The Froome Files, test data only thread

[Vayerism]

KB

You'll struggle to find a post where I state my presentation of this data is anything other than interesting, because it is, well, I think it is. I've also not claimed a high level of accuracy, sticking "est" next to everything that is estimated or worse "Circa". I stated in my last point that the data for clean athletes was scant. however we have enough to make broadly informed predictions/estimations.

It's more a thought exercise than anything else. Taking the blood values we have, putting in what we know to be true about the impact of grand tour on an athlete's body and predicting, the values we don't have, from there and then assessing whether or not, that is credible/possible/likely or not.

You've already said comparing the blood values of doped athletes to clean ones is stupid, and I tend to agree.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

KB

You'll struggle to find a post where I state my presentation of this data is anything other than interesting, because it is, well, I think it is. I've also not claimed a high level of accuracy, sticking "est" next to everything that is estimated or worse "Circa". I stated in my last point that the data for clean athletes was scant. however we have enough to make broadly informed predictions/estimations.

It's more a thought exercise than anything else. Taking the blood values we have, putting in what we know to be true about the impact of grand tour on an athlete's body and predicting, the values we don't have, from there and then assessing whether or not, that is credible/possible/likely or not.

You've already said comparing the blood values of doped athletes to clean ones is stupid, and I tend to agree.

That's fair enough, I would just say that if you are going to include numbers, such as 16.8, you should probably include some kind of error (although this is admittedly hard to do).

I didn't say stupid I don't think, difficult sure but not stupid. The issue with clean vs doped is we generally don't know which is which. I do think it's informative to compare data with data, such as the CSC data Sniper linked to the data we have for Froome, and your, and others, estimates for the start of the TdF as it shows that his values were either very high or he has a very low decline rate. Neither is proof of doping but they are certainly things that would make you sit up and take notice.

 

[Tom the Engine]

I'm not comfortable enough with my physiology knowledge to really contribute to this discussion. But as a statistician I'd like to add a general remark.

I've also not claimed a high level of accuracy, sticking "est" next to everything that is estimated or worse "Circa".

That's fair enough and I've also not seen any disingenuous claims from you about accuracy elsewhere. But still it's a bit misleading. And I'm not trying to school you because I'm sure you're perfectly aware of this. But when estimates from data are discussed in public I think it's worthwhile to remind us all of some general characteristics from time to time.

If we consider simple straighforward statements like the following:

1 point per week is fairly typical for a GT, see Horner, Rasmussen or Hamilton (in reference to why its three bags/tour). Though it varies obviously. It can also be 10-12% with the majority in the first week, as you wouldn't expect it to continue to drop on a continual standard line.
So it stands to reason, though without the actual figure nothing more than that. That if Froome is at 15.3 a week and a half in you can add 1.5 to the figure giving 16.8 at the start of the tour.

We have a measured value (15.3) and a rough estimate for a rate of change ("1 point per week is fairly typical for a GT"). So we start with the measured value and add the product of number of days and rate of change to get an estimate for the initial value (16.8). So this is really as easy as it gets to compute a point-estimate. But don't forget that all of these involved quantities have some level of uncertainty attached to them (even the number of days, think about it). Especially the estimate for the rate is obtained in a way that its error bars must be huge.
Now if we mix these quantities together the way we do it, the uncertainty level of the result goes through the roof! And that's not just an academic subtlety with no meaning in the "real world". Failing to consider it in the appropriate way can hurt your reasoning badly (and might get you fired as a quantitative professional ).

By reporting numbers like 16.8 (without additional information) you implicitly state that you can control your results plus/minus 0.1, which most certainly you don't. And even if you add "(est)" or "circa" to it, this is still the impression that most people will take away. Nobody who reads this will sit in front of the monitor saying to himself something like: "This value could probably also be 16.2." We just don't.
And if we then go on to interpret the result by comparing it to other numbers and making statements like "X is bigger then Y" or "X is abnormally big" it gets even more crucial. Comparisons like these necessarily have to take the level of uncertainty into account that you're operation on. Otherwise they're probably meaningless.
Could you distinguish 16.8 from 16.7 or 16.9? Unlikely. What about 16.6 or 17.0? Can your method based on few data, many assumptions and simple calculations reliably distinguish 16.8 from 16.4? I don't know. Would it be necessary to have this precision in your analysis to make any statements at all? Your call.

Error estimates like these are admittedly very difficult and sometimes even infeasible. But the uncertainty levels in play can approach the interesting orders of magnitude (that are relevant for comparisons and conclusions) awfully fast when you're playing around with data like this. Just keep this in the back of your head.

 

[thehog]

EPO & heartrate;

 

[IndianCyclist]

EPO & heartrate;

That is incredible. it took 2 years of slogging for me to drop my resting heart rate from 76 to 60. Now i understand the desire to dope.

 

[thehog]

EPO & heartrate;

That is incredible. it took 2 years of slogging for me to drop my resting heart rate from 76 to 60. Now i understand the desire to dope.

It's a logical step. Makes complete sense if you're trying to win a GT. Even microdosing EPO is very effective.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

It would help if verified sources were provided along with quotes.

 

[thehog]

Here come the fun wreckers

 

[djpbaltimore]

So, I am left to assume that the source for that quote will not be forthcoming? Or more context at the very least?

 

[V3R1T4S]

Some basic internet skills (i.e. 2 second google with quotes for exact phrase matching) yields this: http://www.rajeun.net/bicycle.html

Don't care for this argument; enough threads have been ruined here lately by this tit for tat between posters.

 

[King Boonen]

Asking for a source is not tit for tat, it's fundamental to any discussion.

 

[djpbaltimore]

Thank you, VERITAS. I appreciate it.

Interesting that it is written as first person although it is a story about someone else. That is a red flag for me. This should've been included for context in the original quote.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Thank you, VERITAS. I appreciate it.

Interesting that it is written as first person although it is a story about someone else. That is a red flag for me. This should've been included for context in the original quote.

You'd be hard pushed to find a decent study on athletes taking EPO and the responses on the human body. Most of that is on Leinders, Ferrari and Fuentes hard drives etc.

This was a decent, anecdotal account, it wasn't trying to be a scientific study by its own self-admission. So probably stop it with the 'red flag' business, that it kinda stupid for the type of detail it contains.

This article was submitted by Animal, anonimous, in early September of 1999. It has been edited to make it readable, without changing Animal's folkloric language. This article is for educational purposes only and does not provide any medical advice.

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Re:

Thank you, VERITAS. I appreciate it.

Interesting that it is written as first person although it is a story about someone else. That is a red flag for me. This should've been included for context in the original quote.

You'd be hard pushed to find a decent study on athletes taking EPO and the responses on the human body. Most of that is on Leinders, Ferrari and Fuentes hard drives etc.

This was a decent, anecdotal account, it wasn't trying to be a scientific study by its own self-admission. So probably stop it with the 'red flag' business, that it kinda stupid for the type of detail it contains.

This article was submitted by Animal, anonimous, in early September of 1999. It has been edited to make it readable, without changing Animal's folkloric language. This article is for educational purposes only and does not provide any medical advice.

"Who wrote this" was of course the question any reader would have in their mind. Simple to post or link the source with the original post. Unless your goal is to be cryptic, obscure, provocative and to stir up the board.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Thank you, VERITAS. I appreciate it.

Interesting that it is written as first person although it is a story about someone else. That is a red flag for me. This should've been included for context in the original quote.

You'd be hard pushed to find a decent study on athletes taking EPO and the responses on the human body. Most of that is on Leinders, Ferrari and Fuentes hard drives etc.

This was a decent, anecdotal account, it wasn't trying to be a scientific study by its own self-admission. So probably stop it with the 'red flag' business, that it kinda stupid for the type of detail it contains.

This article was submitted by Animal, anonimous, in early September of 1999. It has been edited to make it readable, without changing Animal's folkloric language. This article is for educational purposes only and does not provide any medical advice.

"Who wrote this" was of course the question any reader would have in their mind. Simple to post or link the source with the original post. Unless your goal is to be cryptic, obscure, provocative and to stir up the board.

Simples.

Or you know what you are posting is worthless and you're trying to make people think it isn't.

 

[sniper]

He's anonymous, therefore he has no credibility

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

He's anonymous, therefore he has no credibility

Is that what you think?

Seems a bit harsh to dismiss him for that.

 

[djpbaltimore]

I would be more inclined to think (if the story is true) that he is taking something in addition to EPO, or that his response is an outlier. The common response to EPO in healthy and sick patients is hypertension due to vasoconstriction and this has been published in the literature. In the case of EPO, Hypertension is partially independent of HCT. His BP went down by ~10%. The numbers just don't really add up, but it could be an outlier.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

I would be more inclined to think (if the story is true) that he is taking something in addition to EPO, or that his response is an outlier. The common response to EPO in healthy and sick patients is hypertension due to vasoconstriction and this has been published in the literature. In the case of EPO, Hypertension is partially independent of HCT. His BP went down by ~10%. The numbers just don't really add up, but it could be an outlier.

I'm not sure I'd even give it that much thought. He provides none of the useful information to assess those numbers. He doesn't say at what point during the day these single measurements were taken, Just that it was the same hour. There is no T0 before doping, there is no dose information and then, after reporting single measurements previously he reports two measurements for the final day with no explanation. There is no info how the measurements were taken either. It's worthless.

 

[djpbaltimore]

Valid points, KB. Garbage in... garbage out....

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

Thank you, VERITAS. I appreciate it.

Interesting that it is written as first person although it is a story about someone else. That is a red flag for me. This should've been included for context in the original quote.

You'd be hard pushed to find a decent study on athletes taking EPO and the responses on the human body. Most of that is on Leinders, Ferrari and Fuentes hard drives etc.

This was a decent, anecdotal account, it wasn't trying to be a scientific study by its own self-admission. So probably stop it with the 'red flag' business, that it kinda stupid for the type of detail it contains.

There are studies out there on BodyBuilders forums and the like. You're not going to see a full scale published study. Mark Daly did one (from BBC) and his results were very good but he did say he didn't notice much change with his heart rate (I spoke to him).

What about a real world example? Luckily for us, Captaintbag—a mysterious cycling blogger—has done the math. The numbers are solid, and based around one very basic relationship, Joyner says. Haemoglobin—a protein which carries oxygen—and your VO2 max are naturally linked. Captaintbag can estimate the changes in a rider’s haemoglobin based on how much EPO he is taking (or blood he is transfusing). From there, he can predict the rider’s new VO2 max and threshold power. In other words, he can tell you how quickly a rider can race clean, and on the program.

The numbers are startling. In one example, Captaintbag looked at the power output of domestic pro cyclist Brad Huff and put him on three simulated doping programs—a very-low dose that probably wouldn’t get you caught, a medium-dose (which might also fly under the radar), or a high “Postal” dose.

The results: From putting out 4.875 watts/kg at threshold, Huff could see his numbers rise to 5.25 watts/kg on the very-low dose program, 5.44 watts/kg on the medium dose, and 5.74 watts/kg on the “Postal” program—up to a 17 percent increase. “Presumming that he’d still be wurth [sic] a damn after 4hrs/ he’s not quite winning GTs [grand tours like the Tour de France]/ he’s a sprinter anyways/ but its [sic] a likely ticket to europe [sic],” Captaintbag writes in verse.

THE BOTTOM LINE: There’s no denying that EPO enhances performance. In fact, it can turn low-level pros into world class riders.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Re:

Some basic internet skills (i.e. 2 second google with quotes for exact phrase matching) yields this: http://www.rajeun.net/bicycle.html

Don't care for this argument; enough threads have been ruined here lately by this tit for tat between posters.

Funny how asking for a valid and credible source for a random quote is looked down upon more than posting something without it.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

Some basic internet skills (i.e. 2 second google with quotes for exact phrase matching) yields this: http://www.rajeun.net/bicycle.html

Don't care for this argument; enough threads have been ruined here lately by this tit for tat between posters.

Funny how asking for a valid and credible source for a random quote is looked down upon more than posting something without it.

Its not looked down upon all. You know as well as I do, studies on elite athletes using EPO are rarer than gold dust. The fact that you ask for one shows you were just posturing. There's plenty of home grown studies out there and Dr. Ferrari no doubt has many. I just thought the heart rate aspect to EPO use is interesting. Most suggest the same.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Re: Re:

You know as well as I do, studies on elite athletes using EPO are rarer than gold dust. The fact that you ask for one shows you were just posturing.

When did I ever ask for such a study?

 

[V3R1T4S]

Re: Re:

Some basic internet skills (i.e. 2 second google with quotes for exact phrase matching) yields this: http://www.rajeun.net/bicycle.html

Don't care for this argument; enough threads have been ruined here lately by this tit for tat between posters.

Funny how asking for a valid and credible source for a random quote is looked down upon more than posting something without it.

Funny how you can drip condescension but completely miss the point. Must be slow on a certain wattage forum recently.

[If you must know I am an academic scientist in a basic science by profession. You can probably guess my university affiliation from my screen name... I understand the importance of proper citation as much if not more than almost anyone. But this is nothing more than "pub talk" as you've said multiple times, right Alex? djbalt and sniper annihilated another thread and it seemed this one was heading that way. Instead of complaining, one could have done a basic search then used that as a counter-point. But now we have a whole extra page of... YES! Tit for tat.]