JV talks, sort of

[biokemguy]

...doctor whose job is to maintain the blood parameters within the prescribed limits. ...

The point missed or ignored by many is that the prescribed limits, also limit performance enhancement to the point where clean riders can compete. This is not claiming that the ABP works, just that it limits the dopers to nearly believable levels.

So Dan Martin can beat dopers because they are limited to a level that is achievable clean.

The problem is that too many riders are bumping up against this limit, making it impossible to tell who's clean and who isn't based on performance alone.

 

[martinvickers]

This definitely needs to go here.




So with very few resources since 2008, doping has continued to decline to the point where any clean rider can win any race in 2013.

The battle has been won.

But if large resources are not devoted to the anti-doping effort, now, all this good work will go to waste. It won't "stick" or last.

I hope someone with a scientific mind can help me understand the logic that supports this premise, because surely I am missing it.

It's a fairly simple argument, Wiggo. I suspect your problem is more disagreement than lack of understanding.

 

[BroDeal]

Its very possible that the ABP has been thwarted by some, but is still working well working to control doping. May not have been JV's thought, but my response at least (and its a debate what kind of success rate qualifies 'working well'. 100%? 50%, 1%?)

What I want to hear from JV is how much gain he thinks riders can get while still not tripping the ABP. Then I want to hear how much additional gain can be had by using drugs to reduce a rider's weight.

The way I see it, doping is similar to investing. Money naturally flows to where it will get the most gain, taking risk into account. Reduce possible gains or increase risk in one class of investments and money will simply flow to another class of investments. With the APB restricting blood doping, dopers will seek out gains by other doping methods. The logical replacement is weight loss using a variety of doping products. Another replacement to concentrate on would be recovery drugs that will give a rider an edge over a long stage race.

I also want to know why the APB appears to be just about blood. What about hormone profiling? Why hasn't anyone been busted for T:E ratios fluctuating unnaturally?

 

[Benotti69]

What I want to hear from JV is how much gain he thinks riders can get while still not tripping the ABP. Then I want to hear how much additional gain can be had by using drugs to reduce a rider's weight.

The way I see it, doping is similar to investing. Money naturally flows to where it will get the most gain, taking risk into account. Reduce possible gains or increase risk in one class of investments and money will simply flow to another class of investments. With the APB restricting blood doping, dopers will seek out gains by other doping methods. The logical replacement is weight loss using a variety of doping products. Another replacement to concentrate on would be recovery drugs that will give a rider an edge over a long stage race.

I also want to know why the APB appears to be just about blood. What about hormone profiling? Why hasn't anyone been busted for T:E ratios fluctuating unnaturally?

Presumable they all have TUEs. Someone commented he saw nearly every rider with an asthma inhaler.

I wonder is JV of the not on the WADA list = not doping.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I also want to know why the APB appears to be just about blood. What about hormone profiling? Why hasn't anyone been busted for T:E ratios fluctuating unnaturally?

Thats the true question.

Just like with the EPO 50% rule.

''Great, now we can dope up to 50%''.

Riders then switched to insuline, hgh, perfluorcarbon, actovegin, for the extra bonus of course.

When riders from friggin Costa Rica get popped for GW501...

Come on.

Doping is always 10 steps in front of the testers, hell, even anti - depressants can be used for doping. Spank that inner chimp.

Not every form of doping is blood related. No way. It is the fastest way but no way the only way.

Big Pharma loves cycling.

edit: do not expect an answer to these kinda questions

 

[pmcg76]

Thats the true question.

Just like with the EPO 50% rule.

''Great, now we can dope up to 50%''.

Riders then switched to insuline, hgh, perfluorcarbon, actovegin, for the extra bonus of course.

When riders from friggin Costa Rica get popped for GW501...

Come on.

Doping is always 10 steps in front of the testers, hell, even anti - depressants can be used for doping. Spank that inner chimp.

Not every form of doping is blood related. No way. It is the fastest way but no way the only way.

Big Pharma loves cycling.

edit: do not expect an answer to these kinda questions

Yes but point is, none of those other products have been proven to be as effective as blood doping. EPO and blood doping were the game changers, maybe products like AICAR are also on that level now but that has yet to be proven.

Maybe it should be pointed out here that there were plenty of products(including anti-depressants)around in the days of Greg LeMond yet you fully believe that he was beating guys using such products whilst doing it cleanly in GTs.

If you are going to apply double-standards, try to do it more in a more suttle way.

 

[Benotti69]

Yes but point is, none of those other products have been proven to be as effective as blood doping. EPO and blood doping were the game changers, maybe products like AICAR are also on that level now but that has yet to be proven.

Maybe it should be pointed out here that there were plenty of products(including anti-depressants)around in the days of Greg LeMond yet you fully believe that he was beating guys using such products whilst doing it cleanly in GTs.

If you are going to apply double-standards, try to do it more in a more suttle way.

Armstrong was using EPO on motorola. It wasn't till he hooked up with Ferarri that things really began to improve.

 

[pmcg76]

Armstrong was using EPO on motorola. It wasn't till he hooked up with Ferarri that things really began to improve.

I have no idea how Armstrong is in any shape or form related to my post but the story is he started using EPO in 96 and he also started working with Ferrari that season. Armstrong's results improved in 96 until he went down with cancer compared to the previous two seasons so not sure what your point is.

The question here is if the benefits of EPO and blood doping have been restricted, how closely does the current situation compare to when LeMond was beating doping guys doing it cleanly as a lot of the people here who throw crap around believe was possible.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Yes but point is, none of those other products have been proven to be as effective as blood doping. EPO and blood doping were the game changers, maybe products like AICAR are also on that level now but that has yet to be proven..

We should indeed be patient, a bit like in the beginning of the nineties when idiots like Yvan van Mol stated the Italian dominance was not the result of EPO, but just because the Italians were so much better at planning, training, periodising.

Do you want a newspaper article?

Maybe it should be pointed out here that there were plenty of products(including anti-depressants)around in the days of Greg LeMond yet you fully believe that he was beating guys using such products whilst doing it cleanly in GTs.

If you are going to apply double-standards, try to do it more in a more suttle way.

Where is the double standard? Anti - psychotica was a well known product at that time, in combination with the higher tech doping there is now available that is not a comparison at all. Microdose, insuline, 135cc bloodbags, hgh, aicar, GW443874387438 and all the others. Just like in the eighties...

And, please, LeMond has nothing to do with this, lame remark pmcg.

have no idea how Armstrong is in any shape or form related to my post but the story is he started using EPO in 96

That must be why he got second in LBL in 1994? The young clean raskall against those nasty EPO wonders in the hardest classic there is.

 

[pmcg76]

We should indeed be patient, a bit like in the beginning of the nineties when idiots like Yvan van Mol stated the Italian dominance was not the result of EPO, but just because the Italians were so much better at planning, training, periodising.

Do you want a newspaper article?

Where is the double standard? Anti - psychotica was a well known product at that time, in combination with the higher tech doping there is now available that is not a comparison at all. Microdose, insuline, 135cc bloodbags, hgh, aicar, GW443874387438 and all the others. Just like in the eighties...

And, please, LeMond has nothing to do with this, lame remark pmcg.That must be why he got second in LBL in 1994? The young clean raskall against those nasty EPO wonders in the hardest classic there is.

Full of crap as expected.

Of course LeMond is relevant, you believe LeMond beat riders using doping products, then EPO came along and LeMond disappeared because he couldn't compete with riders using such products. There were no 50% restrictions back then either so you could go as high as you want.

Now there is proof that the effectiveness of EPO and blood doping has been restricted(not stopped) due to the passport, thus that would suggest we are getting back to a competition level that was around in LeMond's time unless there are new wonder drug's on the market.

If LeMond could win GTs doing it clean, then why not the current generation???

As for Armstrong, that 2nd in Liege was the only result of note by Armstrong in 94. His results overall in 96 are way better but try to cherry pick to mislead as usual.

You guys are so blatantly full of ****, its unreal.

 

[BroDeal]

Full of crap as expected.

Of course LeMond is relevant, you believe LeMond beat riders using doping products, then EPO came along and LeMond disappeared because he couldn't compete with riders using such products. There were no 50% restrictions back then either so you could go as high as you want.

Now there is proof that the effectiveness of EPO and blood doping has been restricted(not stopped) due to the passport, thus that would suggest we are getting back to a competition level that was around in LeMond's time unless there are new wonder drug's on the market.

If LeMond could win GTs doing it clean, then why not the current generation???

As for Armstrong, that 2nd in Liege was the only result of note by Armstrong in 94. His results overall in 96 are way better but try to cherry pick to mislead as usual.

You guys are so blatantly full of ****, its unreal.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that in the last twenty-five years there has been no advancement in drugs other than EPO. It is not like it was lower tech in the eighties when riders doped themselves or relied on the bro-science of a soigneur who got his knowledge from his own riding career ten years earlier and now there are experts with medical degrees who have more knowledge about doping than could ever be dreamed of by a mechanic with an eighth grade education who was responsible for concocting his team's pot belge recipe. No advance whatsoever, I am sure.

 

[pmcg76]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that in the last twenty-five years there has been no advancement in drugs other than EPO. It is not like it was lower tech in the eighties when riders doped themselves or relied on the bro-science of a soigneur who got his knowledge from his own riding career ten years earlier and now there are experts with medical degrees who have more knowledge about doping than could ever be dreamed of by a mechanic with an eighth grade education who was responsible for concocting his team's pot belge recipe. No advance whatsoever, I am sure.

Well of course, you can tell us all about these products then because something that trumps EPO and blood doping should be widespread by now!! No matter how non-talkative pro's might be now, there would be rumours of some sort about a wonder product. The stories about EPO were doing the rounds as early as 89/90.

Amazing how the drug Phil Gilbert has been linked with is cortisone which has been around pro cycling since the 70's or 80's.

I could also add that advances in doping could also apply to advance's in training, conditioning etc. Riders are better coached and trained now than they ever were in the 80s.

 

[taiwan]

You're saying that the BP has returned doping to pre-EPO levels. Why so? You yourself mention that when EPO came out you could do as much as you like, then the 50% limit came in. Did the 50% rule negate the advantages of EPO? Why the BP then?

Then you say that any new techniques would have to trump blood doping. Why so? Going balls out with EPO may still be the most effective way to cheat, but methods have without question become more varied and sophisticated since thr early 90s. Transfusions, HGH, microdosing, CERA etc.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Full of crap as expected.
You guys are so blatantly full of ****, its unreal.

Okay, thanks for your opinion.

JV will mail y soon for a new PR forum job.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I also want to know why the APB appears to be just about blood.

Because that calmed anyone down about blood doping that mattered. Because it's expensive and complicated and no one wants athletes going slower.

Why hasn't anyone been busted for T:E ratios fluctuating unnaturally?

Why hasn't half the elite peloton been busted for peptides gets the same answer, because that generates doping controversy. Tests are processed by the lab, then entered into the APMU where nothing happens to positives for riders that matter to the UCI. It's theater.

 

[pmcg76]

You're saying that the BP has returned doping to pre-EPO levels. Why so? You yourself mention that when EPO came out you could do as much as you like, then the 50% limit came in. Did the 50% rule negate the advantages of EPO? Why the BP then?

Then you say that any new techniques would have to trump blood doping. Why so? Going balls out with EPO may still be the most effective way to cheat, but methods have without question become more varied and sophisticated since thr early 90s. Transfusions, HGH, microdosing, CERA etc.

When EPO first came on the scene, there was no limits. Then the 50% limit was put on in 97 which just capped it a bit but was really just dressing. Now EPO is detectable and cannot be used at a level it was used at when it first appeared thanks to being detectable and the ABP.

So in the lifespan of EPO, it has less benefit now than it has had in any other point in it's history.

Likewise blood doping, is micro-dosing as effective as blood bags or EPO? No, so once more it is probably at it's lowest value point compared to previous usage. CERA is also detectable of course and limited by the ABP.

So as I said, in terms of blood vector doping, we are as close to the pre EPO era as we are likely to get.

HGH is the exception as it is still undetectable and I don't think it really show's up on the ABP. Could be wrong.

 

[pmcg76]

Okay, thanks for your opinion.

JV will mail y soon for a new PR forum job.

Ah the refuge of the clinic 12.

When all else fails, resort to calling people fanboy's, skybot's etc, etc.

 

[taiwan]

When EPO first came on the scene, there was no limits. Then the 50% limit was put on in 97 which just capped it a bit but was really just dressing. Now EPO is detectable and cannot be used at a level it was used at when it first appeared thanks to being detectable and the ABP.

So in the lifespan of EPO, it has less benefit now than it has had in any other point in it's history.

Likewise blood doping, is micro-dosing as effective as blood bags or EPO? No, so once more it is probably at it's lowest value point compared to previous usage. CERA is also detectable of course and limited by the ABP.

So as I said, in terms of blood vector doping, we are as close to the pre EPO era as we are likely to get.

HGH is the exception as it is still undetectable and I don't think it really show's up on the ABP. Could be wrong.

Hold on, autologous transfusions are also still undetectable aren't they? With microdosing and new variants of EPO there are still ways to juice up to the BP parameters, thereafter it's up to the judgement of an expert employed by the UCI (stop me if I'm wrong on this) to determine suspicion/guilt. It's hard to say that cycling is effectively back to the pre-EPO era. Then the first small fry have been popped for GW-501516 which is totally unconnected to blood doping. IMO there is still advantage to be had. Realistically I don't think clean guys are winning at GTs and in the Ardennes alongside the "old school" riders.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

The point missed or ignored by many is that the prescribed limits, also limit performance enhancement to the point where clean riders can compete. This is not claiming that the ABP works, just that it limits the dopers to nearly believable levels.

So Dan Martin can beat dopers because they are limited to a level that is achievable clean.

The problem is that too many riders are bumping up against this limit, making it impossible to tell who's clean and who isn't based on performance alone.

THe ABP does not track testosterone. Or other hormone levels. If you reduce OOC testing (as they have), people can train very, very hard by using recovery doping that will not necessarily show up in blood parameters. Add the fact that OOC is reduced, and the chance of being caught is diminished again.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Likewise blood doping, is micro-dosing as effective as blood bags or EPO? No, so once more it is probably at it's lowest value point compared to previous usage. CERA is also detectable of course and limited by the ABP.

Is microdosing as effective as EPO? Not sure what you mean here, but Veloclinic showed that microdosing EPO is in fact more effective than the previous protocol of large subcutaneous injections, as it does not have as significant diuretic effect - ie allows blood plasma to remain constant.

 

[Taxus4a]

Thats the true question.

Just like with the EPO 50% rule.

''Great, now we can dope up to 50%''.

Riders then switched to insuline, hgh, perfluorcarbon, actovegin, for the extra bonus of course.

When riders from friggin Costa Rica get popped for GW501...

Come on.

Doping is always 10 steps in front of the testers, hell, even anti - depressants can be used for doping. Spank that inner chimp.

Not every form of doping is blood related. No way. It is the fastest way but no way the only way.

Big Pharma loves cycling.

edit: do not expect an answer to these kinda questions

A costarican friend that raced there, told me this winter: if Contador comes here, he cant win. And Colombia is worse.
I know who riders use things in Costa Rica, I dont know exactly what, and I knew about two of those four riders caught.
Things there are like here some time ago. There are lot of poor people there that they do not matter.
Gregory Brenes stoped Vuelta a Costa Rica two years ago asking for more controls.
A Vuelta al Tachira a rider riding there told to a friend: someone told me Loteria del Tachira is everybody about 55 hematocrit.. some riders asked him for cycling clothes and wanted to pay with EPO. One of them told him a day: Eyy!, In Europe you cant use neddles, can you? And he thought to himself: and you as well, but you does not matter...He sow people with needles doping in the hotel, there is normal.
Thinks are like that... if you want clean cycling: go to Asia, I mean not Turkia, where could be some dopers, I mean oriental riders from Japan or so...
Africa is the same.
But America is another thing.
In Europe there are serious controls. UCI left races as Colombia, Tachira, RCN to his own rules...but the level is really hight, Henao could get Colombia once, but some riders beat him usually in those races.
RCN 2011:

1.- 34 COL19840828 INFANTINO,Rafael ELITE EPM - UNE 33:21:04
2.- 14 COL19820102 RODAS,Julian ELITE GOB DE ANT-INDEPORTES ANT a 5:04
3.- 40 COL19751015 PARRA,Ivan Ramiro ELITE EPM - UNE a 5:40
4.- 151 COL19880115 ATAPUMA,Darwin ELITE POLICIA NACIONAL a 6:00
5.- 11 COL19871210 HENAO,Sergio Luis ELITE GOB DE ANT-INDEPORTES ANT a 6:50
6.- 32 COL19801022 ORTEGA,Mauricio ELITE EPM - UNE a 8:04
7.- 141 COL19770326 GIRALDO,Alexander ELITE EXITO-BOSI-IND ANT-RD SUE a 10:16
8.- 163 CRC19880421 BRENES,Gregory ELITE MOVISTAR TEAM a 12:42
9.- 115 COL19890305 RIVERA,Oscar SUB23 UNE - EPM a 13:11
10.- 31 COL19810409 BAEZ,Giovanni ELITE EPM - UNE a 13:12
11.- 170 BOL19850109 SOLIZ,Oscar ELITE MOVISTAR TEAM a 14:29
12.- 114 COL19910710 MONTOYA,Juan David SUB23 UNE - EPM a 15:33
13.- 132 COL19840205 SERNA,Alejandro ELITE ESSA-INDSTDER-FMESAN-PCHI a 15:45
14.- 8 COL19870707 CHAPARRO,Didier ELITE GW SHIMANO-CHEC-EDEQ-ENVI a 16:23
15.- 7 COL19860611 MONTOYA,Arley De J ELITE GW SHIMANO-CHEC-EDEQ-ENVI a 17:54
16.- 186 COL19910903 OSPINA,Argiro SUB23 FABR LICORES- ANT IDEA a 25:37

Atapuma is not the same here, but he is strong, he deserve to be in Europe....I would say Movistar riders were clean, I am not sure, I know well Gregory, he is really talented, I could bet for him. It would be possible Henao were clean, and the same for Ospina, but the others... yeah, they are talented for his hight hematocric, but they use a lot of medicin.

Infantino werent beatable for any european rider in that race, even Froome, Contador, Nibali,...

The last ITT was 17 Km, this climb and a little more flat:

Intantino did 1 34 COL19840828 INFANTINO,Rafael ELITE EPM - UNE 00:40:05

25 km/hour with humidity, hot and hight altitude, and the last of 13 days of race...

Infantino was racing in Italy for Amica Chips, he is not old, he is as Nibali, if he is so strong that can beat Henao clearly why is not riding in Europe again? Maybe he is good, but not so good

If you think that in those countries some people are using a strange drug, it is going to be worse in Europe, you are very wrong in my opinion.

And for me this is a pity, I would like to see Gregory again in Europe, he come back just to be part of Movistar continental, but he can t get lot of good results there...

 

[More Strides than Rides]

What I want to hear from JV is how much gain he thinks riders can get while still not tripping the ABP. Then I want to hear how much additional gain can be had by using drugs to reduce a rider's weight.

The way I see it, doping is similar to investing. Money naturally flows to where it will get the most gain, taking risk into account. Reduce possible gains or increase risk in one class of investments and money will simply flow to another class of investments. With the APB restricting blood doping, dopers will seek out gains by other doping methods. The logical replacement is weight loss using a variety of doping products. Another replacement to concentrate on would be recovery drugs that will give a rider an edge over a long stage race.

I also want to know why the APB appears to be just about blood. What about hormone profiling? Why hasn't anyone been busted for T:E ratios fluctuating unnaturally?

Those are excellent questions. I would love to hear an answer.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

It's quite odd to hear people simultaneously completely dismissing the effect of the EPO test and passport, while talking about the importance of non-oxygen vector doping of a sort that EPO had previously rendered trivial. Now, it's certainly true that riders and doctors have been looking for ways other than blood tampering to get an effect, but the importance of that search is precisely that its a reaction to the limitations that now exist on blood doping.

As far as methods like weight loss drugs are concerned, they must surely exist and may well be altering the "natural" hierarchy within the peloton. But as of yet - and only as of yet - they do not appear to have had a significant positive effect on average climbing speeds. Now, that may be because they chiefly aid riders who would otherwise be in the grupetto, in which case they could be important without necessarily either ruling out clean winners or giving the guys who are the very best climbers anyway much additional advantage. That remains to be seen.

 

[taiwan]

I was responding yo a poster overstating the situation in the opposite way, saying the BP had neutered blood doping and if riders couldn't jack their hematocrit right up they couldn't gain an advantage. The BP is not a silver bullet and the EPO test can be beaten. I was talking about other techniques just to illustrate that doping is getting more sophisticated.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

As far as methods like weight loss drugs are concerned, they must surely exist and may well be altering the "natural" hierarchy within the peloton. But as of yet - and only as of yet - they do not appear to have had a significant positive effect on average climbing speeds. Now, that may be because they chiefly aid riders who would otherwise be in the grupetto, in which case they could be important without necessarily either ruling out clean winners or giving the guys who are the very best climbers anyway much additional advantage. That remains to be seen.

You mean there are riders that used to be in the groupetto that are now on or off the front of the peloton!?