LeMond III

[Semper Fidelis]

Re: Re:

You are inclined to give LeMond a pass (your words on the LeMondII link) with respect to V02 score due to a treadmill test.
I took a treadmill test back in 1990 and then a more scientific test later that year in 1990. My tread mill score was higher.

The thing is I think Greg and everyone else trying to figure out performance exact via V02 is pure Bull ****.

Actually, that discrepancy always puzzled me. I just deferred to Veritas, who seemed to know more about this than I did.

But how much higher was your treadmill value, Glenn? That seems to support the point that different types of tests give different results. Just because you scored higher on a treadmill than a bike doesn’t mean everyone else would.

More to the point, though, if Greg was transfusing blood in the late 70s and early 80s, as Sniper wants us to believe, why was his V02 max only 79? What did he do later that pushed it up to the 90s? Do you want to argue that the 79 value was clean? But I thought Squaw Valley was a major doping laboratory. If they were testing the effects of doping, wouldn’t they want to measure V02 max under those conditions?

Maybe that was a clean score, and he did much better doped? But then why did he hide the higher doped value at the time, but later publicize it? In fact, if he was doping, and didn’t want people to know, why would he put out a number in the 90s at any time? Wouldn’t that cast suspicion on him?

In fact, his actual power outputs on the road were quite consistent with a far lower V02max. In that famous ADH stage in which he and Hinault finished together, he did 48 minutes, which is an absolute joke by today’s standards. Sure, different tactics in those days, yadda, yadda, yadda, but AFAIK, the best ADH time pre-90s was slightly under 42 minutes, by Fignon in 1989. That stands up fairly well to current times, but is far worse than what was routinely done in the 90s. You don’t need a V02 max of 90 to do that, you certainly don’t need to rationalize a time like that by claiming you’re 90 or better.

There’s a lot of interesting information on this thread, kudos to Sniper for compiling it, but the case against Lemond comes down to something pretty simple: did he take blood transfusions beginning in his teens? Because if he didn’t, his performances indicate an extraordinary natural talent, entirely consistent with his later TDF victories. We can speculate that he was taking steroids or whatever, but there’s very little reason to believe they would make that much of a difference. It’s either blood manipulation or nothing.

If he was transfusing, he must have been doing so before major one day races he won as an amateur and pro, and also, of course, during the Tour. We have to believe he transfused in the hotel on rest days. No doubt possible, but it seems like a stretch to me. Remember, these were the pre-Armstrong years when riders like Greg didn’t focus just on the Tour. They had a full schedule of spring classics, and sometimes the Giro-Tour double. Would a rider who depended on blood transfusions really be competitive in all those races? Yes, I know, in his later years he performed poorly up till the Tour, but not in his prime years.

I also think all the discussion on mitochondrial myopathy is irrelevant. What difference does it make whether he did or did not suffer from it? It’s not needed to explain the decline in his performance, assuming there even was a decline (has anyone actually compared his power outputs pre- and post-1990?).

The score was 8 higher. At the time I did not think about it. I was in or think I was in the same shape for both tests. I only say that based on my performances at the time. Also I was a distance runner and not a cyclist.

With respect to the discussion on mitochondrial myopathy - the comparison of numbers for power would be interesting.

 

[gillan1969]

Re: Re:

...
Look at the bolded above; that's borderline racist and has no basis in fact. The only fact is that they hired Otto Jacome, who is a Mexican national. The rest is pure speculation. Then let's look at what you wrote up above:

John Swanson

Otto was a cycling coach in the San Francisco bay area and was hired by Bob to train both him and Greg when Greg was 15. Greg and Bob did several local races together between 76 and 78.
That's not speculation.
Speculation is *why* they hired a Mexican coach. Indeed I should've added an "imo" there.
Fact is, in those days (and probably still today), most PEDs were trafficked to the US from Mexico. Two factors of importance here:
1. many products were comparatively easily available over the counter in Mexico but more difficult to come by (or already illegal) in the US. This included steroids.
2. PED traffick between Mexico and the US had increased significantly after the 1968 Games in New Mexico. Those Games was also when/where the 'arms race' between the US and Russia/East Germany really picked up pace.

Then if you look at the changing roles of Otto from trainer/coach to 'confident' to 'soigneur', it just smells.
'Soigneur' in the 80s (and 90s and 2000s) was jargon for fixer. (Even Hampsten admits this in one interview.)
Jacome's role in the iron shot incident is similarly vague. And Otto simply was always there, afaict.

I had little time now, but do ask for links if you want me to back up any of the above (i.e. the things I state as 'fact'). I will provide later.

i think the point has been missed...he wasn't a 'mexican coach' he was an american (San Fransico) coach who was mexican...

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...
Lemond probably wasn't thinking when he said what he said...arguably when you are innocent you don't have to maintain any narrative or pretence...you just speak and if you are prone to rambling...you...eh ramble...

i meant that at least we know when and where he tested his vo2 max test and who did the tests on him.
And of course I'm talking about 2015, not 2007 (those numbers are dodgy as...).
Note that even Jeroen admitted that Froome might have been doping to achieve those numbers in 2015.
So both the 2015 data and the 2007 fax nicely illustrate why caution is at all times warranted when riders provide numbers that are supposed to clear them from suspicions.
Imo we should make no exception for Lemond.

Froome has no credibility....period

have to agree here.

 

[gillan1969]

Re: Re:

...
Lemond probably wasn't thinking when he said what he said...arguably when you are innocent you don't have to maintain any narrative or pretence...you just speak and if you are prone to rambling...you...eh ramble...

i meant that at least we know when and where he tested his vo2 max test and who did the tests on him.
And of course I'm talking about 2015, not 2007 (those numbers are dodgy as...).
Note that even Jeroen admitted that Froome might have been doping to achieve those numbers in 2015.
So both the 2015 data and the 2007 fax nicely illustrate why caution is at all times warranted when riders provide numbers that are supposed to clear them from suspicions.
Imo we should make no exception for Lemond.

Froome has no credibility....period

have to agree here.

agreed...however remember Lemonds numbers are being analysed in retrospect...VO2 numbers were interesting, as in they were of interest at that time...they weren't part of a doping narrative as there wasn't a doping narrative

Froome's numbers, on the other hand, are specifically driven by a doping narrative and one which is designed to portray him as clean

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...
Lemond probably wasn't thinking when he said what he said...arguably when you are innocent you don't have to maintain any narrative or pretence...you just speak and if you are prone to rambling...you...eh ramble...

i meant that at least we know when and where he tested his vo2 max test and who did the tests on him.
And of course I'm talking about 2015, not 2007 (those numbers are dodgy as...).
Note that even Jeroen admitted that Froome might have been doping to achieve those numbers in 2015.
So both the 2015 data and the 2007 fax nicely illustrate why caution is at all times warranted when riders provide numbers that are supposed to clear them from suspicions.
Imo we should make no exception for Lemond.

Froome has no credibility....period

have to agree here.

agreed...however remember Lemonds numbers are being analysed in retrospect...VO2 numbers were interesting, as in they were of interest at that time...they weren't part of a doping narrative as there wasn't a doping narrative

Froome's numbers, on the other hand, are specifically driven by a doping narrative and one which is designed to portray him as clean

fair enough for froome.

Lemond?
when is the first time he mentions those 90+ figures?
I think he was pretty much embroiled in a doping narrative by that time.
If you can show me he mentions those figures already in the 1990s, I will happily acknowledge your point.

 

[gillan1969]

Re: Re:

...
Lemond probably wasn't thinking when he said what he said...arguably when you are innocent you don't have to maintain any narrative or pretence...you just speak and if you are prone to rambling...you...eh ramble...

i meant that at least we know when and where he tested his vo2 max test and who did the tests on him.
And of course I'm talking about 2015, not 2007 (those numbers are dodgy as...).
Note that even Jeroen admitted that Froome might have been doping to achieve those numbers in 2015.
So both the 2015 data and the 2007 fax nicely illustrate why caution is at all times warranted when riders provide numbers that are supposed to clear them from suspicions.
Imo we should make no exception for Lemond.

Froome has no credibility....period

have to agree here.

agreed...however remember Lemonds numbers are being analysed in retrospect...VO2 numbers were interesting, as in they were of interest at that time...they weren't part of a doping narrative as there wasn't a doping narrative

Froome's numbers, on the other hand, are specifically driven by a doping narrative and one which is designed to portray him as clean

fair enough for froome.

Lemond?
when is the first time he mentions those 90+ figures?
I think he was pretty much embroiled in a doping narrative by that time.
If you can show me he mentions those figures already in the 1990s, I will happily acknowledge your point.

if truth is determined by the will to plough the depths of the internet then you win

Physiology and its application to cycling, and the media reporting of it, and cyclists understanding of it, moved considerably over Lemond's career...i think it's safe to say when applied retroactively they can be used to fill in gaps.....and that works both ways

 

[blutto]

Re: Re:

@merckxindex and scienceiscool:
agreed on all accounts.
Hence I don't attribute much value (if any) to the vo2 max debate.
For all we know Lemond pulled all those numbers out of his hat. We simply don't know.
And even if the numbers are real, we have no idea *how* they were achieved.

And hence I wonder what Lemond was thinking putting his numbers forward as evidence of his cleanlihood (and by extension of Lance's doping).
And I wonder on what grounds other posters are unquestioningly latching on to that argument.
Those numbers are not even a rumor of a rumor of a rumor. They're from the horse's mouth.
And good point re: Froome. Seems he has more cred on this particular issue than Lemond.

Lemond probably wasn't thinking when he said what he said...arguably when you are innocent you don't have to maintain any narrative or pretence...you just speak and if you are prone to rambling...you...eh ramble...

Froome has no credibility....period

....the problem with that line of thought is it was not a ramble or a few whoops words that could be taken out of context and it was not a one time event it happened over and over again....

Cheers

 

[GJB123]

Re: Re:

There is no evidence that Hagerman was anything more than an exercise physiologist with an academic appointment at Ohio University.

viewtopic.php?p=1915304#p1915304
viewtopic.php?p=1914388#p1914388

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_rowing_(men)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_rowing_(women)

@ sniper, you adressed various posts after this one. You might as well address this one also.

 

[Merckx index]

Re: Re:

The score was 8 higher. At the time I did not think about it. I was in or think I was in the same shape for both tests. I only say that based on my performances at the time. Also I was a distance runner and not a cyclist.

Apparently your experience is typical; values generally are higher on a treadmill than a stationary cycle, because of the larger muscle mass involved in running vs. cycling:

Sports Med. 1984 Mar-Apr;1(2):99-124.
Tests of maximum oxygen intake. A critical review.
Shephard RJ.

The determinants of endurance effort vary, depending upon the extent of the muscle mass that is activated. Large muscle work, such as treadmill running, is halted by impending circulatory failure; lack of venous return may compound the basic problem of an excessive cardiac work-load. If the task calls for use of a smaller muscle mass, there is ultimately difficulty in perfusing the active muscles, and glycolysis is halted by an accumulation of acid metabolites. Simple field tests of endurance, such as Cooper's 12-minute run and the Canadian Home Fitness Test, have some value in the rapid screening of large populations, but like other submaximal tests of human performance they lack the precision needed to advise the individual. The directly measured maximum oxygen intake (VO2 max) varies with the type of exercise. The highest values are obtained during uphill treadmill running, but well trained athletes often approach these values during performance of sport-specific tasks. Limitations of methodology and wide interindividual variations of constitutional potential limit the interpretation of maximum oxygen intake data in terms of personal fitness, exercise prescription and the monitoring of training responses. The main practical value of VO2 max measurement is in the functional assessment of patients with cardiorespiratory disease, since changes are then large relative to the precision of the test.

The difference was on average almost 10%. Another, more recent study of triathletes reported that treadmill values were about 6% higher than ergometer values:

http://www.jssm.org/vol2/n3/5/v2n3-5pdf.pdf

Note the above abstract implies that trained cyclists might have relatively higher values on an ergometer test, and this seems to be the case. E.g., this study found that the difference between the treadmill value and the cycle value was less for cyclists, though the treadmill values were still higher:

Eur J Appl Physiol. 2000 Feb;81(3):214-21.
Specificity of treadmill and cycle ergometer tests in triathletes, runners and cyclists.
Basset FA1, Boulay MR.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the viability of using a single test in which cardiorespiratory variables are measured, to establish training guidelines in running and/or cycling training activities. Six triathletes (two females and four males), six runners (two females and four males) and six males cyclists, all with 5.5 years of serious training and still involved in racing, were tested on a treadmill and cycle ergometer. Cardiorespiratory variables [e.g., heart rate (HR), minute ventilation, carbon dioxide output (VCO2)] were calculated relative to fixed percentages of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max; from 50 to 100%). The entire group of subjects had significantly (P < 0.05) higher values of VO2max on the treadmill compared with the cycle ergometer [mean (SEM) 4.7 (0.8) and 4.4 (0.9) l.min-1, respectively], and differences between tests averaged 10.5% for runners, 6.1% for triathletes and 2.8% for cyclists. A three-way analysis of variance using a 3 x 2 x 6 design (groups x tests x intensities) demonstrated that all factors yielded highly significant F-ratios (P < 0.05) for all variables between tests, even though differences in HR were only 4 beats.min-1. When HR was plotted against a fixed percentage of VO2max, a high correlation was found between tests. These results demonstrate that for triathletes, cyclists and runners, the relationship between HR and percentage of VO2max, obtained in either a treadmill or a cycle ergometer test, may be used independently of absolute VO2max to obtain reference HR values that can be used to monitor their running and/or cycling training bouts.

I did find one old study reporting that trained cyclists had higher values on an ergometer, but the ergometer values were also higher than what was measured in the velodrome:

Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1983;50(2):283-9.
VO2max of cyclists from treadmill, bicycle ergometer and velodrome tests.
Ricci J, Léger LA.
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to measure the VO2max of trained cyclists on the treadmill (means +/- SD = 54.7 +/- 6.3 ml kg-1 min-1), while riding a bicycle on a velodrome track at 100 rpm (53.7 +/- 7.8) and on the bicycle ergometer at 60 rpm (62.4 +/- 8.1): VO2max beeing the highest in the latter case (p less than 0.05). The highest maximal HR, 188 +/- 6 beats min-1, was observed during the treadmill test, while estimates of 184 +/- 6 and 179 +/- 7 were obtained for the velodrome and the bicycle ergometer tests, respectively. No significant differences were observed in the blood lactate concentrations (treadmill: 10.35 +/- 4.01 bicycle ergometer: 10.25 +/- 2.29 velodrome: 10.95 +/- 1.51 mmol L-1. In conclusion, bicycle ergometer tests might not be specific enough to evaluate the ability of trained cyclists to perform an endurance or aerobic task on the track. Trained cyclists, as opposed to untrained ones, appear to achieve higher VO2max on the bicycle ergometer as compared to the treadmill.

So it seems that the 79 value GL reported in 1977 or whenever probably would be a maximum estimate of what he would perform on an ergometer, though I'd be interested in a physiologist commenting on this. The other factor I think mentioned by Veritas was the elevation issue. Squaw Valley base camp has an elevation of about 1900 m. I believe there is a 5-6% decrease in V02 max at this altitude? Thus it's equivalent to about 84 at sea level. That would be a maximum, assuming he could perform as well on a cycling ergometer as a treadmill. But then again, maybe when he was measured at 90+, that was also on a treadmill?

So at age 15-16, before he had started a peak training program, he had the sea level equivalent of 84. Given a little maturing and training, that could be increased somewhat.

 

[HelmutRoole]

Re: Re:

...
Look at the bolded above; that's borderline racist and has no basis in fact. The only fact is that they hired Otto Jacome, who is a Mexican national. The rest is pure speculation. Then let's look at what you wrote up above:

John Swanson

Otto was a cycling coach in the San Francisco bay area and was hired by Bob to train both him and Greg when Greg was 15. Greg and Bob did several local races together between 76 and 78.
That's not speculation.
Speculation is *why* they hired a Mexican coach. Indeed I should've added an "imo" there.
Fact is, in those days (and probably still today), most PEDs were trafficked to the US from Mexico. Two factors of importance here:
1. many products were comparatively easily available over the counter in Mexico but more difficult to come by (or already illegal) in the US. This included steroids.
2. PED traffick between Mexico and the US had increased significantly after the 1968 Games in New Mexico. Those Games was also when/where the 'arms race' between the US and Russia/East Germany really picked up pace.

Then if you look at the changing roles of Otto from trainer/coach to 'confident' to 'soigneur', it just smells.
'Soigneur' in the 80s (and 90s and 2000s) was jargon for fixer. (Even Hampsten admits this in one interview.)
Jacome's role in the iron shot incident is similarly vague. And Otto simply was always there, afaict.

I had little time now, but do ask for links if you want me to back up any of the above (i.e. the things I state as 'fact'). I will provide later.

i think the point has been missed...he wasn't a 'mexican coach' he was an american (San Fransico) coach who was mexican...

Are you sure about this? If true, he had no more access to the farmacias than any other American citizen.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

There is no evidence that Hagerman was anything more than an exercise physiologist with an academic appointment at Ohio University.

viewtopic.php?p=1915304#p1915304
viewtopic.php?p=1914388#p1914388

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_rowing_(men)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_rowing_(women)

@ sniper, you adressed various posts after this one. You might as well address this one also.

sure thing.

So what follows is the profile of the guy who in the late 1970s, together with the unblemished Ed Burke, did physiological testing on future champs Greg Lemond and Eric Heiden.

THE HAGERMAN FILE (with two Appendices)

In the late 60s, Hagerman makes a name for himself by doing different kinds of physiological testing with Olympic athletes, mainly rowers and pentathletes. He experiments with anabolic steroids on weightlifters in 1975 ("The effects of anabolic steroid ingestion on serum enzyme and urine 17 ketosteroid levels") and does cardio-respiratory conditioning on adolescents in 1976 ("The effects of conditioning on cardiorespiratory function in adolescent boys").

Now, that study from 1976 really is most revealing: it makes recommendations for future 'cardio-respiratory fitness' research on junior athletes, providing references to the works of a certain Ekblom, a certain Astrand, a certain Saltin and a certain Woldemar Gerschler. Indeed *that* Ekblom, *that* Astrand, *that* Saltin, and *that* Woldemar Gerschler. Together, those scholars/physiologists consituted the absolute creme de la creme of research into blood doping stretching from the late 40s to the early 70s, pioneering such methods as 'blood packing' and blood transfusions for athletic/competitive purposes.
More about Gerschler: viewtopic.php?p=1798584#p1798584
Astrand: viewtopic.php?p=1798590#p1798590
Ekblom & Saltin: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3372716/
For background on those three Scandinavian guys I can furthermore recommend the "Routledge Handbook of Drugs and Sport". Or simply search the Clinic archives for any of them.
I think most will agree, there was a bloody (pun intended) obvious reason for Hagerman to refer to the works of these guys.

Now, it is interesting to note that, before all that, Hagerman had already written a dissertation on the effects of altitude on soldiers on behalf of the US Defense Department in the 1960s. The US Defense department, where a certain Charles Drew had made a good name for himself in the 1940s (yes, that early) by successfully experimenting with blood transfusions and developing new blood storage methods. I haven't seen Hagerman's dissertation, but we can be fairly certain he knew Drew's work inside-out. (Drew: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_R._Drew)

Now then, briefly back to Dardik and Ariel, two guys who were later exposed as class-A frauds and quacks, and who had explicitly expressed the need to test PEDs on adolescents in order to close the gap with communist-bloc countries, both in publications (Ariel) and in several presentations in front of the USOC (Dardik). Testing PEDs (blood doping and anabolic steroids) on adolescent Olympic hopefuls with the aim of identifying 'outstanding athletes' and allowing them to compete with Russian and East German pharmaceutically enhanced athletes: that's what Dardik and Ariel's OTC plans were all about.
And that's where Hagerman comes into the picture. Irving Dardik and Gideon Ariel pick up Hagerman in the mid-70s, they join hands and open the OTC medical centres in Squaw Valley and Colorado Springs.

If, in the face of all this evidence, anybody is still reluctant to do the math on Hagerman or on the purpose of his role at the OTC, thats up to him/her. In my humble view, if it wiggles and quacks like a duck, and has duck-like feathers, it's probably a duck.

One astounding thing about all this is that, to my knowledge, nobody (neither Dardik, nor Ariel, nor Hagerman, nor Don Miller who facilitated the whole thing) has ever been held accountable for what went on there in the late 70s. I don't think there has been any kind of inquiry into that episode, despite the fact that the aim to test PEDs on adolescents was explicitly formulated.

Bibliography
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fredrick_Hagerman
https://ready2row.wordpress.com/2015/04/29/great-quotes-and-boats-11/
http://highperformancerowing.net/journal/?currentPage=6
https://books.google.pl/books?id=pUQEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA48&dq=hagerman+altitude+training&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=hagerman%20altitude%20training&f=false
http://www.arielnet.com/articles/show/adi-pub-01202/the-center-of-attention
http://www.arielnet.com/articles/show/adi-pub-01076/md-aims-to-imppove-nation-s-health-using-olympic-athletes-as-walking-fitness-labs

APPENDIX I: Some Hagerman trivia:
- was involved with the U.S. Olympic and U.S. world championship rowing team from 1972 through 2012, attending 8 Olympics games and dozens of world rowing championships, and serving as Head of FISA's Sports Medicine Commission for several years;
- served as a fitness and training consultant to several professional baseball teams, including the Cincinnati Reds and the Florida Marlins;
- was an avid competitive runner. Competed in over a dozen marathons, and as a 45 year-old, he was one of the top 10 marathoners in the U.S., and held the age group national record (he would stress, for a single week) in the 10,000 meter road race category;
- was a leading expert in altitude training, and, anecdotally, used to test the effects of 'altitude' on himself. (for a broader definition of the term 'altitude training', see the "names for dope and doping thread")

APPENDIX II: Selection of studies in which Hagerman participated:
"Muscle fiber characteristics and performance correlates of male Olympic-style weightlifters"
"Creatine supplementation improves muscular performance in older men."
"Skeletal muscle adaptations in elastic resistance-trained young men and women"
"Cardiorespiratory and metabolic adaptations to hyperoxic training"
"Effects of a long-term fitness programm on professional baseball players"
"Profile of creatine kinase isoenzymes in skeletal muscle of marathon runners"
"Muscle fiber composition and blood ammonia levels after intense exercise in humans"
"Recovery of muscular strength, power and work capacity following intense endurance exercise: the marathon"
" Physiological profiles of elite rowers"
"An investigation of accumulative acute fatigue in participants at the 1966 World Modern Pentathlon Championships, Melbourne (Victoria, Australia)"
"The effects of anabolic steroid ingestion on serum enzyme and urine 17 ketosteroid levels"
"The effects of conditioning on cardiorespiratory function in adolescent boys"

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...
Maybe that was a clean score, and he did much better doped? But then why did he hide the higher doped value at the time, but later publicize it? In fact, if he was doping, and didn’t want people to know, why would he put out a number in the 90s at any time?

Who knows. Maybe because he was (about to become) embroiled in a mud fight with Lance? Lemond used his alleged vo2max and Lance's alleged vo2max as an argument why he was clean and Lance wasn't.

Merckx index: Wouldn’t that cast suspicion on him?

People 'bought' into it en masse, including many a Clinic poster. So short answer: no.

Merckx index: but the case against Lemond comes down to something pretty simple: did he take blood transfusions beginning in his teens? Because if he didn’t, his performances indicate an extraordinary natural talent, entirely consistent with his later TDF victories. We can speculate that he was taking steroids or whatever, but there’s very little reason to believe they would make that much of a difference. It’s either blood manipulation or nothing.

I see what you mean, and agree to a large extent. But imagine that evidence of Lemond using EPO or steroids or amphetamines or HGH would surface, would you discard it solely on the basic that we lack evidence of blood transfusions earlier in his carreer?
Also, for the record, I don't think Lemond being a (huge) talent and Lemond being a doper are mutually exclusive.
That said, I agree, if we knew 100% that he wasn't blood doping in his early years, then that would be pretty conclusive evidence that he was indeed an unparalleled natural talent, and yes, that would make discussions about Lemond and doping with 'minor' stuff such as steroids and/or amphetamines rather moot.

Merckx index: If he was transfusing, he must have been doing so before major one day races he won as an amateur and pro, and also, of course, during the Tour. We have to believe he transfused in the hotel on rest days. No doubt possible, but it seems like a stretch to me. Remember, these were the pre-Armstrong years when riders like Greg didn’t focus just on the Tour. They had a full schedule of spring classics, and sometimes the Giro-Tour double. Would a rider who depended on blood transfusions really be competitive in all those races? Yes, I know, in his later years he performed poorly up till the Tour, but not in his prime years.

It's a legitimate question. I personally certainly lack the knowledge of blood doping (the logistics behind it, the physiological effects, etc.) to be able to make any claims about this. But let me say this: wrt the history of blood doping, I think we've only just scratched the surface. (See e.g. Danny Van Haute's case discussed in the US cycling thread.) And so I still think it would be useful to open a thread solely dedicated to the history of blood doping.

Merckx index:
I also think all the discussion on mitochondrial myopathy is irrelevant. What difference does it make whether he did or did not suffer from it? It’s not needed to explain the decline in his performance, assuming there even was a decline (has anyone actually compared his power outputs pre- and post-1990?).

He couldn't finish races in 1992, so yes, there was a decline. In the press there was all sorts of speculation about Lemond's illnesses from 1991 onwards:
viewtopic.php?p=1916746#p1916746
The myopathy chapter gains relevance in light of Max Testa's claim that Lemond was finished because he'd doped too much. And there is an interesting parallel with Thevenet, who is said to have suffered a very similar decline and similar symptoms as Lemond. Thevenet later admitted steroid use was the main cause.
In my view, Lemond's three-year stint at the OTC under guys like Dardik, Ariel and Hagerman, who had either experimented with anabolic steroids (Hagerman/Ariel) or publicly recommended such experiments (Dardik/Ariel) also adds credence to the steroid-induced myopathy hypothesis.
Then you add in Eddie B.
With all respect to Scienceiscool and Steve Tilford, who've tried hard to paint Eddie in a positive light, Eddie really was a class-A doping doc. Disregarding blood doping for a sec, which he was vocally supporting in the press as late as 1985 ("not illegal"; "the rider's own business", etc.).
Just read the Wheelmen section on him. If you know what was going on in the communist-bloc countries in terms of doping (amphetamines, hormones, and most importantly: steroids) in the late 60s throughout the 70s, when Eddie was a cycling coach in Warsaw, and if you realize that he'd been brought in by Fraysse under the umbrella of the (soon-to-be) Amateur Sports Act, i.e. with the aim to close the gap with communist-bloc countries in terms of sports science and medicine, then there really is very little room for doubt. Eddie B, the "Father of American Cycling" to some (http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/greg-lemonds-fantasy-cycling-camp/); The "Father of American Doping" to others (http://gazette.com/doping-questions-remain-of-springs-based-armstrong-coach/article/149946).
In sum: the steroid-induced myopathy hypothesis strikes me as plausible.

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Re: Re:

@merckxindex and scienceiscool:
agreed on all accounts.
Hence I don't attribute much value (if any) to the vo2 max debate.
For all we know Lemond pulled all those numbers out of his hat. We simply don't know.
And even if the numbers are real, we have no idea *how* they were achieved.

And hence I wonder what Lemond was thinking putting his numbers forward as evidence of his cleanlihood (and by extension of Lance's doping).
And I wonder on what grounds other posters are unquestioningly latching on to that argument.
Those numbers are not even a rumor of a rumor of a rumor. They're from the horse's mouth.
And good point re: Froome. Seems he has more cred on this particular issue than Lemond.

Lemond probably wasn't thinking when he said what he said...arguably when you are innocent you don't have to maintain any narrative or pretence...you just speak and if you are prone to rambling...you...eh ramble...

Froome has no credibility....period

I think this is quite accurate. To my recollection, Greg started to bring up his VO2 max figures when Armstrong Posted his, as a proof of cleanliness, hence journalists started questioning Greg about Lance's VO2max numbers.

The inconsistency in that regard is largely due to the rambling you described. Take for example Hinault. When I asked him in 2008 he said 93. I don't think there's any record of that value anywhere. He probably heard Greg say 92, so he went for 93. Hinault goes as far as to say his VO2max was at 86 in the winter, 93 in the summer.

Do you recall your VO2 max at the time ?

Yes. 93.

That’s huge. Big engine.

Yes. And you have the results to go with it. 86 in the winter, 93 in the summer.

And what was your lung volume ?

Not that big, 6.6 liters, 7 liters depending on the measuring machine.

And your BPM ?

34 for the lowest, 198 for the highest.

http://www.gitaneusa.com/Hinault.asp

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Re: Re:

@merckxindex and scienceiscool:
agreed on all accounts.
Hence I don't attribute much value (if any) to the vo2 max debate.
For all we know Lemond pulled all those numbers out of his hat. We simply don't know.
And even if the numbers are real, we have no idea *how* they were achieved.

And hence I wonder what Lemond was thinking putting his numbers forward as evidence of his cleanlihood (and by extension of Lance's doping).
And I wonder on what grounds other posters are unquestioningly latching on to that argument.
Those numbers are not even a rumor of a rumor of a rumor. They're from the horse's mouth.
And good point re: Froome. Seems he has more cred on this particular issue than Lemond.

Lemond probably wasn't thinking when he said what he said...arguably when you are innocent you don't have to maintain any narrative or pretence...you just speak and if you are prone to rambling...you...eh ramble...

Froome has no credibility....period

....the problem with that line of thought is it was not a ramble or a few whoops words that could be taken out of context and it was not a one time event it happened over and over again....

Cheers

Yes, because Greg isn't in forensics. He's telling a story. Wether you like it, believe it, investigate it is your problem, not Greg's.

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Re: Re:

More to the point, though, if Greg was transfusing blood in the late 70s and early 80s, as Sniper wants us to believe, why was his V02 max only 79? What did he do later that pushed it up to the 90s? Do you want to argue that the 79 value was clean? But I thought Squaw Valley was a major doping laboratory. If they were testing the effects of doping, wouldn’t they want to measure V02 max under those conditions?

the 79 vo2max value is from 1977. At a guess that would have been recorded during Mike Fraysse's and Eddie B.'s selection camp in that same year (or maybe shortly after).
He was incorporated in the OTC in Colorado Springs in 1978, together with Eddie B. and USCF who opened office there.
I assume, if he ever transfused, he started then and there in 1978.
I also assume he (and his father Bob) was already using more traditional stuff in 1976-77 under Otto Jacome, who'd been hired by Bob to train him and Greg together. Bob and Greg subsequently did several local races together. Bob clearly had plans for his son. And in that day, there was only one reason to hire a Mexican cycling coach.

For the record, I don't 'want' anybody to believe it.
But acknowledging the possibility puts to bed the argument that he couldn't be on EPO because he (allegedly) didn't improve in 89-90 compared to pre-shooting levels.

Because you can't find another reason doesn't mean there wasn't one.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Yes, because Greg isn't in forensics. He's telling a story. Wether you like it, believe it, investigate it is your problem, not Greg's.

So for the record, you now admit that those data cannot be used as evidence of Lemond's cleanliness?
Because that's what many have been doing, including Greg himself.

 

[sniper]

Because you can't find another reason doesn't mean there wasn't one.

Ow, but I agree.
Similarly, the possibility that Sky really hired Leinders for his expertise on saddle sore cannot be discarded.
Or that Testa really was very antidoping until he met Lance.

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Re: Re:

Yes, because Greg isn't in forensics. He's telling a story. Wether you like it, believe it, investigate it is your problem, not Greg's.

So for the record, you now admit that those data cannot be used as evidence of Lemond's cleanliness?
Because that's what many have been doing, including Greg himself.

I've always, always said I believe you can't prove someone was clean. Hence I'm not even trying.

Because you can't find another reason doesn't mean there wasn't one.

Ow, but I agree.
Similarly, the possibility that Sky really hired Leinders for his expertise on saddle sore cannot be discarded.
Or that Testa really was very antidoping until he met Lance.

I thought we agreed on giving up sarcasm ?

You comparing Otto Jacome to those guys doesn't make him the same. It's your opinion, it's fine. It doesn't make it true.

 

[sniper]

The thing is, you can repeat "it's not proven, it's just your opinion" another five or six times. But it really adds very little to the discussion, or to my understanding of why so many people still believe in a clean Lemond.
It also genuinely makes me wonder why you're not going into the Sky or Indurain or Cancellara-motor threads to claim the same.
And like you just admitted it cannot be proven that he was clean, I have reversely admitted it can/will probably not be proven that he doped (unless he would admit to such).
But that being the case, we can still talk about these issues in terms of likelihood, plausibility, etc., can't we?

Take Jacome: what do you think about him? And why do think that?
I gave my view and told you why I think he was a fixer.
Same for Eddie B.
Same for the whole OTC setup. Investment in Montgomery. etc.
If "it's just your opinion" is all you can muster in response, that's a bit meager. I honestly don't know how else to respond to that than with a teaspoon of sarcasm.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I can understand sarcasm from anyone who is a Fan of any cyclist or sportsman etc.

You have admiration for the person and I respect that.

If y'all want to go back and forth then by all means have fun. Can't say I'm not guilty of it in the Politics thread and sometimes here in the clinic.

The entire vo2 score stuff in my opinion is a little more than just troubling. Let me explain my POV.

It is one thing to claim a certain score or claim a ballpark figure while talking with someone. I used to do that back before I got a clever little training tool called a Garmin 620. The dam thing even calculates estimated vo2.

So the days of pure speculation was over now I can say hey I'm a 46 year old about to be 47 with a vo2 score of 58-63 depends on the type of pain I like to feel in the mornings. Over the past months I have stopped my running due to various health reasons. I will be curious to see what the damage is.
Point is my training group from yesteryear's we would speculate and brag depending on the conversation vo2 scores . we were all solid sub 2:40 marathoners even in our old days.

Greg at Squaw Valley was a measured score. The other sounds like BS in my opinion. It is just something thrown out there. The question is did he throw that out there to "provide proof" he was clean? I'm not sure. Did Greg throw that number out there because he already knew a true tested score for Lance? I don't have the time to research that, trying to remember when all the argument started between the two of them is difficult enough for me. AnyWho - I believe Greg just made up that score.

 

[sniper]

agree about the Squaw Valley value sounding legit, and the rest sounding a bit iffy.

In a more recent interview he talks about his vo2 max again, saying it hasn't changed.
Can somebody tell me how/whether that makes sense, also in the context of his alleged myopathy?

While LeMond retired over 20 years ago, he said that his ability to use oxygen remains the same as when he was a competitive racer. “I took 6.4 litres in [as a pro],” he said, by way of example. “I did a VO2 Max test at 47 [years of age] and I take 6.4 litres in. My weight is way different, but when I saw my wattage output after four months [training], I was 380 watts sustainable for 30 minutes. It kind of matched.

“I know exactly where I was 15, 20 years ago…It doesn’t really change. Now what would change it is blood doping, that could artificially boost the VO2 Max. If your haematocrit is 45 and you boost it to 50, you can improve it quite a bit. Because of that, you have to combine [VO2 Max] testing with the passport.

http://cyclingtips.com/2015/07/tour-de-france-lemond-repeats-calls-for-greater-transparency-in-the-sport/

 

[djpbaltimore]

Re: Re:

There is no evidence that Hagerman was anything more than an exercise physiologist with an academic appointment at Ohio University.

viewtopic.php?p=1915304#p1915304
viewtopic.php?p=1914388#p1914388

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_rowing_(men)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_rowing_(women)

@ sniper, you adressed various posts after this one. You might as well address this one also.

sure thing.

So what follows is the profile of the guy who in the late 1970s, together with the unblemished Ed Burke, did physiological testing on future champs Greg Lemond and Eric Heiden.

THE HAGERMAN FILE (with two Appendices)

In the late 60s, Hagerman makes a name for himself by doing different kinds of physiological testing with Olympic athletes, mainly rowers and pentathletes. He experiments with anabolic steroids on weightlifters in 1975 ("The effects of anabolic steroid ingestion on serum enzyme and urine 17 ketosteroid levels") and does cardio-respiratory conditioning on adolescents in 1976 ("The effects of conditioning on cardiorespiratory function in adolescent boys").

Now, that study from 1976 really is most revealing: it makes recommendations for future 'cardio-respiratory fitness' research on junior athletes, providing references to the works of a certain Ekblom, a certain Astrand, a certain Saltin and a certain Woldemar Gerschler. Indeed *that* Ekblom, *that* Astrand, *that* Saltin, and *that* Woldemar Gerschler. Together, those scholars/physiologists consituted the absolute creme de la creme of research into blood doping stretching from the late 40s to the early 70s, pioneering such methods as 'blood packing' and blood transfusions for athletic/competitive purposes.
More about Gerschler: viewtopic.php?p=1798584#p1798584
Astrand: viewtopic.php?p=1798590#p1798590
Ekblom & Saltin: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3372716/
For background on those three Scandinavian guys I can furthermore recommend the "Routledge Handbook of Drugs and Sport". Or simply search the Clinic archives for any of them.
I think most will agree, there was a bloody (pun intended) obvious reason for Hagerman to refer to the works of these guys.

Now, it is interesting to note that, before all that, Hagerman had already written a dissertation on the effects of altitude on soldiers on behalf of the US Defense Department in the 1960s. The US Defense department, where a certain Charles Drew had made a good name for himself in the 1940s (yes, that early) by successfully experimenting with blood transfusions and developing new blood storage methods. I haven't seen Hagerman's dissertation, but we can be fairly certain he knew Drew's work inside-out. (Drew: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_R._Drew)

Now then, briefly back to Dardik and Ariel, two guys who were later exposed as class-A frauds and quacks, and who had explicitly expressed the need to test PEDs on adolescents in order to close the gap with communist-bloc countries, both in publications (Ariel) and in several presentations in front of the USOC (Dardik). Testing PEDs (blood doping and anabolic steroids) on adolescent Olympic hopefuls with the aim of identifying 'outstanding athletes' and allowing them to compete with Russian and East German pharmaceutically enhanced athletes: that's what Dardik and Ariel's OTC plans were all about.
And that's where Hagerman comes into the picture. Irving Dardik and Gideon Ariel pick up Hagerman in the mid-70s, they join hands and open the OTC medical centres in Squaw Valley and Colorado Springs.

If, in the face of all this evidence, anybody is still reluctant to do the math on Hagerman or on the purpose of his role at the OTC, thats up to him/her. In my humble view, if it wiggles and quacks like a duck, and has duck-like feathers, it's probably a duck.

One astounding thing about all this is that, to my knowledge, nobody (neither Dardik, nor Ariel, nor Hagerman, nor Don Miller who facilitated the whole thing) has ever been held accountable for what went on there in the late 70s. I don't think there has been any kind of inquiry into that episode, despite the fact that the aim to test PEDs on adolescents was explicitly formulated.

Bibliography
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fredrick_Hagerman
https://ready2row.wordpress.com/2015/04/29/great-quotes-and-boats-11/
http://highperformancerowing.net/journal/?currentPage=6
https://books.google.pl/books?id=pUQEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA48&dq=hagerman+altitude+training&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=hagerman%20altitude%20training&f=false
http://www.arielnet.com/articles/show/adi-pub-01202/the-center-of-attention
http://www.arielnet.com/articles/show/adi-pub-01076/md-aims-to-imppove-nation-s-health-using-olympic-athletes-as-walking-fitness-labs

APPENDIX I: Some Hagerman trivia:
- was involved with the U.S. Olympic and U.S. world championship rowing team from 1972 through 2012, attending 8 Olympics games and dozens of world rowing championships, and serving as Head of FISA's Sports Medicine Commission for several years;
- served as a fitness and training consultant to several professional baseball teams, including the Cincinnati Reds and the Florida Marlins;
- was an avid competitive runner. Competed in over a dozen marathons, and as a 45 year-old, he was one of the top 10 marathoners in the U.S., and held the age group national record (he would stress, for a single week) in the 10,000 meter road race category;
- was a leading expert in altitude training, and, anecdotally, used to test the effects of 'altitude' on himself. (for a broader definition of the term 'altitude training', see the "names for dope and doping thread")

APPENDIX II: Selection of studies in which Hagerman participated:
"Muscle fiber characteristics and performance correlates of male Olympic-style weightlifters"
"Creatine supplementation improves muscular performance in older men."
"Skeletal muscle adaptations in elastic resistance-trained young men and women"
"Cardiorespiratory and metabolic adaptations to hyperoxic training"
"Effects of a long-term fitness programm on professional baseball players"
"Profile of creatine kinase isoenzymes in skeletal muscle of marathon runners"
"Muscle fiber composition and blood ammonia levels after intense exercise in humans"
"Recovery of muscular strength, power and work capacity following intense endurance exercise: the marathon"
" Physiological profiles of elite rowers"
"An investigation of accumulative acute fatigue in participants at the 1966 World Modern Pentathlon Championships, Melbourne (Victoria, Australia)"
"The effects of anabolic steroid ingestion on serum enzyme and urine 17 ketosteroid levels"
"The effects of conditioning on cardiorespiratory function in adolescent boys"

So, basically the evidence amounts to nothing more than smoke and mirrors IMO. All those things support my assertion that he was primarily an academic who published papers on Exercise Physiology as part of his profession. I have the paper about the anabolic steroids and what the paper examines is the health effect on the liver from anabolic steroid ingestion. The other bolded paper about conditioning is about how physical activity promotes better cardiovascular health in adolescents. Making it seem like it was about 'cardiovascular conditioning of adolescents' (i.e blood doping) cannot change the real fact that is was a completely innocuous study. In that paper, Ekblom is referenced for a different study unrelated to the work he did on transfusions. Yet another distortion IMO. Ekblom also did a lot of work on Rheumatoid arthritis. Would any reference to those papers also imply blood doping by the scientists in question?

http://jap.physiology.org/content/27/3/350.long 'Effect of physical training in adolescent boys.'
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5289801 'Physical training in normal boys in adolescence.'

If USA rowing was a hotbed of blood doping, why were their medal hauls so poor during the time of Hagerman's training? Links to medal tables found above. Or if he was interested primarily in doping, why leave a public footprint of your work? Did Conte publish papers about 'the clear'? Are people that examine the effects of drugs of abuse suspicious of being drug dealers on the sly? If most of the arguments for his role in doping relies on associations with people like Dardick and Ariel, the evidence is inherently weak IMO.

So in summary, look at your misunderstandings about Hagerman that I linked above or found above.
1) That he was a hematologist (He was not, which you have since conceded)
2) That he gave anabolic steroid to adolescents (He did not)
3) That he referenced blood doping in his 1976 paper (He did not)

Yes, the math is pretty easy to do. Confirmation bias compounded with sloppy facts. And now we are expected to believe that a person who has not read a dissertation can accurately forecast what is contained within?

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

agree about the Squaw Valley value sounding legit, and the rest sounding a bit iffy.

In a more recent interview he talks about his vo2 max again, saying it hasn't changed.
Can somebody tell me how/whether that makes sense, also in the context of his alleged myopathy?

While LeMond retired over 20 years ago, he said that his ability to use oxygen remains the same as when he was a competitive racer. “I took 6.4 litres in [as a pro],” he said, by way of example. “I did a VO2 Max test at 47 [years of age] and I take 6.4 litres in. My weight is way different, but when I saw my wattage output after four months [training], I was 380 watts sustainable for 30 minutes. It kind of matched.

“I know exactly where I was 15, 20 years ago…It doesn’t really change. Now what would change it is blood doping, that could artificially boost the VO2 Max. If your haematocrit is 45 and you boost it to 50, you can improve it quite a bit. Because of that, you have to combine [VO2 Max] testing with the passport.

http://cyclingtips.com/2015/07/tour-de-france-lemond-repeats-calls-for-greater-transparency-in-the-sport/

I think he is full of sh!t if he says his vo2 score has not changed with age. No freaking way.

 

[sniper]

@djpbaltimore:

1. I mislabeled hagerman a hematologist. You pointed out he wasn't, I owned up to that mistake and corrected my post accordingly.
2. even if we stripe out Ekblom, there remain references to studies from Astrand, Saltin, and an interview with Woldemar Gerschler. All contemporary creme de la creme of (blood) doping. Sorry, but you just can't spin this one in Hagerman's favor.
3. you're trivializing his connection with Dardik and Ariel. I don't think you should. Dardik had publicly stated the need to do PED testing on adolescents and Ariel had written his PhD about anabolic testing. Hagerman knew perfectly well whom he was dealing with.
4. Of course he was only researching anabolic steroids for their "health effects". They all are. Dardik was. Ariel was. Ferrari, Leinders and Fuentes were. So what's your point there?

Fact is, you could practically fill the whole 'names for dope and doping' drawing only on Hagerman's studies.

 

[djpbaltimore]

1) Your central argument was the Ekblom citation which was not reported accurately. Feel free to post the salient references in full.
2) Post just one piece of evidence that portrays Hagerman as facilitating doping that does not require parsing out of context passages for veiled meanings.
3) Which poster wants more scientists to examine the health effects of PEDs. But when they do, they are only doing so as a cover. Cognitive dissonance.

viewtopic.php?p=1869004#p1869004