• 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!

Pretty Sneaky.....LOL

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 18, 2009
7
0
0
Visit site
Thank god we have you looking at these numbers because just relying on WADA, USADA, UCI, AFLD, their testers, 40 plus in and out of competition tests and the bioligical passports is so un-comforting. I hope that you have immediately notified USADA and WADA of your amazing find in the these number irregularties and that they will nail LA to the wall over this great catch.

It is time to get that cheating SOB off his high, cancer fund raising horse. Who needs his fame to draw fans to the sport, increase public awareness and interest, raise sponsor interest, bring more TV coverage of events. What a terrible thing he has done to the sport that we all love.

You guys all sounds like LeMond, just jealous of LA's success and talent and wish it could be you.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
joebloebloe said:
Thank god we have you looking at these numbers because just relying on WADA, USADA, UCI, AFLD, their testers, 40 plus in and out of competition tests and the bioligical passports is so un-comforting. I hope that you have immediately notified USADA and WADA of your amazing find in the these number irregularties and that they will nail LA to the wall over this great catch.

It is time to get that cheating SOB off his high, cancer fund raising horse. Who needs his fame to draw fans to the sport, increase public awareness and interest, raise sponsor interest, bring more TV coverage of events. What a terrible thing he has done to the sport that we all love.

You guys all sounds like LeMond, just jealous of LA's success and talent and wish it could be you.

No - we don't sound like Lemond - we are all very jealous of his career too.
 
May 13, 2009
3,093
3
0
Visit site
joebloebloe said:
Thank god we have you looking at these numbers because just relying on WADA, USADA, UCI, AFLD, their testers, 40 plus in and out of competition tests and the bioligical passports is so un-comforting. I hope that you have immediately notified USADA and WADA of your amazing find in the these number irregularties and that they will nail LA to the wall over this great catch.

It is time to get that cheating SOB off his high, cancer fund raising horse. Who needs his fame to draw fans to the sport, increase public awareness and interest, raise sponsor interest, bring more TV coverage of events. What a terrible thing he has done to the sport that we all love.

You guys all sounds like LeMond, just jealous of LA's success and talent and wish it could be you.

Still pointless. Got any more sockpuppets?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Dr. Maserati said:
No - we don't sound like Lemond - we are all very jealous of his career too.

But we know LeMond beat Fignon. We also know Fignon was a doper. Since LeMond is so adamant about LA having doped because he beat those who doped then can we conclude (using LeMond's logic) that LeMond doped?

I feel like screaming "GREG, WHAT IS YOUR VO2 MAX?!!!!"

Dopers like LeMond suck the life outta me.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
Scott SoCal said:
But we know LeMond beat Fignon. We also know Fignon was a doper. Since LeMond is so adamant about LA having doped because he beat those who doped then can we conclude (using LeMond's logic) that LeMond doped?

I feel like screaming "GREG, WHAT IS YOUR VO2 MAX?!!!!"

Dopers like LeMond suck the life outta me.

You should read the Lemond thread's on this forum - it has been discussed ad nauseam.
 
joebloebloe said:
Thank god we have you looking at these numbers because just relying on WADA, USADA, UCI, AFLD, their testers, 40 plus in and out of competition tests and the bioligical passports is so un-comforting. I hope that you have immediately notified USADA and WADA of your amazing find in the these number irregularties and that they will nail LA to the wall over this great catch.

It is time to get that cheating SOB off his high, cancer fund raising horse. Who needs his fame to draw fans to the sport, increase public awareness and interest, raise sponsor interest, bring more TV coverage of events. What a terrible thing he has done to the sport that we all love.

You guys all sounds like LeMond, just jealous of LA's success and talent and wish it could be you.

Is it okay if I edit my post, and put some of this stuff in. It's comedy gold.
 
Cobblestones said:
When you look at the variations from 12/3 to 12/18, what looks suspicious to me is that between 12/3 and 12/11, the crit value drops while the number of reticulocytes increases from 0.82 to 1.29. On 12/18, the crit value is back up to about 42%, but the reticulocytes are at 1.39, which is the highest ever. It looks to me that maybe he got some blood drawn between 12/3 and 12/11, then, the body started to replace it, and maybe he helped it a little along with microdosing, a Cera shot or whatever.

Now just before the ToC, the crit went up to 45.8% (assuming that's the correct number) with little impact on the reticulocytes (still 1.1). That, I think is definitely suspicious.

Overall I think it is a little bit dodgy. Now technically, the off score (which is Hb measured in g/L minus 60 times the square root of the percentage of reticulocytes) is never higher than the threshold of 133. So technically, it's ok. However, this limit becomes important only after a transfusion, and it can be circumvented by giving EPO-type products before and after the transfusion. I don't know whether he would have had a transfusion for the TdU. And the chart ends well before the ToC. It's hard to say whether he would have had a transfusion until the end of the chart (2/4). The high crit value of 45.8% might indicate that. Normal off-scores are between 85 and 95. An off score of 75% as on 12/11 might indicate the effect of filling a bag for later use. There is no official lower threshold for the off score which might be triggered by fillings bags. When you compare to Wiggins's published values, his off score at its lowest is about 85, except at the end of the Giro where it dipped dramatically to 65 (which again is kind of weird since at Ventoux his off score was around 85).

In general, one has to remember that the thresholds for crit (50%) and off score (133) are really pretty high. One would need to be a fool to trigger them. It is not a problem to do blood doping without coming near those thresholds.
Thanks Cobbles for this information. This is stuff that you never read from WADA and the UCI. The point I am making is that I have heard so many times that the limiting parameters are so high that riders can be comfortably doping without being near these numbers but since I am not an expert I don’t know what to look for other than Hematocrit level.
 
Krebs cycle said:
I think the variation in %retic value is borderline high, you rarely see it go much outside 0.9-1.2% under normal circumstances but values as high as 1.6-1.7% can be expected with altitude exposure. But then again, I have also seen %retics only go up to 1.5% in subjects that definately were taking EPO.

The value of 1.49% is a bit of a red flag. I would expect altitude or LHTL to have been occurring immediately prior to that date for it to be considered completely "non-suspicious".
Good info. I wish you'd expand on this issue. Thanks.
 
Scott SoCal said:
But we know LeMond beat Fignon. We also know Fignon was a doper. Since LeMond is so adamant about LA having doped because he beat those who doped then can we conclude (using LeMond's logic) that LeMond doped?

I feel like screaming "GREG, WHAT IS YOUR VO2 MAX?!!!!"

Dopers like LeMond suck the life outta me.
This topic has been talked to death in this Forum. I will refer you to one of my posts. Please try to refer to it and if I made any error then tell me and I will adjust the values.

Escarabajo said:
Does tailwind means anything to you?

I will help you with the power calculations:

Greg Lemond ITT 1989: 420-430 Watts (5.65 W/kg)
Lance Armstrong 2004 Alpe d'Huez: 466 Watts (6.5 W/kg)
Contador - Verbier 2009: 413 W- 434 W (6.8- 7.1 W/kg)
Pantani – Alpe d’Huez 1997: 403 W (7.2 W/kg)

Here I am not taking into account the time to exhaustion which is a big factor on the power that an athlete can perform. In other words it is harder to maintain a high power for longer times. Look at the short time for the ITT for Greg Lemond. That is completely believable. Now look at the numbers on Watts/Kg that all other athletes have. Above 6 W/kg the numbers start being seriously suspicious.

Now here is a link at Greg's take on his numbers:
http://www.bikeraceinfo.com/oralhistory/lemond.html

In this link Greg also is explaining how the power decreases over time. This means that over a period of three weeks of riding in the Tour de France the riders will experience fatigue and decrease in VO2 max. Something that is not happening with the other three athletes apparently.

As a late note, this topic has been discussed in the past in this forum so that was the reason why I did not want to reply to you, but since you have been so insistent on this topic now I took the time to reply to you.

I hope this helps.

Note: here is a link on how to do the calculations and a chart on the exhaustion times for athletes. Or you can just Google the topic all you want.
http://swiss2.whosting.ch/mdetting/sports/
It does not look like these numbers will give a higher number than 93 ml/kg which is his VO2 max at 90%. I don't have the formula but if I follow the same procedure as in this link, I don't get close to this number.
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2009/07/tour-de-france-2009-contador-vo2max.html
 
joebloebloe said:
Thank god we have you looking at these numbers because just relying on WADA, USADA, UCI, AFLD, their testers, 40 plus in and out of competition tests and the bioligical passports is so un-comforting. I hope that you have immediately notified USADA and WADA of your amazing find in the these number irregularties and that they will nail LA to the wall over this great catch.
Certainly all those tests did not mean nothing to Kohl. Right? Or to any other of the dopers that have been catch via police instead of a doping test.
So what is your point?
 

TheArbiter

BANNED
Aug 3, 2009
180
0
0
Visit site
I like the way someone posts a conspiracy theory about postings on Armstrong's website - that prove he didn't dope - and then people start using this to make fun, not of the looniness of the orginal post and depths of Armstrong hatred, but of Armstrong fans!

Something has gotten a little backwards here.
 

TheArbiter

BANNED
Aug 3, 2009
180
0
0
Visit site
The point I am making is that I have heard so many times that the limiting parameters are so high that riders can be comfortably doping without being near these numbers but since I am not an expert I don’t know what to look for other than Hematocrit level.

Well what you have to remember is, if there really was a problem with these blood values then there would be a hell of a lot of stink about them. Not just a few comments in a forum from the usual suspects, desperate to throw up as much smoke as they can.

No, these levels are consistent with Wiggins and others who are certainly clean. It's clear that this year at least, Armstrong rode clean - and at 38 and four years out, that puts to bed any idea his dominance in the sport for so long was some type of trickery.

Of course you won't read that here.
 
Apr 8, 2009
272
0
0
Visit site
You guys are amazing.

If you got two different phone bills for the same period, you would call the phone company - right. Or would you put a post up on the internet and theorise about it for days on end.

Whoever did the test, has the correct numbers. The tests were not done by LA. So if you really want to do something useful, you could contact the agency or just the LA organisation itself, and ask which are the correct numbers.

then you could start your theories about what the numbers mean.

Oh hell, why not. Just keep doing what you are doing and start another thread on doping, Lemond, power, VO2, blah, blah, blah :rolleyes:
 
Jul 16, 2009
230
0
0
Visit site
Martin said:
What?? Do you mean the kids of his first wife... or.. or third..
I wouldn't be such as optimistic about this "some call him a hero":)
This got me laughing...
Yea and I really do not know who should be called egoistic here... if it's me or someone who leaves wife and kids who stood beside him during the darkest days of his life...

Which children? I mean the leprous child land mine victims in the slums of Calcutta

Lance, princess diana, michael Jackson, Bono, mother Theresa.

You be very careful here ;-)

In regards to his own fidelity and marital vows and his children- I have little respect for him there and believe that if a person can cheat a spouse they can less care if they cheat a sport. However that's not our business- the crits and
betsy and livestrong and cycling side on the other hand- thats fair game.

What's the next book? 7 highly effective habits of 7 highly effective cyclists?

Cyclist # 1 Lance Pharmstrong
Cyclist # 2 Marco Pantani
cyclist # 3
...........

Habit # 1 Timing Autoglobulous (sp?) Blood doping 2 days before the ITT and big climbs
Habit # 2..........
Habit # 2
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,086
1
0
Visit site
joebloebloe said:
Thank god we have you looking at these numbers because just relying on WADA, USADA, UCI, AFLD, their testers, 40 plus in and out of competition tests and the bioligical passports is so un-comforting. I hope that you have immediately notified USADA and WADA of your amazing find in the these number irregularties and that they will nail LA to the wall over this great catch.

It is time to get that cheating SOB off his high, cancer fund raising horse. Who needs his fame to draw fans to the sport, increase public awareness and interest, raise sponsor interest, bring more TV coverage of events. What a terrible thing he has done to the sport that we all love.

You guys all sounds like LeMond, just jealous of LA's success and talent and wish it could be you.

That's kind of like saying that I never speed because I haven't been caught.....

Seriously though, there is a lot of information in those tables that BigBoat posted. Enough information that, perhaps, people trained in this area (such as Krebs Cycle) can make some informed observations. I am sorry that we are suggesting that your god is not all-powerful......
 
Mar 26, 2009
62
0
0
Visit site
biker77 said:
Has anyone seen an explanation from livestrong?

Lance is a cancer survivor so he doesn't need to explain ****!!!

Seriously, don't you think Lance fan boys excuses sound a lot like Chuck Norris jokes??? Or is it just me :D.
 
TheArbiter said:
Well what you have to remember is, if there really was a problem with these blood values then there would be a hell of a lot of stink about them. Not just a few comments in a forum from the usual suspects, desperate to throw up as much smoke as they can.

No, these levels are consistent with Wiggins and others who are certainly clean.

I heard a couple of convincing and rather technical points made by Krebs and Cobbles in theirs posts. Now I want to hear from you how can you infer from these numbers that he is riding clean?
I see the Off-Score and Hematocrit level are well within range but does that mean that a cyclist is clean because these two numbers are within range? As far as I am concerned one way of tricking these variations is microdosing while you draw blood from your body, so that might throw away the effectiveness of the off-score and hematocrit level swings (Although Lance's Hematocrit swings seem to be a little on the high side from 39 to 45 if this last number is proven to be correct).

It's clear that this year at least, Armstrong rode clean - and at 38 and four years out, that puts to bed any idea his dominance in the sport for so long was some type of trickery.

Of course you won't read that here.


And just remember that in 2005 when Lance retired last time there was no Bio Passport so therefore it was very hard to track down these blood profile variations. So let's not conclude the past results from trhe present.
 
Aug 3, 2009
81
0
0
Visit site
Digger said:
You haters need to get a life. Get off your fat a&&es and go ride your bike. Your lives are so sad that you feel the need to criticise a guy who has done more for the world than any other human being, bar none. This guy changed the face of cycling, revolutionised the sport. His cadence change was something that nobody had ever thought of before, as was going on training camps. The guy trained harder than everyone else because cancer made him change his attitudes. He lost little or no weight, but look at how thin his face became. Come on guys, don't be so negative, give credit where it is due. Michele Ferrari, would it ever occur to you that he was doping other athletes who needed it more, but didn't dope Lance because he was so talented and there was no need. Lance is so anti-doping he can't even be in the peloton with a a guy who has doped (Simeoni). As if he'd put that sh** into his body after going through what he went through. We all know the reason EPO was in the sample - post cancer treatment obviously. Lemond is a jealous whiner wo got jealous when Lance became more successful. Shut up Greg, I used to like you, you were my hero. Now I just wish you'd go away. Don;t get me started on Betsy what's her name. Obviously she's jealous of the success Lance has had. L'Equipe are a tabloid. The French hate Lance because he was so good (Eventhough they loved Indurain, Merckx, Lemond, Anquetil).

In summation, Lance is a cancer surviving hero who kicked its a%% and now is back kicking its a&&, so you don't have to kick its a**. Lance being an egotistical d*** and bully makes me love him even more.

So there you go people, that's what we're arguing with. The sum parts of an argument with most Lance fans......

I'll bet Lance has made more of a difference in the fight against global warming than Al Gore has. Think about it. Lance has motivated millions to get out and ride bicycles than would be riding had he not come back from cancer. Many of them are now regular commuters who don't drive their cars as often...or who ride a bike to the grocery store now instead of driving.

Lance has not only inspired millions of cancer patients, he has also lowered the carbon footprint of millions of regular people, including myself. Not a victory for Lance, but a big victory for mother earth which sustains us. And a victory for our children, for sure.

But some of these anti-Lance conspiracy-theorists in this forum probably don't even believe the science behind global warming, based on some of the careless attitudes and intellectual recklessness(this thread, for instance) that I've seen posted in here.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
ProTour said:
I'll bet Lance has made more of a difference in the fight against global warming than Al Gore has. Think about it. Lance has motivated millions to get out and ride bicycles than would be riding had he not come back from cancer. Many of them are now regular commuters who don't drive their cars as often...or who ride a bike to the grocery store now instead of driving.

Lance has not only inspired millions of cancer patients, he has also lowered the carbon footprint of millions of regular people, including myself. Not a victory for Lance, but a big victory for mother earth which sustains us. And a victory for our children, for sure.

But some of these anti-Lance conspiracy-theorists in this forum probably don't even believe the science behind global warming, based on some of the careless attitudes and intellectual recklessness(this thread, for instance) that I've seen posted in here.

I wouldn't go highlighting Lances great contribution to Mother Earth...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/16/us/16lance.html

Obviously a New York times conspiracy.
 
Aug 3, 2009
81
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
I wouldn't go highlighting Lances great contribution to Mother Earth...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/16/us/16lance.html

Obviously a New York times conspiracy.

Like the lady said at the end of the article, Lance's response was heartening, and he clearly intends to do something about his water consumption. Nobody is perfect, it sounds like he was really caught off-guard with this whole 'watergate' incident.

Water conservation is important, but not nearly important as the fight against global warming, which is a fight Lance is clearly leading with his inspirational achievements.
 
Jul 11, 2009
791
0
0
Visit site
ProTour said:
Like the lady said at the end of the article, Lance's response was heartening, and he clearly intends to do something about his water consumption. Nobody is perfect, it sounds like he was really caught off-guard with this whole 'watergate' incident.

Water conservation is important, but not nearly important as the fight against global warming, which is a fight Lance is clearly leading with his inspirational achievements.

I'm so annoyed that I used this in another thread.
smartchart.jpg

I just give up, write whatever you want.
 
Aug 3, 2009
81
0
0
Visit site
53 x 11 said:
I just give up, write whatever you want.

If you are not interested in being part of the conversation, and can only make worthless demeaning posts, perhaps you should give up and go somewhere else. Global warming is a serious issue, and to belittle the results of someone like Lance who has obviously had an impact is to belittle the fight against global warming itself.

I suspect you are one of the conspiracy theory denialists who doesn't care about global warming, the planet, or the future. The FACT is that global warming is real, just like Lance is for real.
 
Jul 16, 2009
230
0
0
Visit site
This thread is either extremely clever, or disturbing, Or both

Not sure what is humour, irony, sarcasm, and rose coloured denial

Still, Keep it coming
 
ProTour said:
I'll bet Lance has made more of a difference in the fight against global warming than Al Gore has. Think about it. Lance has motivated millions to get out and ride bicycles than would be riding had he not come back from cancer. Many of them are now regular commuters who don't drive their cars as often...or who ride a bike to the grocery store now instead of driving.

Lance has not only inspired millions of cancer patients, he has also lowered the carbon footprint of millions of regular people, including myself. Not a victory for Lance, but a big victory for mother earth which sustains us. And a victory for our children, for sure.

But some of these anti-Lance conspiracy-theorists in this forum probably don't even believe the science behind global warming, based on some of the careless attitudes and intellectual recklessness(this thread, for instance) that I've seen posted in here.

I'll give you one thing, that's a new one. Another one for the list.