When is the smackdown on Chris Horner?

[DirtyWorks]

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoo...=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=tweet


CHRIS HORNER'S BIO PASSPORT PROBLEM


Oops

Already the fanboys are making stuff up.

Personal attack on veloclinic here: I don't necessarily know if he's an expert in the field of interpreting blood values solely because he has an M.D Same joker goes on to grossly misinterpret a study to cast false doubts.

More believers who will be proven wrong.

 

[hrotha]

"Horner cava su fosa"

Horner digs his own grave


http://www.ciclismointernacional.com/horner-cava-su-fosa/

maybe Libertine or Hrotha can translate.

It's pretty basic info, nothing particularly interesting: in releasing his BP to quell the suspicions about his performance, Horner committed sporting suicide because his BP is too anomalous and suspicious. It only really mentions the hemoglobin increase, then illustrates how Horner has probably become damaged goods by (mis)quoting JV's tweet about how he'd rather sign Leipheimer, and finally uses this case and Klöden's retirement without a contract to argue the peloton is cleaner and team managers are not willing to take this kind of risk.

 

[Benotti69]

It's pretty basic info, nothing particularly interesting: in releasing his BP to quell the suspicions about his performance, Horner committed sporting suicide because his BP is too anomalous and suspicious. It only really mentions the hemoglobin increase, then illustrates how Horner has probably become damaged goods by (mis)quoting JV's tweet about how he'd rather sign Leipheimer, and finally uses this case and Klöden's retirement without a contract to argue the peloton is cleaner and team managers are not willing to take this kind of risk.

Cheers hrotha.

 

[observer]

It's pretty basic info, nothing particularly interesting: in releasing his BP to quell the suspicions about his performance, Horner committed sporting suicide because his BP is too anomalous and suspicious. It only really mentions the hemoglobin increase, then illustrates how Horner has probably become damaged goods by (mis)quoting JV's tweet about how he'd rather sign Leipheimer, and finally uses this case and Klöden's retirement without a contract to argue the peloton is cleaner and team managers are not willing to take this kind of risk.

maybe cleaner.. or maybe they don't need the points next year

 

[Ferminal]

Pretty sure Klöden would have plenty of offers if he podiumed the Tour... As it stands why sign up a 38 year old to top20 a GT when there are plenty of 25 year olds who can do it.

Horner's situation would be a bit different. A rider who wins a GT once every twenty years is a bit of a risk. The win hasn't really enhanced the wage he can pull although he probably thinks it has. If he was happy with peanuts I'm sure Savio would take him.

Of course there are lots of teams who wouldn't touch them for obvious reasons. Not all of these are necessarily management driven, but rather looking after their image for sponsors, say Saronni and Amadio.

 

[Merckx index]

From the Outside article:

In published research studies, Morkeberg et al (2009) reported an average Hgb g/dL decrease of 11.5 percent, ranging from 7-21 percent for Tour de France riders, Corsetti et al (2012) reported a more modest decline in Giro riders of 6 percent, and older Vuelta data from Chicharro et al (2001) showed an average drop of 9 percent. The Corsetti et al (2012) paper reported no statistically significant change in reticulocyte count. My review of the literature failed to find any studies demonstrating decreases in the reticulocyte count due to competing in a grand tour.

These are the numbers I would expect from a clean peloton. The question is, how did they get these numbers in pelotons where doping was rampant? The Chicharro study was of the 1998 Vuelta (wonder if LA was one of the subjects?) The Morkeberg study (2008, not 2009) was of the TDF in 2007, prior to the biopassport. How many riders were busted in that Tour? (And only seven riders were studied, with just three time points, so the data have limited meaning.) The Corsetti study was of the 2011 Giro, the winner of which, may I remind everyone, was in doping limbo and later suspended.

I guess this makes it even worse for Horner. He can’t even produce blood parameters that look as normal as those from a random sample of riders in eras which, according to the new UCI line, all the times were suspect.

 

[Von Mises]

I recently had a conversation with one official who is very close to BP system. Because of his position he was not able to comment Horner´s values directly (though I asked), but as general comment he agreed that rising Hb is supicious, but he also added that Hb marker alone is not enough because Hb can change, is easily manipulated, there can be natural causes (like dehydration), what affect Hb, test time sand so. He stressed that in this context Ret% is best marker. To sum it up: Horner is suspicious enough to target test him, but not enough to open BP case.

 

[Avoriaz]

Pretty sure Klöden would have plenty of offers if he podiumed the Tour... As it stands why sign up a 38 year old to top20 a GT when there are plenty of 25 year olds who can do it.

Horner's situation would be a bit different. A rider who wins a GT once every twenty years is a bit of a risk. The win hasn't really enhanced the wage he can pull although he probably thinks it has. If he was happy with peanuts I'm sure Savio would take him.

Of course there are lots of teams who wouldn't touch them for obvious reasons. Not all of these are necessarily management driven, but rather looking after their image for sponsors, say Saronni and Amadio.

If Horner is confident - as he must be if he is asking for Euro750k a year - why doesn't he propose a bonus structured salary? Take a low basic, with accelerators in bonuses (which could take him above his magic number) for when he brings in the victories he is sure of? A team could then snap him up - low risk if he doesn't win, high exposure if he does.

 

[poupou]

Since we have seen his BP, a team would be flagged as pro-doping if they choose to hire him. they have first to communicate on hiring a very suspicious rider. Not an easy task, especially for an old rider.
Secondly, Horner will be under USADA and WADA radar, so his performances will go down.
I cannot seen any reason to hire him.Only concerns and troubles that would be.

 

[Catwhoorg]

I recently had a conversation with one official who is very close to BP system. Because of his position he was not able to comment Horner´s values directly (though I asked), but as general comment he agreed that rising Hb is supicious, but he also added that Hb marker alone is not enough because Hb can change, is easily manipulated, there can be natural causes (like dehydration), what affect Hb, test time sand so. He stressed that in this context Ret% is best marker. To sum it up: Horner is suspicious enough to target test him, but not enough to open BP case.

I would note that his lowest of all ret% in the whole data set occurs during the 2013 Vuelta. (0.39%)

The next lowest ret% of 0.46% was in 2010.
His 'baseline' sample for the Vuelta was 0.85%

Both HB/HCT and ret% are consistent with taking at least one blood bag.

 

[Ferminal]

If Horner is confident - as he must be if he is asking for Euro750k a year - why doesn't he propose a bonus structured salary? Take a low basic, with accelerators in bonuses (which could take him above his magic number) for when he brings in the victories he is sure of? A team could then snap him up - low risk if he doesn't win, high exposure if he does.

Arrangements like that aren't very common in cycling are they? Seems to be more like take your budget and spend as much as you can on wages. Any bonuses are more likely to come from a third party/personal sponsor. Given the nature of the sport they should be used on lots of riders but I'm not sure if they actually are.

 

[StyrbjornSterki]

What if Horner has a US doctor that cooked up his concoction/regimen so that the doctors of the others don't know what it is.

One take-away from Lance's fall from grace is that loose lips sink ships. Three can keep a secret, but only if two of them are dead. Just speculating but I would suspect that in the post-Pharmstrong cycling world, administering PEDs has gone from a team event to a private affair.

 

[MarkvW]

One take-away from Lance's fall from grace is that loose lips sink ships. Three can keep a secret, but only if two of them are dead. Just speculating but I would suspect that in the post-Pharmstrong cycling world, administering PEDs has gone from a team event to a private affair.

What you say is logical and reasonable--but it was also the line spouted by the peloton after Festina.

 

[IndianCyclist]

I would note that his lowest of all ret% in the whole data set occurs during the 2013 Vuelta. (0.39%)

The next lowest ret% of 0.46% was in 2010.
His 'baseline' sample for the Vuelta was 0.85%

Both HB/HCT and ret% are consistent with taking at least one blood bag.

The question is how did he arrange the blood bag logistics during the Vuelta. Surely somebody at least knows something.

 

[Fatclimber]

I recently had a conversation with one official who is very close to BP system. Because of his position he was not able to comment Horner´s values directly (though I asked), but as general comment he agreed that rising Hb is supicious, but he also added that Hb marker alone is not enough because Hb can change, is easily manipulated, there can be natural causes (like dehydration), what affect Hb, test time sand so. He stressed that in this context Ret% is best marker. To sum it up: Horner is suspicious enough to target test him, but not enough to open BP case.

It seems that "dehydration" is the standby excuse/explanation for many things (hematocrit...). I wonder if the level of dehydration required to affect Hb, Hct, and whatever else to such a degree to arouse suspicion would also affect a rider's performance to such a degree that he wouldn't be placed high enough to garner any discussion. Can anybody expand on the dehydration phenomenon? From what I've always been told, dehydration is something that takes days to rectify.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Can anybody expand on the dehydration phenomenon?

Horner's believers are pulling dehydration out of thin air. Sure, it's an explanation, but Contador's steak or Hamilton's ephemeral twin were supposed to explain parameters too. There's some interesting stuff in the Ask JV thread, but it's buried.

As posted by Mr. Parisotto, his profile is not positive, but so suspicious Horner is a candidate for targeted testing. http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...ers-published-biological-passport-values.aspx Somehow, I think Mr. Parisotto would know what dehydration looks like in blood parameters.

Changing the topic, what would be totally consistent with the UCI is no additional testing for a such a suspect profile per Parisotto and Veloclinic.

 

[vedrafjord]

One take-away from Lance's fall from grace is that loose lips sink ships. Three can keep a secret, but only if two of them are dead. Just speculating but I would suspect that in the post-Pharmstrong cycling world, administering PEDs has gone from a team event to a private affair.

What you say is logical and reasonable--but it was also the line spouted by the peloton after Festina.

Whether or not it was the line spouted is irrelevant - Festina was a fluke bust by a border cop, whereas Armstrong's downfall was built on testimony from teammates, a teammate's wife, a masseuse, an ex girlfriend etc. I'm sure lots of dopers were taking notes.

 

[MarkvW]

Whether or not it was the line spouted is irrelevant - Festina was a fluke bust by a border cop, whereas Armstrong's downfall was built on testimony from teammates, a teammate's wife, a masseuse, an ex girlfriend etc. I'm sure lots of dopers were taking notes.

Armstrong's downfall was also a fluke. If Armstrong would have given Floyd a job when his suspension ended, there never would have been an Armstrong scandal. The dopers could also be drawing the following conclusion: Don't screw your coconspirators.

 

[Alex76]

It seems that "dehydration" is the standby excuse/explanation for many things (hematocrit...). I wonder if the level of dehydration required to affect Hb, Hct, and whatever else to such a degree to arouse suspicion would also affect a rider's performance to such a degree that he wouldn't be placed high enough to garner any discussion. Can anybody expand on the dehydration phenomenon? From what I've always been told, dehydration is something that takes days to rectify.

Please.....look at those stages again, do you see a dehydrated man spanking Piti, J-Rod and co on the road?

 

[Ferminal]

I think that is the point Fatclimber was making ^ 'tis a good one.

 

[Benotti69]

Armstrong's downfall was also a fluke. If Armstrong would have given Floyd a job when his suspension ended, there never would have been an Armstrong scandal. The dopers could also be drawing the following conclusion: Don't screw your coconspirators.

I think that Sky paid those they let go because of ZTP handsomely

 

[Le breton]

.....
Festina was a fluke bust by a border cop, .....

Not at all. The "douaniers" knew exactly the route and what they would find in the car, courtesy of a fired Festina employee.

One should never underestimate the nuisance that a disgruntled employee can cause his boss after being fired. Armstrong can confirm (Landis).

 

[Fatclimber]

Please.....look at those stages again, do you see a dehydrated man spanking Piti, J-Rod and co on the road?

Absolutely not, please read more carefully. It seems absurd to me that suspect blood values from a GT leader can quickly be explained by dehydration when it is likely that being dehydrated would hinder performance enough to not allow them to be a leader in the first place. Same with Piti, J-rod & co.

It reeks as some dumb excuse to cover up doping to put it bluntly. I was wondering if there was any factual data to show dehydration's affect on performance. Specifically, the level of dehydration which would cause the fluctuations in Hb & Hct that we've seen in biological passports over the years.

 

[poupou]

Dehydration and performances :

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10198142

http://www.humankinetics.com/excerpts/excerpts/dehydration-and-its-effects-on-performance
http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/v57/n2s/full/1601897a.html

A pratical summary
http://www.kon.org/urc/v10/athletic-training/decker.html

 

[Le breton]

dehydration hype

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2013/01/dangerous-exercise-the-hype-of-dehydration-heat-stroke/

Personally I have done many many multiple successive ascents of the mountain pass nearest my home (11.3 km, 711 m elevation).

Normally I did it when I was already in a decent shape.

What I have done most often is 3 successive climbs (maximum being 21 , each lasting usually just under 40 min. Downhill time about 12 min.

I usually became seriously dehydrated since on a typical day, here, locally, the temperature at the bottom of the climb is about 26 °C with just a bit of white clouds cover. It's under such typical conditions that I once measured my weight loss.

The result : 3.9 kg adding in the 0.6 kg I drank during those 2h40 ( i cycled at a reduced speed to simulate conditions during longer training rides.

3.9 kg/ starting body weight (62) = 6.3%.
3.3 kg / 62 = 5.3 %.

So, generally, when I did those 3 climbs I progressively lost about 5% of my body weight (usually exercising at 95% of power on a TT).

Yet the increase in my 3rd "lap"climbing time was usually limited to 1 min (2.5%) or at most 2 min (5% reduction in power).

Since that cost me about 1700 kJ, assuming I used mostly glycogen, the glycogen used weighed about 425 gram.( taking efficiency = joule/calorie)

Since to each gram of glycogen you have 3 grams of water attached (correct me if I'm wrong), it means those 425 times 4 = 1700 grams should be subtracted from the max. loss of 3300 grams.

Hence my true dehydration level was halved,only about 1600 grams, not 3300 g.

I'll now let professional physiologists on this forum tear up what I wrote.