVV was 5.9w/kg before Tour in '08. Ryder was 5.9 before Giro in '11.... It's actually pretty consistent. But none could come close to 6.5. Not even Brad in '11.

Anyhow, yes, I'm aware that LA's '09 blood profile is whacky. For sure. And, yes, I'm aware that a 6% increase would be very similar to an increase caused by a transfusion.

Believe me, I'm not defending LA. I'm just curious as to what the experts would have to say on the blood profile, in detail. We haven't heard that yet. I would like to. I'm curious.

Thank you for your answer and the numbers you give about your riders. Much interesting, I'm convinced they don't take monkey placenta By the way I was kidding about your british guy.

But why do you mention '11 and not '12 for BW FTP ? According to his latest book in 2012 his FTP was around 460w, his weight 70kg, even with the 4% overestimation due to O'sym rings, thats still close to 6.3 w/kg, isn't it ?

 

[JV1973]

Thank you for your answer and the numbers you give about your riders. Much interesting, I'm convinced they don't take monkey placenta By the way I was kidding about your british guy.

But why do you mention '11 and not '12 for BW FTP ? According to his latest book in 2012 his FTP was around 460w, his weight 70kg, even with the 4% overestimation due to O'sym rings, thats still close to 6.3 w/kg, isn't it ?

Sorry...Typo and brain fart. I meant '12... From the actual race data I've seen, he was around 6.0 -6.1 in '12. FTP on an ergo test isn't that accurate and everyone is always elevated. I read something about an amateur guy hitting 5.4 on an ergo test and saying that if he was better supported he could hit 5.7. using that type of test protocol (4min steps 50 watt increases) Brad would easily test at 6.3 or even higher. The good old 30-45 min climb test is much better. In that type of test, I believe Brad would have been 6.0 -6.1 in '12.... Anyway, point being, apples to apples.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Ok, I'm going to refrain myself from calling you a low functioning Cretin. But that's out of love, not more.

2 facts:

Rasmussen would have never been tested in the bio passport system ever, why?

1. Bio-pass started in 2008 (not 2005-2006)

2. He was on a continental team after 2007. Conti teams don't get tested w bio-pass system.

before you start swinging the self righteous "we know better" blade, you might want to research the topic. just a bit.

xoxo, JV

Here's some research: Michael Rasmussen is on the RTP for 2012 - riding for CONT team Christina Watches.

Can't find the other years, but if he's on it this year, I'd bet $100 he was on it the years before.

 

[the asian]

Here's some research: Michael Rasmussen is on the RTP for 2012 - riding for CONT team Christina Watches.

Can't find the other years, but if he's on it this year, I'd bet $100 he was on it the years before.

wanna bet that he wasn't on it in 2008 and 2009?

 

[the asian]

Here's some research: Michael Rasmussen is on the RTP for 2012 - riding for CONT team Christina Watches.

Can't find the other years, but if he's on it this year, I'd bet $100 he was on it the years before.

Those who ride for Conti teams are usually not included in the Blood passport program, but he was included as a special case in 2010, and during his ban he was also tested.

 

[roundabout]

He was allegedly tested 13 times in 2009. I guess that would be 13 times in 6 months.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Those who ride for Conti teams are usually not included in the Blood passport program, but he was included as a special case in 2010, and during his ban he was also tested.

I'm well aware of that. Perhaps you missed JV's condescending smugness directed at another poster (he called the poster a low functioning cretin)?

The fact is: Rasmussen was on the RTP list, was tested, and didn't test positive once, the whole time he was doping.

 

[roundabout]

Then again it works out to about 1 test per 2 weeks.

 

[pmcg76]

I'm well aware of that. Perhaps you missed JV's condescending smugness directed at another poster (he called the poster a low functioning cretin)?

The fact is: Rasmussen was on the RTP list, was tested, and didn't test positive once, the whole time he was doping.

Dear Wiggo

It was posted previously on this very thread, Rasmussen was added to the BP list in spring 2010, ironically around the same time he stopped doping as he realised he wasn't going to any GTs.

The previous post noted that he was tested 13 times in 2009 but none of those test's were to do with the BP.

 

[the asian]

I'm well aware of that. Perhaps you missed JV's condescending smugness directed at another poster?

The fact is: Rasmussen was on the RTP list, was tested, and didn't test positive once, the whole time he was doping.

He was included in the Blood Passport program in 2010. Probably contributed to him giving up the sauce.

And you surely know passing tests is a piece of cake.

 

[Gregga]

The good old 30-45 min climb test is much better. In that type of test, I believe Brad would have been 6.0 -6.1 in '12.... Anyway, point being, apples to apples.

Interesting. As a matter of fact, according to Portoleau (you now, Vayer-the-clown's friend), Wiggins did 6.05w/kg in the '12 Tdf, as a mean value for the last climbs, that's exactly your estimation but that's just a calculation using speed vs altitude, your data may come from a real SRM file isn't it ? Anyway, 6.0-6.1 is a lot, especially in the third week, when you mentioned 5.9 w/kg for your riders you insisted it was before the TdF.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I'm not throwing mud in anyone's eyes. The data is available for everyone to see. My opinion, looking at the data (median hb, climbing speeds, and median retic stability) lead me to believe that racing is cleaner. It's that simple.

CADF don't have median values in their report.

Just curious how you calculate the median of something unless you're seeing the entire data set? Is this another throw away statement like the one you used last year claiming, "everyone tested high at the start of the 2012 Giro"?

 

[roundabout]

He was included in the Blood Passport program in 2010. Probably contributed to him giving up the sauce.

And you surely know passing tests is a piece of cake.

Oh yeah, the wonderful biological passport.

Is that guy who claimed that he had the roids still riding?

I don't know how much data there was on the chicken, but one could probably have wacky values for quite a bit before UCI would act.

 

[sniper]

Dear Wiggo

It was posted previously on this very thread, Rasmussen was added to the BP list in spring 2010, ironically around the same time he stopped doping as he realised he wasn't going to any GTs.

The previous post noted that he was tested 13 times in 2009 but none of those test's were to do with the BP.

13 tests after his ban (from August 2009 to December 2009) or during (January 2009 to July 2009)?
Either way, it sounds like UCI really tried, but dearly failed, to catch the guy.
Would make sense. I see Pat being ****ed at Michael for smearing the reputation of the TdF.

 

[the asian]

Oh yeah, the wonderful biological passport.

Is that guy who claimed that he had the roids still riding?

I don't know how much data there was on the chicken, but one could probably have wacky values for quite a bit before UCI would act.

yep, but the guy coincidentally stopped the sauce in 2010.

 

[roundabout]

or he was smart enough to understand that even doping won't get him to WT (see Rebellin 2011)

I think he may have also mentioned something about being blacklisted, so there is that as well

see thread here

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=346722

but yay ,passport.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

And if folks are doping, it isn't helping them very much (per climbing speed data)

You really think this is the new Holy Grail for clean cycling isn't it?

You really do not care who is climbing at the maximum climbing speed as measured by Aldo Sassi?

That is the key in my book. Riders dope till they reach to 'the humanly' possible within the bandwiths of the BP.

I think Lance was pretty slow in 2009-2010. Relative to his old self.

The guy was 38 years old at the time man, like Joop Zoetemelk when he won the worlds. How can a 38 year old come in third in Paris? What do you expect? A new Amgen wonderdrug? Even bigger than wonderboy took to become third in 2009?

But, since you are again here on the forum, I guess a big anouncement will be made soon, do you have a scoop for us monkeys? Of course that was a joke, we want to keep things polite here.

 

[Pentacycle]

Interesting. As a matter of fact, according to Portoleau (you now, Vayer-the-clown's friend), Wiggins did 6.05w/kg in the '12 Tdf, as a mean value for the last climbs, that's exactly your estimation but that's just a calculation using speed vs altitude, your data may come from a real SRM file isn't it ? Anyway, 6.0-6.1 is a lot, especially in the third week, when you mentioned 5.9 w/kg for your riders you insisted it was before the TdF.

Perhaps the 5.9 W/kg isn't the max effort you can do in a stage, it's the power he can sustain longer than 15 minutes.(at least that's how I'm interpreting FTP) In the Tour he'll do somewhat better as he's riding full gas, he can go a little harder if he goed in the red like any other rider does at the end of a stage.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

But, since you are again here on the forum, I guess a big anouncement will be made soon, do you have a scoop for us monkeys? Of course that was a joke, we want to keep things polite here.

Monkeys doesn't chew on bones.

 

[JV1973]

You really think this is the new Holy Grail for clean cycling isn't it?

You really do not care who is climbing at the maximum climbing speed as measured by Aldo Sassi?

That is the key in my book. Riders dope till they reach to 'the humanly' possible within the bandwiths of the BP.The guy was 38 years old at the time man, like Joop Zoetemelk when he won the worlds. How can a 38 year old come in third in Paris? What do you expect? A new Amgen wonderdrug? Even bigger than wonderboy took to become third in 2009?

But, since you are again here on the forum, I guess a big anouncement will be made soon, do you have a scoop for us monkeys? Of course that was a joke, we want to keep things polite here.

No announcement. i promise.

Here's why I rely on that number:

If it can be achieved by a clean, talented rider, and it can win the race, then if I find a clean, talented rider, my team can win the race.

I can't find any clean riders doing 6.5w/kg. Nor are there any winning races doing that much these days. So, you are correct to think a less than talented guy could boost himself to 5.9 w/kg illegally. He might get caught, he might not. Risky. But my clean guy still stands a chance to win. So, my team is still in the game! Meaning: I'm happy. Sponsors are happy.

In my career, the clean guy at 5.9 wasn't even in the game.

So, now my job is picking incredibly talented riders. Not running an illegal medical program. Much more fun. Not much margin for error, though! So, I better be good.

JV