Great list, thanks so much. The first link, back in the early phases of his career, really opened my eyes. I did not realize that the American media, at least some in the media, appreciated the magnitude of Lemond’s talent before he had won a TDF.
But one question and one comment. The question: I recall an interview with Lemond in which he said that if EPO had appeared when he was younger, he would have been very tempted to take it—that had he not been near the end of his career, he might have ended up doping. A remarkably honest statement, though it seems to conflict with other things he has said about doping, e.g., that he needed to be clean as a way of maintaining a "purity" that had been compromised by his sexual abuse. I haven’t been able to find this interview again. Does anyone know where this remark appears?
The comment is to this statement that appears in the link provided by Mas:
My wattage, relative to VO2 Max...a VO2 Max of 92 or 93 in a fully recovered way...I think I was capable of producing 450 to 460 watts. The truth is, even at the Tour de France, my Tour de France climb times up l'Alpe d'Huez yielded a wattage of around 380 and 390. That was the historic norm for Hinault and myself. You've got times going back many, many years. But what was learned recently, in the last 5 years, was that when you start the Tour de France, you start with a normal hematocrit of, say, 45 percent. By the time you finish, it's probably down 10 or 15 percent. Which means my VO2 Max dropped 10 or 15 percent. So that's why I was never producing the same wattage.
We now know this is not entirely correct. While HT does drop as GL says, total Hb does not, and though this is counter-intuitive, studies suggest that VO2 Max does not drop. In fact, some studies in which the blood of subjects has been diluted to lower HT have found that VO2 Max actually increases, perhaps because the less viscous blood flows more easily. Such studies have not been carried out in elite riders, but at the least we can conclude there is no evidence that lowered HT in a GT would result in a lower VO2 Max.
How, then, can one account for the discrepancy between GL’s VO2 Max and wattage? Other factors, such as efficiency, might have lowered GL's wattage. If that were the case, even fresh in a laboratory, he would not be able to put out the high wattages seemingly predicted by his VO2 Max. However, I'm guessing that much of the discrepancy did result from a decline during a GT. Not a decline in HT, but a decline in the strength of his muscles, so they were unable to make full use of all that oxygen. This would indeed result in a lower VO2 Max, not because the blood was unable to carry the usual amount of oxygen, but because the muscles could not process this level of oxygen.
As Lemond further notes, his wattage levels were generally lower those of the best riders who followed him in the nineties and beyond, and this is taken by many of us as evidence of doping. Part of the effect of doping would be to stabilize HT in a GT, which means actually increasing Hb. But another critical factor would be accelerating recovery stage to stage, so the muscles could process all that additional oxygen. AFAIK, no one has ever measured VO2 Max in riders known to be blood doping at the time, but Lemond’s strong implication, which I tend agree with, is that there would be levels higher than any he attained.
In addition, as has been documented in studies of EPO, time to exhaustion at submaximal levels of oxygen intake is greatly increased. While this doesn't account for the much greater wattage levels in doped riders, it would help explain how riders with a possibly lower VO2 Max that GL, even doped, could beat him in the early nineties. It could also contribute to the greater overall average speeds in the TDF, since most of any Tour is ridden at submaximal levels. And it would explain how souped up domestiques, such as those at USPS back in the day, and possibly at Sky today, could tire out elite climbers even if the latter had higher VO2 Max values.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram