Ullrich confessed

[Mr.38%]

Matschiner got specific about prices, I had to look them up. Remember, his support was superb, he even had Siberia before Ufe iirc. And I found him real cheap, maybe too cheap for greedy Bernie.

How many Matschiners are still there?

 

[thehog]

Matschiner got specific about prices, I had to look them up. Remember, his support was superb, he even had Siberia before Ufe iirc. And I found him real cheap, maybe too cheap for greedy Bernie.

How many Matschiners are still there?

If you want a transfusion you can get it. Prices vary as does quality.

Being on the right team and having a DS to hook you up helps.

Contador and Valverde took a very good path to their programs.

DS's generally are not going to put a neo on the transfusion program. They have to break them first. Then introduce them slowly into the stepped program.

Trust me if you were riding in the 2000s and you wanted transfusions you didn't have to go far.

 

[Race Radio]

Nonsense.

Do you think Manzano was paying 65k for transfusions in 2003?

Do you think Ricco homemade joblob cost him 100k.

Baloney sandwich.

Freiburg wasn't charging the price of a car for a transfusion.

Humanplasma? Rabo? Nothing like Ferrari

Thanks for proving my point.

Ricco tried to do it on his own, how did that work out for him? How many riders were in the car to Freiburg in 2007? Even if it cost 20K how many NeoPro's can afford that? Manzano paid for his transfusion, $4,500 up front and more out of his prize money. Only a select few on the team were even offered that deal.

Ferrari charged lance over 1 million. Tyler and Jan paid Fuentes close to 100k each..... level playing field .

 

[blackcat]

Thanks for proving my point.

Ricco tried to do it on his own, how did that work out for him? How many riders were in the car to Freiburg in 2007? Even if it cost 20K how many NeoPro's can afford that? Manzano paid for his transfusion, $4,500 up front and more out of his prize money. Only a select few on the team were even offered that deal.

Ferrari charged lance over 1 million. Tyler and Jan paid Fuentes close to 100k each..... level playing field .

also means, if you have cancer and have a great story to sell on letterman and leno and to katie couric, you can funnel some of those 60million greenbacks from Nike into Ferrari's pockets.

if you cant be marketed to the US consumer, = less blood bags.

if anyone is curious, go to autobus.cyclingnews and the calendar for 2002 and the Tour.

Rumsas came third in Paris. but Fassa lost time to berloki and ONCE in the TTT. otherwise, Rumas was second to Lance. the difference was the support behind Lance. medical, preparation, stateside, gerona, st moritz, ferrari.

the $ should not decide the race.

in June before Landis' 2006 win his manager Will Geoghan had him selling prosthetic hips and a story in the NY Times magazine the week before grand departe.

not against capitalism, but the race needs to be decided on the hot pour

 

[thehog]

Thanks for proving my point.

Ricco tried to do it on his own, how did that work out for him? How many riders were in the car to Freiburg in 2007? Even if it cost 20K how many NeoPro's can afford that? Manzano paid for his transfusion, $4,500 up front and more out of his prize money. Only a select few on the team were even offered that deal.

Ferrari charged lance over 1 million. Tyler and Jan paid Fuentes close to 100k each..... level playing field .

Cool your jets there Race. There are no points to prove. This is the Clinic. Not a Race Radio soapbox. The Clinic is free to all to give their opinions. Lets keep it that way.

You're hung up on level playing fields, lance, Ferrari and jan.

Transfusions were available. Just like life we can't all afford a Mercedes. But we can still buy a car. No one was excluded.

If you want a transfusion you could get it.

Prices and quality varying.

You'll be fine. Just take a few deep breaths.

 

[gooner]

Cool your jets there Race. There are no points to prove. This is the Clinic. Not a Race Radio soapbox. The Clinic is free to all to give their opinions. Lets keep it that way.

You're hung up on level playing fields, lance, Ferrari and jan.

Transfusions were available. Just like life we can't all afford a Mercedes. But we can still buy a car. No one was excluded.

If you want a transfusion you could get it.

Prices and quality varying.

You'll be fine. Just take a few deep breaths.

So you admit some couldn't afford a more sophisticated blood doping programme as others.

 

[blackcat]

Matschiner got specific about prices, I had to look them up. Remember, his support was superb, he even had Siberia before Ufe iirc. And I found him real cheap, maybe too cheap for greedy Bernie.

How many Matschiners are still there?

matschiner had a collective of kenyan runners in his management pool. not just bernie kohl

so the runners were gonna earn him a commission at golden league races. it was like he took an equity stake.

and the kenyans would not have had deutschmarks to pay. he had to invest in their hema

 

[Race Radio]

Transfusions were available. Just like life we can't all afford a Mercedes. But we can still buy a car. No one was excluded.
.

No worries. Enjoy driving around France for 3 weeks in July in a Yugo. If you can't afford the Yugo you can always take a bus, or even hitchhike.....but you will not beat Lance in his Ferrari or Jan in his Mercades

 

[Von Mises]

Transfusions were available. Just like life we can't all afford a Mercedes. But we can still buy a car. No one was excluded.

Maybe no one was excluded, but if you read/listen Hamilton or Landis, it is pretty clear that tranfusions was more complicated, you could not do it alone, you needed more money, better planning, better logistics etc. During TdF it was especially complicated, you needed special logistical arrangments etc Quite clear it was not possible (at least if you wanted to make it relatively safe and risk free).

 

[thehog]

So you admit some couldn't afford a more sophisticated blood doping programme as others.

Of course. But there's nothing to admit. It's obvious. Of course Lance had more to spend on drugs than the guy coming 148th. Lance was a multi-millionaire. Jan had a 3m a year contract.

That's not a revelation.

However Riis, JB, Saiz made sure everyone was covered regardless of earnings.

No one missed out. If you were at the Tour then you were on "the team".

Do you think 1996 2nd year Pro Jan paid for all his drugs on his own?

I mean seriously.

Jan and Lance had their top flight program's but they earnt the right to spend millions on their programs for one reason - because they could.

Life.

 

[Race Radio]

Maybe no one was excluded, but if you read/listen Hamilton or Landis, it is pretty clear that tranfusions was more complicated, you could not do it alone, you needed more money, better planning, better logistics etc. During TdF it was especially complicated, you needed special logistical arrangments etc Quite clear it was not possible (at least if you wanted to make it relatively safe and risk free).

Hamilton's book also made it clear that most of the team was excluded. This was the case with the early doping program and only got more exclusive when the transfusions started

 

[Scott SoCal]

Contador and Valverde took a very good path to their programs.

With Pepe Marti sourcing his dope?

 

[Mr.38%]

matschiner had a collective of kenyan runners in his management pool. not just bernie kohl

so the runners were gonna earn him a commission at golden league races. it was like he took an equity stake.

and the kenyans would not have had deutschmarks to pay. he had to invest in their hema

Kenyan's are/were even greedier than Bernie, and Matschiner was aware of this. So he put them on half or one third of the optimum dosis, knowing they had more than one source. He didn't suspect Kohl to have another as well...

Like I said elsewhere, if everyone had his personal Matschiner they'd be happily doping away.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Of course. But there's nothing to admit. It's obvious. Of course Lance had more to spend on drugs than the guy coming 148th. Lance was a multi-millionaire. Jan had a 3m a year contract.

That's not a revelation.

However Riis, JB, Saiz made sure everyone was covered regardless of earnings.

No one missed out. If you were at the Tour then you were on "the team".

Do you think 1996 2nd year Pro Jan paid for all his drugs on his own?

I mean seriously.

Jan and Lance had their top flight program's but they earnt the right to spend millions on their programs for one reason - because they could.

Life.

Well, either Hamilton has it wrong, or you do.

 

[thehog]

With Pepe Marti sourcing his dope?

Absolutely!

Clean team Sky ProCycling today have the most money and scientific "clean" program because they can buy the best riders and pay the biggest salaries.

Fact of life.

Some people/teams have more money.

It's no different in a clean cycling world than in a dirty cycling world.

What's all this crap that Jan had an advantage?

Not likely. T-Mobile had a big budget. And they used it.

AMC-Halfords wouldn't compete today on their budget.

That is clear.

 

[Merckx index]

Let me restate what I think is RR’s argument.

He has evidence, from his sources, that Jan performed very poorly in training camps as well as in some documented races prior to his big performances in the TDF. How is this to be reconciled with his great performances in the TDF?

RR has two explanations for this:

1) Ulle transfused. RR argues that this is much more expensive than EPO, that most other riders couldn’t afford it, or at least couldn’t afford it to the extent that Ulle and a select few others did it. This is possible, but then it raises the question: how could Ulle afford it? The logic seems to be that with his great results came more money, but the logic is circular: if he couldn’t get great results without transfusing, how did he get all that money in the first place? It would seem that only riders born fairly wealthy would be able to afford transfusions from the beginning, giving them the great results that would bring more money to sustain the doping.

Moreover, when Ulle began his pro career, in the early to mid 90s, there is no evidence AFAIK that he was transfusing. EPO was the program of choice, and as RR acknowledges, its use was very widespread. So how did Ulle get an advantage over others?

This brings us to the second factor:

2) Ulle was a better responder to EPO than most other riders. He got more of a benefit from the drug than others.

So RR’s argument, as far as I can tell, goes like this: Like other riders, Jan took EPO in the 90s, and because of his better response, got better results than most, and built a fraudulent image of himself as a supremely naturally talented GT rider. Because of that success, when the EPO test was developed, and it was necessary to switch to transfusions, he had the economic means to go on the best program, unlike most other riders.

But the problem with this, as I have pointed out ad nauseum, is that there is no evidence that Jan was a better responder to EPO. He apparently had a fairly low natural HT, but in the days before the 50% limit that wasn’t as much of an advantage as it was later, and in any case, there would have been other riders with comparably low HTs. Beyond this, everything else is pure speculation.

The only other explanation that fits RR’s thesis is that Jan was willing to push the envelope more than other riders. Like Riis, he was willing to jack his HT up to levels where others would not go. One of the “costs” Alex is referring to. Again, possible, but again, I haven’t seen the evidence for this.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Let me restate what I think is RR’s argument.

He has evidence, from his sources, that Jan performed very poorly in training camps as well as in some documented races prior to his big performances in the TDF. How is this to be reconciled with his great performances in the TDF?

RR has two explanations for this:

1) Ulle transfused. RR argues that this is much more expensive than EPO, that most other riders couldn’t afford it, or at least couldn’t afford it to the extent that Ulle and a select few others did it. This is possible, but then it raises the question: how could Ulle afford it? The logic seems to be that with his great results came more money, but the logic is circular: if he couldn’t get great results without transfusing, how did he get all that money in the first place? It would seem that only riders born fairly wealthy would be able to afford transfusions from the beginning, giving them the great results that would bring more money to sustain the doping.

Moreover, when Ulle began his pro career, in the early to mid 90s, there is no evidence AFAIK that he was transfusing. EPO was the program of choice, and as RR acknowledges, its use was very widespread. So how did Ulle get an advantage over others?

This brings us to the second factor:

2) Ulle was a better responder to EPO than most other riders. He got more of a benefit from the drug than others.

So RR’s argument, as far as I can tell, goes like this: Like other riders, Jan took EPO in the 90s, and because of his better response, got better results than most, and built a fraudulent image of himself as a supremely naturally talented GT rider. Because of that success, when the EPO test was developed, and it was necessary to switch to transfusions, he had the economic means to go on the best program, unlike most other riders.

But the problem with this, as I have pointed out ad nauseum, is that there is no evidence that Jan was a better responder to EPO. He apparently had a fairly low natural HT, but in the days before the 50% limit that wasn’t as much of an advantage as it was later, and in any case, there would have been other riders with comparably low HTs. Beyond this, everything else is pure speculation.

The only other explanation that fits RR’s thesis is that Jan was willing to push the envelope more than other riders. Like Riis, he was willing to jack his HT up to levels where others would not go. One of the “costs” Alex is referring to. Again, possible, but again, I haven’t seen the evidence for this.

Those explainations become more complicated if one is to believe Livingston's claim that JU never raced with a high hct (low 40's iirc) from 2001 forward.

 

[blackcat]

Let me restate what I think is RR’s argument.

He has evidence, from his sources, that Jan performed very poorly in training camps as well as in some documented races prior to his big performances in the TDF. How is this to be reconciled with his great performances in the TDF?

RR has two explanations for this:

1) Ulle transfused. RR argues that this is much more expensive than EPO, that most other riders couldn’t afford it, or at least couldn’t afford it to the extent that Ulle and a select few others did it. This is possible, but then it raises the question: how could Ulle afford it? The logic seems to be that with his great results came more money, but the logic is circular: if he couldn’t get great results without transfusing, how did he get all that money in the first place? It would seem that only riders born fairly wealthy would be able to afford transfusions from the beginning, giving them the great results that would bring more money to sustain the doping.

Moreover, when Ulle began his pro career, in the early to mid 90s, there is no evidence AFAIK that he was transfusing. EPO was the program of choice, and as RR acknowledges, its use was very widespread. So how did Ulle get an advantage over others?

This brings us to the second factor:

2) Ulle was a better responder to EPO than most other riders. He got more of a benefit from the drug than others.

So RR’s argument, as far as I can tell, goes like this: Like other riders, Jan took EPO in the 90s, and because of his better response, got better results than most, and built a fraudulent image of himself as a supremely naturally talented GT rider. Because of that success, when the EPO test was developed, and it was necessary to switch to transfusions, he had the economic means to go on the best program, unlike most other riders.

But the problem with this, as I have pointed out ad nauseum, is that there is no evidence that Jan was a better responder to EPO. He apparently had a fairly low natural HT, but in the days before the 50% limit that wasn’t as much of an advantage as it was later, and in any case, there would have been other riders with comparably low HTs. Beyond this, everything else is pure speculation.

The only other explanation that fits RR’s thesis is that Jan was willing to push the envelope more than other riders. Like Riis, he was willing to jack his HT up to levels where others would not go. One of the “costs” Alex is referring to. Again, possible, but again, I haven’t seen the evidence for this.

but the Armstrong consensus is, he was not a GT winner in the making pre-Ferrari.

how does this conflict with this on Ullrich. how unfair is it on Ullrich?

 

[thehog]

Well, either Hamilton has it wrong, or you do.

As I've said before its pointless. It's easy to pluck out Jan and say he was a chemical creation depriving neo-pros of their right to win because he did win.

However the entire era was a mess. No one knows who was good, who had access to the best programs, who had protection, who did not etc.

The UCI were fully aware of Ferrari, Fuentes etc.

They were also well aware of what JB, Riis and what others were doing.

Jan didn't deprive anyone of anything. He was a phenomenal cyclist brought up in an era of rampant drug taking.

What correlations can you possibly draw from that period?

The only certainly was there was massive corruption, collusion and ?????

Jan doped. I think that's all that an he said.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

So you admit some couldn't afford a more sophisticated blood doping programme as others.

Ya, TheHogs incessant trolling means he is even trolling himself.

 

[Race Radio]

It's easy to pluck out Jan

I don't see anyone doing that here. As I have written multiple times the big winners of the era were riders who

Responded well to the dope of the era
Had access to the best drugs and guidence on how to use them
Were willing to take risk
Had protection from the Feds and the media

Jan is no different from Lance, Riis, or any of the other chemical inventions of the era.

 

[thehog]

I don't see anyone doing that here. As I have written multiple times the big winners of the era were riders who

Responded well to the dope of the era
Had access to the best drugs and guidence on how to use them
Were willing to take risk
Had protection from the Feds and the media

Jan is no different from Lance, Riis, or any of the other chemical inventions of the era.

Agreed.


(10)

 

[MacRoadie]

I think people are getting a bit too free, throwing around the terms "transfusions" and "doping program".

At the risk of offending half of the clinic, a blood transfusion is NOT prohibitively expensive. It's also not a particularly complicated process either.

In fact, there is an entire (legitimate) industry catering to autologous blood donation for pre-operative patients wanting to store their own blood for use during surgery (PABD). Places like Daxor and CryoBanks have been doing it for years on a national level, and there are literally hundreds of local blood banks storing autologous supplies.

To put things in general perspective, a pint of homologous blood bought privately runs about $230.00 a pint. Red blood cell product from the Red Cross runs about $130 to $150 depending on type and Rh factor. Privately stored blood runs about $600 per pint.

Now, when you start talking about a "doping program", THEN things get expensive. The real costs lie in the expertise required to prepare the individual program, the scheduling of draws and re-infusion, the PED cocktails that are needed to ensure optimal recovery from draws and to maximize production of new blood cells. That, inarguably, is a rare commodity and demands high prices.

In other words, you weren't paying Ferrari to draw your blood and store it in his fridge.

Certainly to be truly effective, one can't work without the other and although just about anyone can afford to draw and store their own blood (and re-infuse), the other side of the equation (the program) is required to achieve any meaningful success.

 

[thehog]

I think people are getting a bit too free, throwing around the terms "transfusions" and "doping program".

At the risk of offending half of the clinic, a blood transfusion is NOT prohibitively expensive. It's also not a particularly complicated process either.

In fact, there is an entire (legitimate) industry catering to autologous blood donation for pre-operative patients wanting to store their own blood for use during surgery (PABD). Places like Daxor and CryoBanks have been doing it for years on a national level, and there are literally hundreds of local blood banks storing autologous supplies.

To put things in general perspective, a pint of homologous blood bought privately runs about $230.00 a pint. Red blood cell product from the Red Cross runs about $130 to $150 depending on type and Rh factor. Privately stored blood runs about $600 per pint.

Now, when you start talking about a "doping program", THEN things get expensive. The real costs lie in the expertise required to prepare the individual program, the scheduling of draws and re-infusion, the PED cocktails that are needed to ensure optimal recovery from draws and to maximize production of new blood cells. That, inarguably, is a rare commodity and demands high prices.

In other words, you weren't paying Ferrari to draw your blood and store it in his fridge.

Certainly to be truly effective, one can't work without the other and although just about anyone can afford to draw and store their own blood (and re-infuse), the other side of the equation (the program) is required to achieve any meaningful success.

Correct.

Also Ullrich wasn't a chemical invention.

He had to get his ticket of admission.

And that was winning a lot of races pre-EPO frenzy days.

Everyone could see when he won the Commenwealth Cycle Classic the guy had uber-talent.

Put a clean Froome and a clean Ullrich in a two up match race.

Who would you out your money on? There's your anwser, right there.

 

[del1962]

Correct.

Also Ullrich wasn't a chemical invention.

He had to get his ticket of admission.

And that was winning a lot of races pre-EPO frenzy days.

Everyone could see when he won the Commenwealth Cycle Classic the guy had uber-talent.

Put a clean Froome and a clean Ullrich in a two up match race.

Who would you out your money on? There's your anwser, right there.

If you can promise me Ullrich would not sneak in a bloodbag, I would put my money on Froome even if he was forced to ride a bmx