- Jun 19, 2009
Be careful with your accusations - I have never said Lance was a good (or bad) responder.Merckx index said:RR was very obviously trying to argue that the article provided evidence that EPO provides different levels of performance enhancement for different individuals. There is nothing in that article that supports that.
As an aside, I find it interesting that some of you change tactics in the middle of an argument. Was it a better program, or was LA just a better responder? If the latter, no need to bring in Ferrari at all. OTOH, if he was a better responder, those same articles you claim show wide variation in responding to EPO (I can't access the latest link offered, so can't comment on it) would also indicate that LA would definitely not be the only one, and probably not the greatest responder.
I have always maintained that LA's programme was better because of Ferrari and have never "changed tactics".
Fair enough - but LA broke his pre Tour season in to 2 parts.Merckx index said:I pointed that out in my post. But I also pointed out that he tried to win these races on occasion, and failed. Moreover, sincehe won TDS or Dauphine several times pre-Tour, the argument that he couldn't excel in a race that he entered primarily for training clearly does not hold.
Arrive in Europe Feb/March build up form for the late Classics, he was usually in good form but not top form.
Then in May he went off doing more 'training' or recon - and he was building his form to peak for July which meant he was always in pretty good form for the Dauphine and TdS in June - as they were his last prep races.