"Vast Majority Of Riders Are Clean"

Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
If a top team rode clean they would never finish anybody in the top 50 places in the Tour de France no matter how talented their acquisitions... The management and the rider's goals are to ride the TDF because its their dream to do so. Likely the pro riders have a history of EPO, hgh, testosterone doping dating back to their junior or U-23 year old days. So to say they are gonna be clean for the pros is really laughable to begin with.

Clean They'd never come close to winning a stage or getting any good stage results and I say that with complete seriousness and I'm not over-doing it. In fact they would never ride well enough (win races at the top in Europe) without doping. So they would not even exist at the very top of the sport to begin with most likely...

The top riders that earn world class wins (that gets a Pro Continental team selected for a race like the TDF) blood dope with their own blood which gives up to a bloody 25% increase in sustainable power. A clean talented rider would never ever beat a talented blood doped rider unless the doper F-d up big time by crashing, or just being a total idiot in general.

You have to look at power outputs at the top which have been leaked. Hunter Allen F-d up when he released Gustov Larsson's TT power in California (486 watts for 31 minutes). He had about 6.3 watts per kilo for that effort. Talented past freaks like Lemond and Fingon who WON the TDF only could do about 5.8 maybe 5.9 for that length of time.

Now, just look at how much of a nobody Larsson is in Grand Tours. Not even top 50 maybe... He sure as hell will never win it. Yet he hold far more watts than what past winners could. This insight (Hunter Allen being a total genius by releasing the power data of his doped client) shows us that all the top riders are heavily doped.

Yet people from the uci, (Gripper) claim that all are clean and only 5 bloody riders out of 840 get taken out. Do you really think that expert stage racer Cauchtiolli who was blood doped with a 20% power gains (who was 3rd a few years back in the Giro) could not keep up with clean riders? It make zilch sense to believe what the UCI is saying here and it reeks of heavy corruption among all interested parties. If this isnt obvious to somebody I dont know what else I can say!
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
0
BigBoat said:
You have to look at power outputs at the top which are occationally leaked. Hunter Allen F-d up when he released Gustov Larsson's TT power in California (486 watts for 31 minutes). He had about 6.3 watts per kilo for that effort. Talented past freaks like Lemond and Fingon who WON the TDF only could do about 5.8 maybe 5.9 for that length of time.
Any of you who train and race with a powermeter know just how insane those power numbers that BigBoat speaks of are.

For comparison, Marco Pinotti released some power numbers in the most recent issue of CycleSport (I cannot give you a link as they only provide this in print to subscribers of which I am one obviously). He was talking about his power output when climbing the Mur de Huy which many of you know is the very steep climb in Fleche-Wallone that has a 25% max gradient, averages 10%, and is 1.3 KM long. This is what Pinotti said:
"My power output averages out at nearly 440 watts for the whole climb, which takes just over four minutes when we are racing up it. I use a 39x25 lowest gear."

This is obviously Pinotti's VO2 max power with a portion of the power being supplied by his anaerobic system. This is a four minute MAXIMAL effort. If you think it is any less than maximal you are kidding yourself. Even if it was a Cat 3 race going up the Mur de Huy, any bike race is going to be going all out up that climb. Why? We're talking 1.3 KM up a steep as hell hill. If you don't go all out then I will and I will drop you. They are all going all out. 440 watts for 4 minutes. And yet Larsson averages 486 for 31 minutes? That's insane.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
The good UCI protour and continental riders like to take 800cc refills of their own packed red cells (blood) right before races after blood controls. It only takes 20 minute to put in 3 units (250cc per unit). This gives perhaps a hematocrit (crit) boost of 9 points. You could go to 59% if you had a naturally high crit excuse like Ricco did.

They hemodilute on normal saline for controls, and they use human albumin There are other plasma expanders out there that they use... The Bio passport looks at the amount of hemoglobin per sample and that is very adjustible with hemodilution and training off of blood (say 2 units or 500ml.) They can dump it by draining blood from a 16 or 17 guage needle into a Pepsi can or some other container and dumping it down the sink... Or into a blood bag with preserving solution and into the fridge at 4 degrees to be infused later in the race. The body immediately replaces blood loss with plasma volume so your crit will drop and a good doctor can time a riders "natural" blood levels to happen right for the controls. They are able to now preserve blood (whole or packed red cells) that retain their original values (rectics). So they cannot be busted on dead cells which is looked at in blood samples.

The riders IV dose human identical epo (Dynepo) to stimulate rectics. This cant be tested for! Yet riders are still so careless that recently one was busted for regular old epo (Kolom)...

HGH, or IGF-1 boost recovery and cant be tested for. Insulin too! There are all sorts of 02 carrying boosters like the old hemopure/ oxyglobin the riders used back in 2002. Its a joke to say riders in the Tour de France are clean. A JOKE! The tour doctors constantly used to spout that riders show no signs of doping and everybody's clean! They must really have a laugh producing that dribble to the media.

Have a nice day. :)
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
0
dimspace said:
The only thing that "upsets" me is that this proves that the UCI is still toothless and corrupt. The last time I got "upset" regarding doping in cycling was in 2006 when Operation Puerto prior to Le Tour revealed that everyone who ever got any results in pro cycling was jacked, and then the Goddamn yellow jersey tested positive and got thrown out of the race for the first time in history. Since then I've been as cynical as they come but nothing regarding doping in this sport is ever going to "upset" me again.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
0
0
BigBoat said:
If a top team rode clean they would never finish anybody in the top 50 places in the Tour de France no matter how talented their acquisitions... The management and the rider's goals are to ride the TDF because its their dream to do so. Likely the pro riders have a history of EPO, hgh, testosterone doping dating back to their junior 15-18 year old days. So to say they are gonna be clean for the pros is really laughable to begin with.

Clean They'd never come close to winning a stage or getting any good stage results and I say that with complete seriousness and I'm not over-doing it. In fact they would never ride well enough (win races at the top in Europe) without doping. So they would not even exist at the very top of the sport to begin with most likely...

The top riders that earn world class wins (that gets a Pro Continental team selected for a race like the TDF) blood dope with their own blood which gives up to a bloody 25% increase in sustainable power. A clean talented rider would never ever beat a talented blood doped rider unless the doper F-d up big time by crashing, or just being a total idiot in general.

You have to look at power outputs at the top which are occationally leaked. Hunter Allen F-d up when he released Gustov Larsson's TT power in California (486 watts for 31 minutes). He had about 6.3 watts per kilo for that effort. Talented past freaks like Lemond and Fingon who WON the TDF only could do about 5.8 maybe 5.9 for that length of time.

Now, just look at how much of a nobody Larsson is in Grand Tours. Not even top 50 maybe... He sure as hell will never win it. Yet he hold far more watts than what past winners could. This insight (Hunter Allen being a total genius by releasing the power data of his doped client) shows us that all the top riders are heavily doped.

Yet people from the uci, (silvia shenk) claim that all are clean and only 5 bloody riders out of 840 get taken out. Do you really think that expert stage racer Cauchtiolli who was blood doped with a 20% power gains (who was 3rd a few years back in the Giro) could not keep up with clean riders? It make zilch sense to believe what the UCI is saying here and it reeks of heavy corruption among all interested parties. If this isnt obvious to somebody I dont know what else I can say!
you're an idiot--seriously.

-There are several guys, including one in the top ten, who rode last year's tour clean

-increasing one's hemocratic level artificially has been proven to increase a rider's performance anywhere from 5-8 percent. That's a lot, but no where near the '20 percent' nonsense you're spewing, which has about as much validity as the rest of your post

-Larsson's 80KG at a minimum. That puts his w/kg around 6.0. Factor in the mis-calibrated SRM and probably not resetting his zero offset (2 factors which apply to about 90% of pros' SRM's) and who knows what his actual power was during the event. He's also an Olympic medalist, top 5 at worlds, Swedish national TT champ, etc...so the fact that he's a 'nobody' on GC in grand tours?? Umm...so???

There's a significant doping problem in pro cycling, and the US domestic scene is probably worse than a lot of Europe right now, as there's very little testing. That said, the nonsense you're spouting (along with some of the downright libelous accusations about riders whom you know absolutely nothing) will some day bite you hard in the a$$--count on it.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
131313 said:
you're an idiot--seriously.

-There are several guys, including one in the top ten, who rode last year's tour clean
firstly, your post fascinates me, just because it indicates that perhaps you have some first hand knowledge that we dont...

Secondly,
sev·er·al (svr-l, svrl)
adj.
1. Being of a number more than two or three but not many: several miles away.

2. Single; distinct: "Pshaw! said I, with an air of carelessness, three several times" Laurence Sterne.
3. Respectively different; various: They parted and went their several ways. See Synonyms at distinct.
4. Law Relating separately to each party of a bond or note.
pron. (used with a pl. verb)
An indefinite but small number; some or a few: Several of the workers went home sick.

Was the word several meant to be taken in its true context, ie. of the riders in the top 10, nine of them had their performance artificially enhanced by doping and that there was one clean rider in the top ten, or am i reading too much into that..
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
0
131313 said:
Factor in the mis-calibrated SRM and probably not resetting his zero offset (2 factors which apply to about 90% of pros' SRM's) and who knows what his actual power was during the event.
You're telling us that 90% of pros are too brilliant to calibrate their SRM's prior to a race? That's strange since you're probably aware that many many amateurs race train with power now and I don't know a single one of them that is too brilliant to properly zero and calibrate their powermeter. We like to do that becuase it, you know, makes it so the numbers actually mean something. It ain't rocket science.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
0
0
BikeCentric said:
You're telling us that 90% of pros are too brilliant to calibrate their SRM's prior to a race? That's strange since you're probably aware that many many amateurs race train with power now and I don't know a single one of them that is too brilliant to properly zero and calibrate their powermeter. We like to do that becuase it, you know, makes it so the numbers actually mean something. It ain't rocket science.
that's exactly what I'm saying--and I agree with you completely. The majority of them are using them as very expensive bike computers. I have no first-hand knowledge of Larsson--maybe he's one of the few who actually does take an interest, so he may set his zero offset...

I've seen power numbers from a guy winning a grand tour field sprint on 950 watts (approximately 72kg rider)...and had another explain to me that he TT's 'around 600 watts'...

many of these guys aren't as sophisticated as you'd think when it comes to power measurement and implementing it into their training--and not nearly as much as many amateur riders.
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
0
131313 said:
that's exactly what I'm saying--and I agree with you completely. The majority of them are using them as very expensive bike computers. I have no first-hand knowledge of Larsson--maybe he's one of the few who actually does take an interest, so he may set his zero offset...

I've seen power numbers from a guy winning a grand tour field sprint on 950 watts (approximately 72kg rider)...and had another explain to me that he TT's 'around 600 watts'...

many of these guys aren't as sophisticated as you'd think when it comes to power measurement and implementing it into their training--and not nearly as much as many amateur riders.
Okay, well I'll take your word for it then as you do actually sound like you know what you're talking about and I do mean that.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
BikeCentric said:
If you don't go all out then I will and I will drop you. They are all going all out. 440 watts for 4 minutes. And yet Larsson averages 486 for 31 minutes? That's insane.
I wonder what Pinotti's real 4 minute power is... He wouldnt be in that pack if he could only do 440 watts. His team won the TTT for crying out loud...
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
0
0
dimspace said:
firstly, your post fascinates me, just because it indicates that perhaps you have some first hand knowledge that we dont...

Secondly,
sev·er·al (svr-l, svrl)
adj.
1. Being of a number more than two or three but not many: several miles away.

2. Single; distinct: "Pshaw! said I, with an air of carelessness, three several times" Laurence Sterne.
3. Respectively different; various: They parted and went their several ways. See Synonyms at distinct.
4. Law Relating separately to each party of a bond or note.
pron. (used with a pl. verb)
An indefinite but small number; some or a few: Several of the workers went home sick.

Was the word several meant to be taken in its true context, ie. of the riders in the top 10, nine of them had their performance artificially enhanced by doping and that there was one clean rider in the top ten, or am i reading too much into that..
as far as the top ten, I have direct knowlege and complete faith that one of the top ten riders, and several (the majority) of his teammates competed clean--as direct as anyone can have. I don't know about the other 9--but I suspect that given his result, the playing field was probably more level than at any time since the advent of blood doping.

As far as 'several' as it pertains to the rest of the field, I honestly can't say.
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
0
BigBoat said:
I wonder what Pinotti's real 4 minute power is... He wouldnt be in that pack if he could only do 440 watts. His team won the TTT for crying out loud...
That's what I was thinking BigB. I was like "wtf, I can come very very close to those numbers and I'm a ****ty Cat3!"
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
I cant believe this... Thats crazy! 440 watts for 4 minute ya ha! Your buddy on the other teams are at 550 watts. How the F- did you stay with them? Did you hang onto the car?
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
0
131313 said:
as far as the top ten, I have direct knowlege and complete faith that one of the top ten riders, and several (the majority) of his teammates competed clean--as direct as anyone can have. I don't know about the other 9--but I suspect that given his result, the playing field was probably more level than at any time since the advent of blood doping.

As far as 'several' as it pertains to the rest of the field, I honestly can't say.
You talking VDV and Garmin/Slipstream?
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
131313 said:
you're an idiot--seriously.

-There are several guys, including one in the top ten, who rode last year's tour clean

-increasing one's hemocratic level artificially has been proven to increase a rider's performance anywhere from 5-8 percent. That's a lot, but no where near the '20 percent' nonsense you're spewing, which has about as much validity as the rest of your post

-Larsson's 80KG at a minimum. That puts his w/kg around 6.0. Factor in the mis-calibrated SRM and probably not resetting his zero offset (2 factors which apply to about 90% of pros' SRM's) and who knows what his actual power was during the event. He's also an Olympic medalist, top 5 at worlds, Swedish national TT champ, etc...so the fact that he's a 'nobody' on GC in grand tours?? Umm...so???

There's a significant doping problem in pro cycling, and the US domestic scene is probably worse than a lot of Europe right now, as there's very little testing. That said, the nonsense you're spouting (along with some of the downright libelous accusations about riders whom you know absolutely nothing) will some day bite you hard in the a$$--count on it.
Nobody down the board 10th was clean in last year'd TDF... You;ve never been doped before have you? The gains is a heckuva lot more than 7%.... Like 20-30% in somebody that responds very well to a jacked crit.

Larsson was 72-74 kilos... He's a stick! He sure as heck was not 80 and he is listed on his team list at 77 kg at their team wiegh in.... Probably 74 kilos for racing.

A 7 year old can calibrate an SRM properly. :) I mean the dude (Larsson) does not stand a chance in heck against Christian Vande Velde on a climb... And he is blood dope to 57-60% crit and his 31 minute power is 486 watts! A clean talent at his weight would be lucky to hold that for 6-10 minutes.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
3
0
BikeCentric said:
You talking VDV and Garmin/Slipstream?
I have serious doubts about the top ten claim looking at the other riders in the top ten, many of whom have been in the sport since before dope testing became more serious and have not suffered a noticeable drop in performance.

As much as people claim that they know so and so is clean, I remember those around Landis who claimed to not know anything or even notice anything. Those same people are now working with Garmin's riders. That indicates to me that either they are clueless as to what the riders are doing on their own, in which case a claim that Garmin's riders are clean is worthless, or that they were in on what Landis was doing, in which case their claims would also be worthless.

As far as BigBoat talking a lot of nonsense, I gotta agree that it is at least 50% nonsense, probably more.
 
Apr 8, 2009
272
0
0
BigBoat said:
They hemodilute on normal saline for controls,
I still don't understand how a rider who has jacked his haemocrit up, manages to get it to normal levels before the control, when he is assigned a chaperone immediately he crosses the line.

Can you explain for the uninitiated?
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
davidg said:
I still don't understand how a rider who has jacked his haemocrit up, manages to get it to normal levels before the control, when he is assigned a chaperone immediately he crosses the line.

Can you explain for the uninitiated?
They can use Ringers Lactate IV's and plasma after the stages if there is no forced champerone.... If they have over 50% at the post stage control they can say that they are extremely dehyrated. This happens all the time. If your "natural crit" on the opening 2 days from the prologue was 47% its easy to be over 50% with "dehyration." Some of Lances crits posted on his website have been 46 or higher. Their true natural crits might be 39-42%...
The UCI likes to take their blood samples in the morning and factor that but not post stage... And if a rider is "sick" and "dehyrated" the UCI cant do a damn thing about it except let them go I believe...
 
May 18, 2009
79
0
0
BigBoat said:
Larsson was 72-74 kilos... He's a stick! He sure as heck was not 80 and he is listed on his team list at 77 kg at their team wiegh in.... Probably 74 kilos for racing.
his 31 minute power is 486 watts! A clean talent at his weight would be lucky to hold that for 6 minutes.
I disagree. For instance i was holding over 400 for 4 mins about a month before road season. this is without doing efforts, ergo etc. My race weight is less then 60kg, and am 17. I know these numbers are clean. Also i know others a couple years older who can slam out over 500w for the 4 min efforts. So for a seasoned pro, holding 486 for 30 mins is probably not that unrealistic. Just because you can't do it does't make it impossible.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
ambrose said:
I disagree. For instance i was holding over 400 for 4 mins about a month before road season. this is without doing efforts, ergo etc. My race weight is less then 60kg, and am 17. I know these numbers are clean. Also i know others a couple years older who can slam out over 500w for the 4 min efforts. So for a seasoned pro, holding 486 for 30 mins is probably not that unrealistic. Just because you can't do it does't make it impossible.
Do you own a powermeter bros.... Thats a lot of power your talking about no kidding. Get on the TT bike and see how long you can hold 485 for in the aero position! 31 bloody minutes nonstop! Try it ha ha ha...Next up... Push 500 watts for that amount of time on the road bike on a climb.
 
May 14, 2009
151
0
0
Cyclismag is famous to publish calculated power evaluation on last climb on TDF mountain stages. They use a reference rider of 78kg, time and elevation to get their numbers.
Before the EPO era, the best "rider" was just under 400W for a climb longer than 30mn, from 93 to today riders were able to sustain more than 450W, record close of 480W like Armstrong or Riis.
So Lance Armstrong has gained around 100W by meeting Dr. Ferrari, more than 20%. He had only a 375W engine on his 4 first TDF.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY