• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Old Age or Limited Dope?

The 50% hematocrit rule had the effect of limiting the excessive hematocrits that were being used in the mid 90s. Now chaperones are used for testing, testosterone is sometimes being tested for without the initial T:TE screen. Synacthen is being tested for, HGH is being tested for, blood values are being tracked, and testing frequency has been dramatically increased. Has the effect been to limit doping just like the 50% rule did?

Are we seeing riders like Wiggins and the French do better because the doping that can be done is not as effective as it once was?

I expected Armstrong to do better than he has. I thought that although accelerations on climbs would hurt him, he would still be able to put out close to the same power he used to. Instead he does not even look like the same rider. His form on the bike is different. His cadence is lower. He is very very far from the guy who used to spin up climbs at 100+ RPM while not looking like he was breathing hard. Is this the result of not being able to dope as much as he used to?
 
Jul 16, 2009
306
0
0
Visit site
Are we to assume by what u are saying BroDeal that Lances "Doctors" have fallen off the waggon?

Why then havnt the testers been able to get anything on him if thats the case ????

Everytime the man pi$%es he is tested.

Why no eveidence....... could it be ..... just like Federer and Tiger Woods etc he is just really good at what he does and maybe age has caught up with him???????

Interested on your thoughts re evidence.

Not sure whether Roger or Tiger have been hounded for so long re their performances. Why then LA ???

Others have been caught with all sorts of crap in their system.... perhaps the quacks are smarter in Texas????:cool:
 
Jul 20, 2009
3
0
0
Visit site
Dopestrong

Barracuda said:
Are we to assume by what u are saying BroDeal that Lances "Doctors" have fallen off the waggon?

Why then havnt the testers been able to get anything on him if thats the case ????

Everytime the man pi$%es he is tested.

Why no eveidence....... could it be ..... just like Federer and Tiger Woods etc he is just really good at what he does and maybe age has caught up with him???????

Interested on your thoughts re evidence.

Not sure whether Roger or Tiger have been hounded for so long re their performances. Why then LA ???

Others have been caught with all sorts of crap in their system.... perhaps the quacks are smarter in Texas????:cool:

In the court of public opinion...proof depends on what you see when you watch a video like this...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXPXHK7I1iQ LA fans just see their hero doing what he does best, cynics see this as proof of how doped he was.
 
Mar 10, 2009
272
2
0
Visit site
I can't believe how long that attack was. It went on forever. And to be going twice the speed of Pantani who was going for it is just crazy. I need some of what his got.
 
Jul 16, 2009
306
0
0
Visit site
Maybe he's actually been training on his bike!!!!!!

Maybe Man didnt land on the moon either !!!! Although thats been proven to be incorrect also.

Maybe hes been on the bike not hitting the coke on his couch!!!!
 
Mar 10, 2009
2
0
0
Visit site
armstrong did well, nearley 4 years out of the tour, 38 years old in a few months, what did you expect, just look at the others around him, why didnt they catch contador?, its because on this day contador is a stunning climber,i have been a cyclist and followed cycling for over 35 years, and have seen and heard every sob story ,theory and exuse going, but yesterday Contador was exeptional, that was a guy showing the world he is the best at a climb like that, and for any one to be within a few mutes of him at the finish they had to be on top of there game.
 
Jul 16, 2009
306
0
0
Visit site
Agree Chopper ......... all the cynics should read what Cadel said about the stage also ... hardest he's done in a while. So the agrument from BroDeal about TTT's and soft course didnt ring true yesterday... best rider won ...others did well to limit losses to what they did and until testing to anything other than being guilty of hard work or having some alien being living inside of him then LA did OK in my books.

Not able to get the You Tube gear up at the moment so whats the condensed version of the link in the previous post????
 
Jul 16, 2009
306
0
0
Visit site
From LA's twitter :

"Good morning. Antidoping control to wake up to. Alberto, Andreas, and myself.
12:09 am Jul 20th "

Look, testing him again to try and find what they didnt find the previous tests!!!

Damn those doctors are talented.

They should do DNA tests on Phar lap as well to see if he was doping !!!:D
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
BroDeal said:
The 50% hematocrit rule had the effect of limiting the excessive hematocrits that were being used in the mid 90s. Now chaperones are used for testing, testosterone is sometimes being tested for without the initial T:TE screen. Synacthen is being tested for, HGH is being tested for, blood values are being tracked, and testing frequency has been dramatically increased. Has the effect been to limit doping just like the 50% rule did?......

I think the bio-passport has kept the opportunity to dope limited to a small band for the dopers to play with.
It is quite different to the old 50% rule though- as it meant you could dope up to 50% from your natural crit - which gave some a distinct advantage.
Also as you could have a higher value than the 50% but could bring it down if you were selected for any tests.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
1
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
I think the bio-passport has kept the opportunity to dope limited to a small band for the dopers to play with.
It is quite different to the old 50% rule though- as it meant you could dope up to 50% from your natural crit - which gave some a distinct advantage.
Also as you could have a higher value than the 50% but could bring it down if you were selected for any tests.
no no, the crit parameters changed.

Armstrong came in at 43 in 2003.

Basso was studied as a perfect example of a clean athlete.

Throw out the crit number now, means nothing. Athletes know how to manipulate it, and still get the practical effect of an O2 delivery capacity of 55.
 
We don't know what's his hematacrit level is. In any case, from what the medics who know about this stuff have told me, in their opinions, these riders should be between 39-43% with the intensity and volume of effort they put out. So if he's at 49% or 49.5%, as he was and his entire team (everyone on it) before, then he's blood doping.

The 50% limit has always been too high and only was really a health consideration. Pantani did most of his mountain dashes at 49-49.8%, and even when caught at the 99 Giro as only at a "descrete" 50.2%!

Then there are autologous blood transfussions and the new products. There are always new products. Cycling reporter Eugenio Bevilacqua and avid rider for la Repubblica, one of Italy's major newspapers, who I ride with ocasionally, has mentioned rumors of a new type of EPO being used which has yet to be identified. Cera was used over the last 3 years, till they figured out how to detect it, before that Nesp (which I don't even know if they can detect). In other words, there is always something new and the products have usually always been circa 3 years ahead of the tests. The market demand keeps the supplies innovative and fresh. Otherwise everybody would have just given up at testosterone 25 years ago. You'd have to ask AC and LA for better updates, though.:D

As I mentioned before, Lance's ride didn't surprise me in the least yeasterday, as he was being regularly passed by Sastre, et al, at the Giro. By the way, way to go Sastre! That's the best continued response to Lance's arrogant remarks about him last year, for which the former gave an apology, though should have never uttered.

Normally you don't make a super jump between the Giro and Tour, you either are able to maintain excellent condition, like Indurain in 93-94, or else it goes down the sh!ter like Menchov this year. Unless you are Lemond or Ullrich who came into the Giro fat whales and went out hammered but with their motors turned on finally. Lance did not start the Giro in those riders' grossly out of weight and consequently fitness conditions. He was more or less, to use the same comparison, begining the Giro in Sastre's position (but coming back from injury). But he was not in the same boat Ullrich used to captain at the Giro for sure. Consequently, as yesterday's ride also demonstrated, he (also like Sastre) was not going to make a huge leap in condition after the Giro at the Tour. In fact we are seeing an only slightly better version of Lance in the mountains than we did in the last Giro mountain stages, whereas Sastre has remained the same, I think, or maybe has slightly less good form. It's just that in his case the competition is better at the Tour. And there wasn't this Contador at the Giro either as a barometer. If Lance would have ridden after the Giro like Contador yeaterday, then I'd have even bought a top secret US miltary doping regime behind the Texan's effort. That he falls within the "normal" parameters, means he's on the normal regiment of the usual stuff. But there's no way he's clean, at just 1:35 off that performance by AC yeasterday.

His major problem is his age, having been away for 3 years (this is even more important at his age) and that the arms race for him, against riders ten years younger, is no longer possible to win. If it weren't for the team time trial and that cheeky move with Columbia, he'd be struggling to be in the top ten right now, which is also a more accurate indication of the actual worth of his performance in this Tour.

I find it so interesting to listen to humbled Lance's comments after yesterday's stage, compared to the arrogant one he made last year about the quality of the Tour. This demonstrates, but he himself also said so, that he thought this comeback back in January was "gonna be easy", before reality set in and thus immediately realized shortly thereafter his original asessment was wrong. A classic case of a guy's over-inflated ego allowing him to attempt a pass longer than his legs can make. Lance is simply overmatched. And I gaurantee had he known then what he does now, he never would have made this ego stroking come-back. He simply didn't like to be a king without a throne. So he simply thought he could claim whatever one was up for grabs, without considering his own age seriously, nor respecting the younger talents. What a wànker.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
Barracuda said:
From LA's twitter :

"Good morning. Antidoping control to wake up to. Alberto, Andreas, and myself.
12:09 am Jul 20th "

Look, testing him again to try and find what they didnt find the previous tests!!!

Damn those doctors are talented.

They should do DNA tests on Phar lap as well to see if he was doping !!!:D

The testing is part of the biological passport - which is set up to build up and examine riders profiles, which is why there are so many tests.
The top 50 riders will get tested more than the others.

LA actually welcomes it. And as to your quote above I hope you are not suggesting Mr.Armstrong doped?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
blackcat said:
no no, the crit parameters changed.

Armstrong came in at 43 in 2003.

Basso was studied as a perfect example of a clean athlete.

Throw out the crit number now, means nothing. Athletes know how to manipulate it, and still get the practical effect of an O2 delivery capacity of 55.

BC - how do you mean the parameters changed?
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
1
0
Visit site
mean, no longer benchmark O2 delivery capacity on a UCI hematocrit "health check". They subverted this 7 years ago. The numbers mean nothing with a decent medical program. It is manipulated downwards.

why would Armstrong say "43 is a compelling number"?
 
Jul 16, 2009
306
0
0
Visit site
Not saying he is doping ... being sarcastic to say they think the more they test.... maybe they think the will prove something...... case of guilty until proven innocent even if it takes that many tests. Not seeing it (doping) first hand I dont understand as much as others on the thread do regards levels etc. So are we saying that one day in the future he will be caught retrospectively????

Maybe Phar Lap, Alain Prost and Elvis should be tested to see if there performances where "out of the norm"

Realise I am being very sarcastic but dont understand how dopers can be 3 years ahead of the tests. Surely not worth it when you consider the repercussions???????
 
Jul 19, 2009
949
0
0
Visit site
unsheath said:
^^ Whats not to understand? EPO wasnt detectable for 10+ years and autologous blood doping still isn't.

EPO is still partially undetectable or small window of detection for some kind of EPO, microdosing not detectable too.
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,442
0
0
Visit site
Barracuda said:
Realise I am being very sarcastic but dont understand how dopers can be 3 years ahead of the tests. Surely not worth it when you consider the repercussions???????

CERA is a good example: the only reason these riders (Kohl, Shumacher, Rebellin, Ricco etc) were caught was because the manufacturer put a marker in the drug which could be identified by drug testers. EPO was not detected, just the CERA marker. If it weren't for the manufacturer, we would still have Ricco burning up mountains.

Then look at how the majority of riders are caught now days. Most are "affairs" like Operation Puerto. The drugs used by riders like Ullrich and Hamilton in these programs are amazing: EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone, HGH, cortisone, IGH, etc, etc. Hamilton made a stupid mistake to get caught, but Ullrich did not test positive to any of the plethora of drugs he was taking.

Autologous blood transfusions are difficult to detect, HGH can only be detected in the first few hours, and they're obviously still having difficulty with EPO. After suspicious blood parameters, they retrospectively tested Thomas Dekker from 2 years ago and detected EPO. Why couldn't they detect it back then?

And the biological passport is not the answer that we were hoping for either. The likes of Kohl, Schumacher, Rebellin, etc are not identified using the passport despite doping with EPO and/or blood transfusions. Average professional riders who cannot afford the expensive programs and doctors are the ones getting caught by the BP, while those that can afford the programs and the doctors still ride without sanctions. I forget the thread, but someone posted an interesting interview with one of the BALCO athletes where this athlete's doctor basically was saying don't worry if you've stuck to the program.

So yes, the athletes are way ahead of the testers. And now there is the possibility of gene doping ...
 

Bagster

BANNED
Jun 23, 2009
290
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
The testing is part of the biological passport - which is set up to build up and examine riders profiles, which is why there are so many tests.
The top 50 riders will get tested more than the others.

LA actually welcomes it. And as to your quote above I hope you are not suggesting Mr.Armstrong doped?

You have to realise that to the dopeheads who post on here, nobody is clean and they will never accept that anyone is clean, least of all Lance and probably not anyone who rides a bike faster than they do, which is certainly anyone in the Tour. What you have to really look at is that what they say is all allegation and innuendo dressed up as 'facts'. Laughable really. I know personally two riders in this tour who definitely not on dope and they are both doing ok.
 
Jul 19, 2009
949
0
0
Visit site
Bagster said:
Laughable really. I know personally two riders in this tour who definitely not on dope and they are both doing ok.
Why don't you name them? Are you afraid to defame them?

How are you sur that they are clean? Landis seemed a pretty boy like Basso is and many other dopers.
 
Jun 16, 2009
647
0
0
Visit site
Bagster said:
You have to realise that to the dopeheads who post on here, nobody is clean and they will never accept that anyone is clean, least of all Lance and probably not anyone who rides a bike faster than they do, which is certainly anyone in the Tour. What you have to really look at is that what they say is all allegation and innuendo dressed up as 'facts'. Laughable really. I know personally two riders in this tour who definitely not on dope and they are both doing ok.

What absolute twaddle.

General opinion here seems to be that it is possible to ride clean, and many do, but the list of GC contenders from the last 15 years reads like a rogues gallery.


Circumstantial evidence aside - the number of actual positive controls of those who have stood on the podium in grand tours, combined with the fact that no matter how many people claim the problem is going away, the best guys in every race are nudging 7 w/kg in the final climbs - shows that the problem is unlikely to have disappeared.
 

TRENDING THREADS