JV talks, sort of

[sniper]

by the way, the re-opening of the Freiburg/T-mobile investigation is related not only to the recent BRD-doping report, which has prompted politicians to ask for a new investigation into the Freiburg clinic.
It is also, and perhaps more directly, linked to Zabel's recent confession.
Zabel already talked to NADA for two hours and, in addition, the Freiburg public prosecutors have made him an offer to talk in exchange for lesser punishment.
http://www.badische-zeitung.de/frei...ten-die-chefs-der-sportmedizin--74084103.html
Race Radio noticed recently that Zabel might well turn out to have loose lips and spill beans on people who have hitherto been able to dodge bullets. I'm guessing Klier is one of them.

 

[Race Radio]

by the way, the re-opening of the Freiburg/T-mobile investigation is related not only to the recent BRD-doping report, which has prompted politicians to ask for a new investigation into the Freiburg clinic.
It is also, and perhaps more directly, linked to Zabel's recent confession.
Zabel already talked to NADA for two hours and, in addition, the Freiburg public prosecutors have made him an offer to talk in exchange for lesser punishment.
http://www.badische-zeitung.de/frei...ten-die-chefs-der-sportmedizin--74084103.html
Race Radio noticed recently that Zabel might well turn out to have loose lips and spill beans on people who have hitherto been able to dodge bullets. I'm guessing Klier is one of them.

Thanks for the link.....would be nice to see Kloden finally get sanctioned

I doubt Zabel had much to do with this, likely in the works for months.

 

[Beech Mtn]

As to why so many say they stopped doping in 2006 - very likely due to the anti-doping law Spain passed in November of that year.

The new set of laws foresees prison sentences from six months up to two years for involvement in illegal doping practices.

Now, this is not necessarily to say that everybody actually did stop doping in 2006, but those who were based in Spain (or doping at Spanish races) are not likely to want to confess to a crime and bring on a criminal investigation.

Spanish authorities are, in fact, conducting an investigation that is borne out of the USADA file, looking to see if there are any criminal charges to be made. However, since pretty much everybody "stopped doping" in 2006 before the law was passed, it's unlikely that anything will stick.

 

[sniper]

Thanks for the link.....would be nice to see Kloden finally get sanctioned

I doubt Zabel had much to do with this, likely in the works for months.

true. so probably unrelated indeed to zabel.

still, Klier could have seen the renewed interest in the freiburg clinic coming, given the ongoing BDR-doping investigation in which Freiburg plays a prominent role.

Or do you see different reasons behind (the timing of) Klier's confession?

 

[Beech Mtn]

Klier was teammates with Bobby Julich and Kevin Livingston. The time period should be outside statute of limitations, but then lying to cover up one's doping can possibly be used to toll SOL. Would USADA attempt to do this, or am I grasping at straws here?

edit-
And Julich now works for BMC. USADA -> Klier -> Julich -> Ochowicz

Nah, that's probably too much to hope for that some day, some way, Och would be investigated.

 

[Race Radio]

true. so probably unrelated indeed to zabel.

still, Klier could have seen the renewed interest in the freiburg clinic coming, given the ongoing BDR-doping investigation in which Freiburg plays a prominent role.

Or do you see different reasons behind (the timing of) Klier's confession?

Yes, I think there are different reasons. If it was connected to the BDR/NADA investigation I think he would have told his story to them, not USADA

 

[thehog]

Klier was teammates with Bobby Julich and Kevin Livingston. The time period should be outside statute of limitations, but then lying to cover up one's doping can possibly be used to toll SOL. Would USADA attempt to do this, or am I grasping at straws here?

edit-
And Julich now works for BMC. USADA -> Klier -> Julich -> Ochowicz

Nah, that's probably too much to hope for that some day, some way, Och would be investigated.

By that time Och will be in the Cayman island getting back to his roots in "shifting money".

 

[Beech Mtn]

By that time Och will be in the Cayman island getting back to his roots in "shifting money".

Speaking of Och and "shifting money," Och would be a possible pathway to Hein (He Who Needs Banning More Than Anyone, Even Ekimov). But to be honest, I was making too big a reach to hope Julich -> Och.

 

[Race Radio]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/german-anti-doping-agency-responds-to-kliers-supsension

NADA says they are very supportive of USADA and the sanction

"The USADA today issued a press release saying that the former athlete and current sport director for the American pro-cycling team Garmin-Sharp Andreas Klier has been suspended for six months," read the statement. "Klier lived in Belgium from 2001 to 2010, and did not have a German licence. From 2001 to 2007, he rode for the Telekom/T-Mobile team."

"The NADA worked closely with the USADA during the proceedings. It accompanied the case from the start and was also present at the discussions with Andreas Klier. He made a comprehensive confession and admitted to the use of forbidden substances and methods during his active career. The NADA and the WADA will carefully evaluate this information and use it in their future anti-doping work. The NADA welcomes this confession, which supports the work for a clean sport."

"The German [federation] continues to be available to all those who want to talk about their doping past and support clean sport."

 

[Dear Wiggo]

1. Examining closely what was done by dopers who (allegedly) stopped doping 7 years ago to help combat present day doping practices: #fail
2. I am pretty sure court cases involving many witnesses expect different stories, not all the same stories, as if they were rehearsed. This "stopped doping in 2006" thing is looking ridiculous.
3. Spain enacting anti-doping laws motivating riders to stop doping in 2006 sounds like a good theory, but there's lots of races and lots of racers, and doping in-race (IC) is IMO, less important than OOC doping, where you spend most of your time. A large load of 80 race days netts you 280 days of training with the best help known to the pharmaceutical world. Not buying it.
4. W.T.F is Klier spewing about "riders of today are not subject to the same temptations". What an utter crock. Just. WTF!?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

1. Examining closely what was done by dopers who (allegedly) stopped doping 7 years ago to help combat present day doping practices: #fail
2. I am pretty sure court cases involving many witnesses expect different stories, not all the same stories, as if they were rehearsed. This "stopped doping in 2006" thing is looking ridiculous.
3. Spain enacting anti-doping laws motivating riders to stop doping in 2006 sounds like a good theory, but there's lots of races and lots of racers, and doping in-race (IC) is IMO, less important than OOC doping, where you spend most of your time. A large load of 80 race days netts you 280 days of training with the best help known to the pharmaceutical world. Not buying it.
4. W.T.F is Klier spewing about "riders of today are not subject to the same temptations". What an utter crock. Just. WTF!?

Little Levi admitted doping up to 2007, theres a large part of your theory gone.

And we don't have all witnesses or confessions.
These are the guys who cracked first, probably the reluctant ones on a program.
The next ones will be all the redacted names, that another 20. Doubt any of them who were still riding beyond 06 stopped.

 

[the sceptic]

Sorry, couldnt help myself but had to post this quote.

VN: That being said, how do you match up against such a powerful team?
CVV: When you’re racing on your home soil, you’re that much more relaxed; you’re instantly 10 percent better. Our team has fared well in every race we’ve done over here in the United States. I don’t think we’re going to necessarily be outclassed but we’ll see. From day one it’s already going to be really hard; with that circuit race in Aspen, we’ll know right away what we’re dealing with.

Instantly 10% better Now we know why the vuelta and giro are always dominated by the natives.

 

[Ferminal]

Yes, if there was a three week GT in the USA he could top5.

 

[Galic Ho]

Now that you mention it. The math is terrible.

Mayo 55.51 in the ITT.

The Dawg 59.00 after 220km.

That's around 5%, no?

Jezus!

55'51" = 3351 seconds. 12% of that is 402.12 thus 402 seconds rounding down. Meaning the time Froome needed to do was 3753. This is what he did based on your time listed hog.

59'00" = 3540 seconds. Thus well below 12%.

So we simply determine the difference and divide by the original number to get the actual percentage.

3540-3351 = 189 seconds

189/3351 = 5.64%

Adding in everything said, it makes Froome's time even more absurd. In a 3 week GT, at the back end of the race, after 220km versus a 7 day event with an ITT in the prime of the EPO era by a well known and CAUGHT doper Chris Froome can still be within 5% of Heras time and record.

Totally legit right? Yeah, nothing to see here. Nothing to see!

 

[Spencer the Half Wit]

55'51" = 3351 seconds. 12% of that is 402.12 thus 402 seconds rounding down. Meaning the time Froome needed to do was 3753. This is what he did based on your time listed hog.

59'00" = 3540 seconds. Thus well below 12%.

So we simply determine the difference and divide by the original number to get the actual percentage.

3540-3351 = 189 seconds

189/3351 = 5.64%

Adding in everything said, it makes Froome's time even more absurd. In a 3 week GT, at the back end of the race, after 220km versus a 7 day event with an ITT in the prime of the EPO era by a well known and CAUGHT doper Chris Froome can still be within 5% of Heras time and record.

Totally legit right? Yeah, nothing to see here. Nothing to see!

What would be legit? 58.31 by Moncoutie in 1999?

 

[Galic Ho]

Apples and Oranges. Apart from RR, Moncoutie is regarded as being an absurdly gifted rider who could have done a lot better if he crossed the line either totally or more than he did, per how you view him.

As I said, 3 week GT, final week on top of 220km vs a chrono in the Dauphine. Big difference.

Until this years event, I was under the impression JV had the record myself. Then again, to defend Froome people started dragging up Dauphine times. Such people would undoubtedly make horrible accountants and finance consultants. Gotta put it in perspective, keep it real. Compare like things. Comparing GT times is fine, even if the variables fluctuate...it gives you a reasonable idea. One week races vs 3 weeks? Put down the hash pipe and get with the times is what needs to be said.

 

[Galic Ho]

by the way, the re-opening of the Freiburg/T-mobile investigation is related not only to the recent BRD-doping report, which has prompted politicians to ask for a new investigation into the Freiburg clinic.
It is also, and perhaps more directly, linked to Zabel's recent confession.
Zabel already talked to NADA for two hours and, in addition, the Freiburg public prosecutors have made him an offer to talk in exchange for lesser punishment.
http://www.badische-zeitung.de/frei...ten-die-chefs-der-sportmedizin--74084103.html
Race Radio noticed recently that Zabel might well turn out to have loose lips and spill beans on people who have hitherto been able to dodge bullets. I'm guessing Klier is one of them.

So Zabel did the dirty on his old mates hey?

Oh that is priceless! Even if he didn't, if he stirred up a hornets nest, I can't imagine his son will be having a swell time next year with BMC.

Back to 2006 and it being the year everything and everyone, bar Levi and Lance apparently went clean. Out of everyone, assume for a second if this were true. Who was screwed the pooch the most? I'd say Floyd. Won Tour. Found doping. Results stripped. Next year everyone races clean. Go figure! If only he'd waited a year, maybe all he'd have to have put up with was a doped Chicken. Maybe!

 

[Spencer the Half Wit]

Apples and Oranges. Apart from RR, Moncoutie is regarded as being an absurdly gifted rider who could have done a lot better if he crossed the line either totally or more than he did, per how you view him.

As I said, 3 week GT, final week on top of 220km vs a chrono in the Dauphine. Big difference.

Until this years event, I was under the impression JV had the record myself. Then again, to defend Froome people started dragging up Dauphine times. Such people would undoubtedly make horrible accountants and finance consultants. Gotta put it in perspective, keep it real. Compare like things. Comparing GT times is fine, even if the variables fluctuate...it gives you a reasonable idea. One week races vs 3 weeks? Put down the hash pipe and get with the times is what needs to be said.

Don't have a pipe, prefer rolling them.

Just askin' some questions.

What would be legit for a 220km stage in the second week of a GT, as obviously 59.00 isn't?

Regards Dauphine times v TDF times are the Dauphine times on average faster than the tdf times?

Using the Alpe, are the fastest times set in the Dauphine or the tdf? I can't seem to find the times for the Dauphine to compare them with the tdf

 

[thehog]

Don't have a pipe, prefer rolling them.

Just askin' some questions.

What would be legit for a 220km stage in the second week of a GT, as obviously 59.00 isn't?

Regards Dauphine times v TDF times are the Dauphine times on average faster than the tdf times?

Using the Alpe, are the fastest times set in the Dauphine or the tdf? I can't seem to find the times for the Dauphine to compare them with the tdf

Dauphine was a ITT. Not a stage with 220km prior to Ventoux.

Slight difference

 

[thehog]

55'51" = 3351 seconds. 12% of that is 402.12 thus 402 seconds rounding down. Meaning the time Froome needed to do was 3753. This is what he did based on your time listed hog.

59'00" = 3540 seconds. Thus well below 12%.

So we simply determine the difference and divide by the original number to get the actual percentage.

3540-3351 = 189 seconds

189/3351 = 5.64%

Adding in everything said, it makes Froome's time even more absurd. In a 3 week GT, at the back end of the race, after 220km versus a 7 day event with an ITT in the prime of the EPO era by a well known and CAUGHT doper Chris Froome can still be within 5% of Heras time and record.

Totally legit right? Yeah, nothing to see here. Nothing to see!

Correct which makes the Race Radio tweet utterly ridiculously as well having poor math!

 

[Spencer the Half Wit]

Dauphine was a ITT. Not a stage with 220km prior to Ventoux.

Slight difference

Yes, I'm aware of that. My questions still remains, what is a legit time up Ventoux, as obviously 59.00 isn't.

Further, since GH raised the issue, are one week stage race climbs faster than GT climbs on average?

 

[the sceptic]

when JV gets that mba he should start his own Tv-show and the winner gets to be his personal assistant.

 

[Galic Ho]

Don't have a pipe, prefer rolling them.

Just askin' some questions.

What would be legit for a 220km stage in the second week of a GT, as obviously 59.00 isn't?

Regards Dauphine times v TDF times are the Dauphine times on average faster than the tdf times?

Using the Alpe, are the fastest times set in the Dauphine or the tdf? I can't seem to find the times for the Dauphine to compare them with the tdf

My apologies. I thought you were bashing on Moncoutie.

Here is a link to the top Tour times for Alpe d'Huez. Top 200. Of the list...Luis Herrera and Lemond have clean times. Maybe Fignon...amphetamines only. The rest? Blood doping and epo. All of them...well to varying degrees as the times and years show. Make no mistake...Sastre was a big time doper. 3 sub 40 minute times in the Tour. That's alien territory.

http://www.thehubsa.co.za/forum/topic/126865-alpe-dhuez-all-time-top-200-list/

Wasn't Ventoux in the third week? Take Alpe d'Huez...Luis Herrera arguably has the fastest legit time on that list. 160th for one of the most gifted climbers of all time. He did it in 41'50" which is just behind the times Evans group did in 2008. Naturally I'd say Lemond's 146th placed time is the fastest clean time at 41'42" but that was done with him drafting two EPO dopers in 91. So many times are faster from 91 on that list and from guys who two years before were getting annihilated from Lemond who himself was a minute plus slower.

So let's take a look at Herrera versus Pantani shall we?

Marco managed 36'50" one time back in 1995. I have another record of 36'40" but the first time is fine...don't wanna make Marco look even more absurd do I?

36'50" = 2210 seconds

Herrera did 41'50" = 2510

2510-2210 = 300 seconds. Or 5 minutes exactly.

Note for Froome the difference in time on a longer and harder climb was already LOWER than this shorter climb. Alpe d'Huez is also shielded from the wind. Mt Ventoux is not and Froome rode a lot of that climb with no wind breaker.

So Froome on a longer climb, after a massive stage (note the Alpe d'Huez stages are also rarely over 180-90 km not 220km...it matters despite what some tell you) was 189 seconds off the record or just over 3 minutes. In contrast we have Herrera who was exactly 5 minutes off the record.

So to get the percentage difference we do the following:

300/2210 = 13.57%. Now that is just time, but it's well over double what Froome's time was and this is for a much shorter distance. How about Lemond's times from non epo ball busting years? Well they are on the forum but I can't be bothered to find them. But they were in the 42' minute range, just over from memory, so just outside the top 200 times. Maybe a minute slower in 89 than Delgado and Fignon from memory. Still fast, but over 15% down.

Take the 1986 reported time Lemond and Fignon did after breaking an entire peloton on the previous mountain and riding off alone. Note ENTIRE PELOTON. 48'00". Thus:

48'00" = 2880 seconds or a difference of 670 seconds. So 11 minutes and a bit. No biggie right?

Percentage wise that gives us 670/2210 = 30.1%

Now the analysis part is that was just two men, ridng solo for half a stage. So naturally it will be slower. But note, nobody could go with them and they are still so much slower it isn't funny. They won 8 Tours between themselves and barring a shotgun incident and EPO, they'd have won 10 Tours no sweat and maybe more. I still reckon Lemond could have gotten 7 if he was never shot and epo wasn't invented. But that is wishing.

So taking Heras Ventoux time and let's say a safe estimate of 15% given Herrera was a climbing freak...kind of like what is said about Quintana...and assuming the best all round GC would be slower than Herrera who was a pure climber what does that give us time wise?

Heras Ventoux record in just the Dauphine:

55'51" = 3351 seconds

3351*15% = 502.65 seconds or round up to 503.

Adding the 502 seconds to Heras time, we get 8'23" difference.

So 55'51" plus 8'23" we get 1:4'14". This is a whole 5 minutes and 14 seconds SLOWER than Froome. This isn't even considering a safe estimate for percentage times done above was done using EPO Tour times versus 80 Tour times for Alpe d'Huez. Ventoux is Dauphine versus Tour.

So who was clean? I sure as hell don't think Froome was. How much time did Evans lose this year, when Gilbert and Morabito pulled him up? 8'46". John Gadret did 4'56" slower than Froome and Jan Bakelants did 5'04" slower. They were in 22nd and 23rd place. BTW Gadret bagged the crap out of Froome and Sky. So I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. Plus he rides for a French team and isn't a tool.

Now I'm not saying they were super elite. Granted I just found out this was stage 15...but that is double the race days of a Dauphine Ventoux ascent. So less fatigue at this stage than say in the last 3 days. Let's assume Dan Martin is clean, or relatively so. He was 14th 2'36" so about half the time of Gadret and Bakelants. Martin tanked after this stage. He totally bombed out. Is he the best clean rider in the peloton? I don't think so. I still see WAY TOO MANY guys going way too fast. They're all simply not that good. Check the list here:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tour-de-france/stage-15/results

Take the Alpe d'Huez times. Fignon and Delgado just managed under 42' in 1989 over Lemond. These guys won 6 Tours between them. They were the only riders at the front. The only ones. Everyone else dropped. Yet here we have Richie Porte, faking on Ventoux, less than 10 seconds behind Martin. That's not normal. It was the Chiefs, the Heads of State, the Big Boys only back in the 80s. Now we still have every random making a show of it. Guys who clearly were doped in recent years and yet despite dropping form, like Contador (take your pick why) they're still darn fast despite Froome whooping them.

Make no mistake. Froome could have gone faster. A lot faster. I think he held back. You want a safe number for what might be possible. 10-12% of a doped time. With a qualifier. The remaining guys behind this time get smashed. Just like the 80s. But we still have a lot of riders going under this % and I don't think it's normal given Lemond and Herrera were freaks of nature. Good from the get go.

BTW I like the number RR came up with 12% slower than the record. I'd buy that. Problem is like I said, Froome was under half of that, his history is a joke, his physique is a mockery on common sense, Sky are a joke and we're comparing a week long races chrono with the first stage of the third week of racing that topped 200km. Big difference! Summary...the 12% range seems to me like a good guess for most mountain stages at MINIMUM. Longer climbs like Ventoux should need more IMO. Also, always look at the followers, what they did. Froome was absurd...but so were a lot of others.

As for power meters and wattages...I don't care. General rule of thumb. Time wise, they are still way too fast and most here know it. Anyone doing over 5.7 W/kg on Ventoux is suspect. Anyone. ****** this 6.0 W/kg rule. Also Spencer...check the bragging Tim Kerrison was doing about Froome and Porte's Madone times. So close to Armstrong's it isn't funny. Ridiculously close. LA was doped to the gills when it he did it too.

 

[Galic Ho]

Yes, I'm aware of that. My questions still remains, what is a legit time up Ventoux, as obviously 59.00 isn't.

Further, since GH raised the issue, are one week stage race climbs faster than GT climbs on average?

I know the Dauphine 2010 time up Alpe d'Huez was only 42' something. The one where Brajkovic and Contador went alone. Might have been 43' and a bit. They dropped everyone.

It's fair to say a lot of the peloton have either extracted blood and thus aren't gonna put the effort in, or are riding clean/cleaner than they would have in the Armstrong days. They do go slower in the week long races now for he most part than days gone by.

When a lot of GT's come around, the times seem to go either the same or faster. Just depends on the year and who is doing what. Would have to do a climb by climb analysis and look at times. Sorry, but I don't have lists for all the times. I only had the full list of Alpe d'Huez times this year. Wish I had more but I don't.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

36'50" = 2210 seconds

Herrera did 41'50" = 2510

2510-2210 = 300 seconds. Or 5 minutes exactly.

I am surprised that someone with your self-proclaimed talent at statistics needed to convert that to seconds and then back to minutes to get the answer.

Still you got there end... so good for you.