JV talks, sort of

[hrotha]

WADA is sully very tightlipped about new tests. they like to surprise people.

I think they're not related, but Italian sponsors are notoriously promiscuous so it's kinda hard to follow team history.

 

[hrotha]

Didn't they become Liquigas?

At least I think they were called Brescialat-Liquigas at some point.

I think they're not related, but Italian sponsors are notoriously promiscuous so it's kinda hard to follow team history.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Well, assuming the passport is objectively and impartially administered by an appropriately funded organization. So, perhaps <1% is currently too optimistic. Sorry. Don't jump on me.

Good additional point.

It is clearly NOT being impartially administered based on the Lance saga.

 

[biokemguy]

no surprises in 5 years

I guess since no one has been surprised in the past 5 years AICAR and GW1516 must not work in people like they do in mice.

 

[JV1973]

JV, if you don't stop quoting your own posts, people are going to think The Hog is your sockpuppet here on the forum.

OK, now re EPO, what about these supposed new forms of EPO that aren't detectable? And reports that some guys don't get tested all that often for the biopassport? If those two things are true, leaves room for EPO gains to grow back to the higher macro numbers of earlier years.

Any chance UCI will do like USADA and publish numbers of times an athlete is tested each year? Having some basic stats, like number of biopassport blood tests per quarter for each athlete would allow the passport to look more robust to the general public, IMO.

I can't see that any form of EPO could be less detectable than Dynepo. Dynepo used human liver cells for the base of e coli to break down into the genetic specific rEPO. Most EPO uses hamster ovaries. So, could someone come up with an EPO that avoids the current gel/band templates? Sure. Won't last long, however, as it won't mimic endogenous EPO as well as Dynepo does.

If they can find Dynepo, then any other form of EPO will be detectable with a bit of time.

If you want to be worried about something, be worried about autologous transfusions. It's the last place true, non marginal, gains can be found and not detected. The biopassport limits it, severely, but doesn't eliminate it. Which is still good news. 500ml of packed cells makes a big performance gain, but would be picked up in an impartially administered biopass. 100ml might slide below the radar, but wouldn't provide that much performance gain. At some point being able to sleep through the night and look at yourself in the mirror is actually a larger performance gain than 100ml of packed red cells.

Again, all under the assumption the bio pass is being impartially administered and appropriately funded.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Because EPO, unlike much of doping, is not a marginal gain. It is a macro gain. Unmonitored, 1994-1997, it provides a 10-12% advantage. Somewhat monitored, 1998-2001, it provides a 5-8% advantage (still not marginal)... Then, closely monitored (2001-2007) maybe a 3-6% advantage, still not marginal. You basically need to get to a evolved biopassport, plus advanced EPO test gel situation, like now, to reduce it's advantage to marginal (<1%)

It only took 20 years!!!

JV

Given the limit on performance the drugs can give, is there not simply a shift to drugs for recovery? Meaning you can keep performances within plausible limits, not look ridiculous on the road, but maintain stamina and performance over longer times? Drugs like hGH for example.

And should we really looking at rider's heads to look for signs of this?

It sounds to me like me have genuinely seen the end of the EPO era, but these other drugs present and future are the new danger.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Ok the post above does answer my question in general

 

[JV1973]

Given the limit on performance the drugs can give, is there not simply a shift to drugs for recovery? Meaning you can keep performances within plausible limits, not look ridiculous on the road, but maintain stamina and performance over longer times? Drugs like hGH for example.

And should we really looking at rider's heads to look for signs of this?

It sounds to me like me have genuinely seen the end of the EPO era, but these other drugs present and future are the new danger.

anecdotally, most doping docs found hGH is not very effective used singularly. It must be used in conjunction with testosterone and sometimes insulin and corticoids to work well. I'm not quite sure of the mechanisms at work here. So, while hGH is marginally detectable, testosterone and corticoids are more easily detected. So, while what you're saying could be true, I think the advantage gained if you wanted low probability of getting caught, would be minimal.

The best recovery drug out there? EPO. More oxygen saturation, even at rest, provides better recovery. I think a lot of the time when guys took hGH and EPO, they recovered better, but not because of the hGH, but because of the EPO, they just didn't know.

 

[Beech Mtn]

Thanks for the answer re Dynepo & other types of EPO.

Do you think the biopassport is currently adequately funded? How often do you think riders get tested for the passport on average over the course of a year? I would assume new/young guys need more tests/year to establish a baseline, and that guys who've been in the testing pool long-term can get by with fewer? Or is that incorrect?

 

[JV1973]

Thanks for the answer re Dynepo & other types of EPO.

Do you think the biopassport is currently adequately funded? How often do you think riders get tested for the passport on average over the course of a year? I would assume new/young guys need more tests/year to establish a baseline, and that guys who've been in the testing pool long-term can get by with fewer? Or is that incorrect?

You are correct. No, it is not adequately funded.

 

[hrotha]

Did anybody ever think of using the data from the pre-Tour medical tests, back in the days where people would show up with a 49% hematocrit, to compare it with later data (not necessarily post-biological passport)?

 

[Beech Mtn]

As long as you're here, JV, can you tell us anything about what's happening with the World Series Cycling and/or breakaway league?

Will we be getting new races next year, and if so, will they be like that 4-day stage race stuff that had been reported? (Please say those reports were not accurate and that any new races will be varied and interesting)

 

[JimmyFingers]

anecdotally, most doping docs found hGH is not very effective used singularly. It must be used in conjunction with testosterone and sometimes insulin and corticoids to work well. I'm not quite sure of the mechanisms at work here. So, while hGH is marginally detectable, testosterone and corticoids are more easily detected. So, while what you're saying could be true, I think the advantage gained if you wanted low probability of getting caught, would be minimal.

The best recovery drug out there? EPO. More oxygen saturation, even at rest, provides better recovery. I think a lot of the time when guys took hGH and EPO, they recovered better, but not because of the hGH, but because of the EPO, they just didn't know.

Thanks, very interesting. Perhaps we can get rid of the 'Contador's Head' thread. The popular counter to 'the peloton's slower, the climbs are slower, the power is lower so the sport is cleaner' is that micro-dosing to boost performance to just below acceptable levels is going on, and the other is soft-pedaling using power meters to make sure you don't ping any suspicion index.

I'm wondering if such soft-pedaling is plausible given the adrenalin and pressures of the race, and whether you think getting rid of power metres might expose cheats and lessen the effects of drugs? Nibali recently called for the end of it, but more because of the style of Sky's riding rather than as an anti-doping measure.

 

[sniper]

Well, assuming the passport is objectively and impartially administered by an appropriately funded organization. So, perhaps <1% is currently too optimistic. Sorry. Don't jump on me.

Another disclaimer.
Don't worry nobody's gonna jump on you. Most know that the passport has been junk. Basically this is you bursting your own bubble, backtracking after having used the BP multiple times (both in press and in here) as an argument why it's been so much cleaner after 2008 and why winning GTs clean is now possible. Too optimistic, thanks for finally noticing.

Thanks for the answer re Dynepo & other types of EPO.

Do you think the biopassport is currently adequately funded? How often do you think riders get tested for the passport on average over the course of a year? I would assume new/young guys need more tests/year to establish a baseline, and that guys who've been in the testing pool long-term can get by with fewer? Or is that incorrect?

You are correct. No, it is not adequately funded.

Wasn''t there a one month gap in Ryder's 2012 passport testing in the run up to the Giro?

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

I'm wondering if such soft-pedaling is plausible given the adrenalin and pressures of the race...

This idea does sound a bit far-fetched to me. If you're a few seconds down on GC in a major one-week stage race, soft-pedalling and feeling good, the urge to just let it rip and bag the win would be too powerful for all riders to overcome all the time, geiven the cut-throat nature of the sport.

You've got no more chance of being caught for the ride in question than if you're soft-pedalling under the radar, and for the guys near the end of their careers, maybe looking for a new contract, a prominent win in the hand is worth a lot of races soft-pedalling to anonymity, even if you do come under closer scrutiny following the win.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Indeed it could be written and the strawman easily refuted, because (and indeed you will know this, personally) I am known to correct and question people in many threads on many topics Glenn.

Its ok Doc you can suck up if you want.

I have seen how you attempt to correct and question as if you were a moderator or maybe you are?

Anyhow you made an statement about someone who is posting here. It could have easily been mistaken for negative statements or an attack on those guys.

In my opinion snipers and the others were just asking tough questions that are not exactly the opinion of other folks. No harm really. Some here think it will run Johnathon Vaughters off etc. I don't think it will but hey I happen to be surprised he is here answering questions. I admire that. I wish Floyd and Tyler would come in and chat.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Its ok Doc you can suck up if you want.

I don't - you can repeat it all you wish, i guess it beats trying to refute what I said.

I have seen how you attempt to correct and question as if you were a moderator or maybe you are?

No i am not a mod - just a poster, who wants to be able to make their own mind up with facts and proper arguments. Misquoting people out of context and flat out lies does not help that

Anyhow you made an statement about someone who is posting here. It could have easily been mistaken for negative statements or an attack on those guys.

Yes, I named them - I didn't want to take the lame option of throwing out barbs to unnamed people, and I wanted to allow then an opportunity to respond.
I also made very clear the solutions.

In my opinion snipers and the others were just asking tough questions that are not exactly the opinion of other folks. No harm really. Some here think it will run Johnathon Vaughters off etc. I don't think it will but hey I happen to be surprised he is here answering questions. I admire that. I wish Floyd and Tyler would come in and chat.

They are entitled to their opinions - not there facts.

Oh, and just so we are clear - your above post has all to do with another poster, nothing to do with the subject of the thread - it could be considered trolling, I am sure you wouldn't want that.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

What I know is this:

In my generation, the guys who were winning medals at Junior National/World championships at 14-17 years old, long before doping ever entered their mind, were the same guys who were of a high enough calibre to race in Europe and be selected by pro teams to race pro, and henceforth be introduced to doping, as was par for the course in Europe at that time. I can think of one guy who was good enough, but chose to opt out of doping: Darren Baker. And, yeah, he deserves an apology.

I'll give you an example, in 1993, I finished 2nd GC, won TT stage in the Vuelta Venezuela. It was packed with Colombians and Venezuelan riders who went on to successful pro careers. I was 19. At this point in my career my only doping was drinking way too much Joe Weider weight gainer and having really bad gas. This result got me a contract in Europe, which by the end of 1996 had me choosing to dope. But doping did not get me to the contract.

I also won Tour of the Gila, with 1 teammate, in 1995, against all the best US pro guys, dope free. And the moment I went back to Europe, I went from winner to 124th place. Same form, same fitness.

I see this all the time, amateurs that dope thinking it's "the way" to get into the pros. One, most good DS's can spot a super-fast donkey from a mile away. Two, even when they sneak into a pro team, going from a non bio-passport monitored doping regime (full gas) to having a constant stream of blood tests, slows them down a lot. A lot. Usually it ends up in tears - a year or two in the pros and goodbye. In some ways, I was lucky, EPO had not quite hit the scene when I was amateur (1992-1993).

If you can do 6.0 w/kg and you get you *** handed to you by guys doing 6.6, then blame doping and ask for a damn apology. But what I hear a lot of these days are guys who, 10-15 years ago, could do 5.2 w/kg, complaining they were robbed. 5.2 + massive doping = 5.7.

So, do I owe an apology to Darren Baker? Yes. He was a 6.0 athlete. He finished in the top 50 of Tour de Suisse in 1996, clean. Which is an unbelievable feat and would put him in the top 10 of the Tour de France, if he doped. He was cheated by me and others.

Hope this lends a bit of perspective.

btw - funny quote from the guy who beat me at Vuelta Venezuela at a race in 1996. He was on a big Italian team and we recognized each other at Volta Catalunya. He said "Everyone back home thought I was doping when I won the Tour of Venezuela, but I wasn't. Now, nobody back in Venezuela thinks I dope, because i don't win anymore, but I dope myself every day of every race."

Jonathon thank you for the reply.

VO2 max and w/kg numbers are the tell all in many instances.

The talent to ride at that level is few and far between. For me I don't feel like I had the power nor the VO2 max. I believe my own score for VO2 was 88 but I never ended up with any promise with regards to cycling so my question was not based on seeking any apology for myself. I ended up running distance and was good enough in my own mind.

I agree the guys with w/kg numbers like you mention looking for apologies is fairly pathetic. 10 or 15 years ago was like 1998, for me it was more like 1989 and 1990 the curve was only good until 1995. So I was not one of those w/kg number guys.

Thanks again for the reply. Good on ya for the words towards D.Baker.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I don't - you can repeat it all you wish, i guess it beats trying to refute what I said.


No i am not a mod - just a poster, who wants to be able to make their own mind up with facts and proper arguments. Misquoting people out of context and flat out lies does not help that


Yes, I named them - I didn't want to take the lame option of throwing out barbs to unnamed people, and I wanted to allow then an opportunity to respond.
I also made very clear the solutions.


They are entitled to their opinions - not there facts.

Oh, and just so we are clear - your above post has all to do with another poster, nothing to do with the subject of the thread - it could be considered trolling, I am sure you wouldn't want that.

Yours was the same with regards to sniper. bad stuff.

Jonathon is here answering questions so back to it.

 

[JV1973]

Another disclaimer.
Don't worry nobody's gonna jump on you. Most know that the passport has been junk. Basically this is you bursting your own bubble, backtracking after having used the BP multiple times (both in press and in here) as an argument why it's been so much cleaner after 2008 and why winning GTs clean is now possible. Too optimistic, thanks for finally noticing.




Wasn''t there a one month gap in Ryder's 2012 passport testing in the run up to the Giro?

I don't think the passport has been junk. I think it's been very effective. I do not think it will continue to be effective unless it is made more robust and precise. That will require greater funding.

But, you say, Lance seems to have circumvented the passport. Perhaps. But, even if he did, I don't see that as common. I worry much less about Lance and the publicly visible squabbles between "experts" that you guys buy into. I worry about the big picture. The big picture says median values are down, median speeds are down. Winners' speeds are down, winners' blood values are more stable. That's what I like to see.

But, as I said above, if certain people are seen to have circumvented the passport or seen to have received preferential treatment, then the whole thing begins to fall apart, as more and more attempt to do the same. Like I said, I think it's been effective, I do not think it will stay that way without significant change.


See, while plenty of doubt has been cast on upper level UCI management, the people working in the trenches, like Anne Gripper and Francesca Rossi are people who I have a great deal of faith in. Give them total autonomy over their work and proper funding and they will make sure the passport is effective.

Hope that clarifies.

 

[blackcat]

Yes, but you'd be amazed at how few riders do. I'd say maybe 10% of the peloton cools down, while the rest just jump on the bus straight after the sprint. Cycling sometimes is so backwards it amazes me.

Brailsford really gotta get with iz marginal gains thing. Needs to adopt Lim's thermal regulation theory frozen bidons on stage 17 hailmary glory.

#sniag_lanigram

when you need to transcend marginal gains, Gollum is your tolkien character

has anyone seen his feet? I think de feet would have hairsutism

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I guess since no one has been surprised in the past 5 years AICAR and GW1516 must not work in people like they do in mice.

No surprises no doubt. But somehow these two names keep coming back up?

 

[sniper]

I don't think the passport has been junk. I think it's been very effective. I do not think it will continue to be effective unless it is made more robust and precise. That will require greater funding.

But, you say, Lance seems to have circumvented the passport. Perhaps. But, even if he did, I don't see that as common. I worry much less about Lance and the publicly visible squabbles between "experts" that you guys buy into. I worry about the big picture. The big picture says median values are down, median speeds are down. Winners' speeds are down, winners' blood values are more stable. That's what I like to see.

But, as I said above, if certain people are seen to have circumvented the passport or seen to have received preferential treatment, then the whole thing begins to fall apart, as more and more attempt to do the same. Like I said, I think it's been effective, I do not think it will stay that way without significant change.


See, while plenty of doubt has been cast on upper level UCI management, the people working in the trenches, like Anne Gripper and Francesca Rossi are people who I have a great deal of faith in. Give them total autonomy over their work and proper funding and they will make sure the passport is effective.

Hope that clarifies.

appreciate the clarification.
So you agree it has been massively flawed under UCI supervision.
You say we can have reasonable faith that someday the passport will work.
Yet your claims of clean(er) cycling relate to past/present, not to the future.
The only tangible evidence we have (Lance's 2009 passport being covered up by the UCI) suggests that the passport didn't work in the period of 2009 to present, a period in which you got a 3rd place TdF and a 1st place Giro, and in which Sky, whom you supposedly believe are clean, has been, and is, kicking everybody's ***.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I don't think the passport has been junk. I think it's been very effective. I do not think it will continue to be effective unless it is made more robust and precise. That will require greater funding.

But, you say, Lance seems to have circumvented the passport. Perhaps. But, even if he did, I don't see that as common. I worry much less about Lance and the publicly visible squabbles between "experts" that you guys buy into. I worry about the big picture. The big picture says median values are down, median speeds are down. Winners' speeds are down, winners' blood values are more stable. That's what I like to see.

But, as I said above, if certain people are seen to have circumvented the passport or seen to have received preferential treatment, then the whole thing begins to fall apart, as more and more attempt to do the same. Like I said, I think it's been effective, I do not think it will stay that way without significant change.


See, while plenty of doubt has been cast on upper level UCI management, the people working in the trenches, like Anne Gripper and Francesca Rossi are people who I have a great deal of faith in. Give them total autonomy over their work and proper funding and they will make sure the passport is effective.

Hope that clarifies.

JV - this is one part I don't get.
On one hand the "amateur armchair hematologist " line is used to dismiss those (like us here) who interpret the data.
But, for the most part you too appear to he relying on the same people to interpret the data. I assume the UcI do not give you all the data t get independently verified - I would presume you see overall datas at meetings.

So how do you know that the data is accurate and authentic?

 

[blackcat]

appreciate the clarification.
So you agree it has been massively flawed under UCI supervision.
You say we can have reasonable faith that someday the passport will work.
Yet your claims of clean(er) cycling relate to past/present, not to the future.
The only tangible evidence we have (Lance's 2009 passport being covered up by the UCI) suggests that the passport didn't work in the period of 2009 to present, a period in which you got a 3rd place TdF and a 1st place Giro, and in which Sky, whom you supposedly believe are clean, has been, and is, kicking everybody's ***.

gotta be kidding me jonny thinks Sky is clean.

this is just the public rhetoric.

if he had you in bed and was whisper pillowtalk he does not think that someone breaks thru for a TdF win at 35 like Evans and Wigans, when all the body's natural hormones have been declining since the mid2late twenteez.

i mean, fignon, hinault, lemond, apart from the 120 racing days, less $$$ (un)professional peloton, there is a reason that threshold of the 4th decade was the retirement age (3o dat is)

Now, this time, Wigans and Evans break thru. And one of em ten years back was talking about himself as the only Australian with a Ferrari in him, before Rogers. (Wigans dad is Australian, so it could be him I am talking about, or not)


we just gotta chuckle like BigBoat (hehehehe) under our breath and maintain this ruse when jonny says he thinks sky and wigans are clean.

yeah, clean. sanitary pads.

not sure if he means before or after.

or lets use the different (apposite) color smiley face emoticon thingie