Re:
This is one unsolved mystery about Armstrong from FMK's review linked above:
I’ve no idea how much raw talent Armstrong had, but the problem with basing such a claim on his performance in those early Tours is that, just a chapter or two before, LeMond and Fignon’s poor performances in their final Tours was taken as proof the rest of peloton was hopped up to the gills on EPO. If we know that Armstrong didn’t take to EPO until the end of 1995, how can we then argue that his poor performance in those early Tours signified a lack of talent?
I think the fallacy described here originates from people confusing two things:
1) Whether there was something strange in Armstrong's 1998 comeback when his results were significantly better than his 1994-1995 results. To point this out before the USADA case and confessions was a good argument that he might've started to take "hard" PEDs as French journalists, David Walsh and Mike Ashenden have pointed out during the the SCA hearings and elsewhere.
Because all the complaining about what a pathetic GT-rider Lance was during his pre-cancer days is at least somewhat accurate and hasn't gone anywhere even after the 2012-2013 events, the abundance of this material has led to this question:
2) Whether Lance had no natural talent because his domination started only after the application of blood doping with the help of Dr. Ferrari. While this can be true, many people come to this conclusion because they remember the observations by LeMond and even more sympathetic Phil Anderson how in troubles the Texan was particularly during the time trials and mountain stages during his pre-cancer years.
Whether or how much Lance had talent is an interesting questions, but I thinkg that particularly Greg LeMond has far too "Vo2Max reductionist"-reading of the world when he tends to think that there is something suspicious in anyone with a Vo2Max below his presumed 95 ml/kg/min figure who produces more watts than he could do during his Tour wins.
I think it is the consensus view that that cycling efficiency tends to be inversely related to oxygen capacity among elites, and this article should remind everyone that the magical figure isn't the end of story:
https://www.outsideonline.com/2398524/highest-ever-vo2max-cyclist-oskar-svendsen
It is interesting that when training induced improved cycling efficiency was discussed in David Walsh's book
From Lance to Landis, LeMond didn't think the issue in terms of muscle/peripheral level adaptation to training but only in terms of instant pedalling efficiency, in terms of cadence, knee angles and the interplay between different pushing and pulling muscles etc. and told that his coach had told that the improvement would be something like one percent at most.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram