Tyler's Book

Page 49 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 16, 2010
7,617
1,054
20,680
Microchip said:
I recall one of the footnotes commenting that she was a "star witness". They're talking, but just not to the public.

If you were Crow would you speak out? Imagine the response: "***** is just jealous I found someone else." If you were the first wife, would you speak out, when you're raising the kids and seeing him how often? If you were Haven would you speak out when you lied and lied and lied as much as she did? The only wives speaking out seem to be Andreu and LeMond ...
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
4
0
fmk_RoI said:
The correlation between avg speed and EPO not as clear as ppl think. Late 80s is hit by so many things: the UCI taming the Tour (cutting days off it); the sudden influx of cash; the changes in technology; the improvements in training; and, yes, of course, better drugs.

I haven't sorted out an online account for photos, so I'll just post a bit of data to illustrate a point. Years 1980 and 2000 cleanly bracket the introduction of EPO. In those years' Tour de France, the number and length of flat stages is pretty much equal. If you take the data below and plot winning speed vs stage distance, you will get a nice, linear slope. Longer stages are a bit slower than shorter, etc.

The slope of the lines is the same for each year. However, the two lines are shifted by 6 km/hr!! Put into perspective, 6 km/hr is a 15 % difference in average speed. If we assume that power ~ speed^3 (i.e., aerodynamics dominate at those speeds) then that represents a 50% increase in average power output. Insane.

This can not be due to road conditions, bike frames, clothing, wheels, nutrition, or anything, really. The athletes involved are making efforts consistent with one-day classic races for the duration of a whole grand tour. Something changed that greatly affected FTP and recovery. EPO.

year distance time speed
1980 133 3.328 39.9639423077
1980 276 7.605 36.291913215
1980 282.5 7.977 35.414316159
1980 249.6 8.056 30.9831181728
1980 215.8 5.953 36.2506299345
1980 164.2 4.351 37.7384509308
1980 205.3 5.474 37.5045670442
1980 203 4.716 43.0449533503
1980 194.1 5.757 33.7154768108
1980 189.5 5.58 33.9605734767
1980 160 3.962 40.3836446239

206.6 5.71 36.84

2000 194 4.769 40.6793877123
2000 161.5 3.631 44.4781052052
2000 202 4.318 46.7809170912
2000 198.5 4.468 44.4270367055
2000 205.5 5.195 39.5572666025
2000 203.5 4.371 46.556851979
2000 181 4.485 40.3567447046
2000 218.5 5.096 42.8767660911
2000 185.5 4.051 45.7911626759
2000 252 6.1375 41.0590631365
2000 248 6.237 39.7627064294

204.5 4.80 42.94

John Swanson
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
4
0
Note: I'm using http://www.bikeraceinfo.com/tdf/tdf2012.html as my data source.

For 2012 there 9 flat stages, and the average speed for those stages was 42.6 km/hr. Again, this is 6 km/hr faster than 1980. Even with more "realistic" mountain performances, I have to conclude the athlete's ability to sustain 50% higher power output for long periods and then recover quickly has fundamentally changed.

John Swanson
 
Aug 11, 2012
416
0
0
Orinda8 said:
One puzzle in the book is why all of the wives have remained silent about the doping even after divorces, they do not have to worry about teams and cycling careers. Sheryl Crowe is in a perfect position to publicly tell what she saw but she remains silent (still hoping Lance will come back to her?).
A puzzle, seriously ? No, they do not have to worry about teams and cycling careers but is that only important to you ?

I actually like it that all wifes remain silent, despite the fact they know a lot of ins and outs.

But nothing worse than a jealous/hateful ex-wife.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
"Jeff" said:
A puzzle, seriously ? No, they do not have to worry about teams and cycling careers but is that only important to you ?

I actually like it that all wifes remain silent, despite the fact they know a lot of ins and outs.

But nothing worse than a jealous/hateful ex-wife.

Yes there is.

It is a doping, cheating, bullying sociopathic disgraced cyclist who was stripped of 7 tour de france wins ;)
 
Aug 29, 2012
607
0
9,980
Benotti69 said:
Yes there is.

It is a doping, cheating, bullying sociopathic disgraced cyclist who was stripped of 7 tour de france wins ;)

Is there anything good to say about LA?
 
May 27, 2010
6,333
3
17,485
Bosco10 said:
Is there anything good to say about LA?

He is not like Evander Holyfield, and is still paying child support?

Otherwise, ask Pandora. There is always hope.

Dave.
 
Sep 15, 2010
1,086
3
9,985
Bosco10 said:
Is there anything good to say about LA?

All of his results since 1998 have been stripped.

via BroDeal: "LA now has more testicles than Tour de France titles." -- ST

He believes in miracles?

When faced with overwhelming evidence, he knows when to quit.

He still has friend$ running unsanctioned races.
 
Jun 4, 2012
27
0
0
Animal said:
I'm over in the US later this month. I'll buy the proper version.

I wouldn't worry about which version to buy too much - the UK edition doesn't have anything particularly significant redacted or added; the main difference in the UK version is an omission of "Motoman's" cycle shop and home town, as well as extracts from Coyle's various 'phone conversations with him.

Other than that, it's only the removal of some names here and there and the addition of a sentence or two to cover off any potential libel laws in the UK.

See all the differences here: http://www.veloveritas.co.uk/2012/09/18/the-differences-between-the-us-and-uk-versions-of-the-secret-race/
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,644
81
22,580
hughmoore said:
Lance was one of the greatest cyclists of all time.

Hugh

The keyword is 'was'. Now that he has been stripped of all results past Aug. 1998, what is left does not make it past Luc Leblanc's palmares. Bested by a Frenchman. Oh, the humanity.
 
Jul 5, 2012
2,878
1
11,485
hughmoore said:
Lance was one of the greatest cheats of all time.



Hugh

Hugh I can't make up my mind if you were serious, or extremely clever in quoting a "nice" thing to say about Lance, but clearly meaning the opposite. So:

Fixed. Free of charge :D
 

thehog

BANNED
Jul 27, 2009
31,285
2
22,485
D-Queued said:
Bad side effects on 'partners' who come into contact with a male hormone product.

Dave.

Meaning someone got knocked up and maybe a little more....
 
Feb 25, 2011
2,538
0
11,480
ffs, if it's too "delicate" for a public forum, would somebody please PM me and the big ring and enlighten us?