When is the smackdown on Chris Horner?

Page 92 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Comparing 2009 data for the time around the Giro

Lance's ret% 4/30 0.98% 5/7 1.33% 5/18 0.72%
Lances HGB drops from 14.9 14.8 13.6 g/dL over those three dates

Chris ret% 4/30 0.68% 5/7 1.01% 5/18 0.75%
Chris's HGB drops from 15.5 14.6 14.2 g/dL

Same pattern as a convicted blood doper, same dates.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
I brought Vaughters up to see what his reaction will be to Chris' numbers.

My interpretation was he disparaged his passport numbers... so now that they are public maybe he will let everyone know what he was referring to.

I think it's relevant.

I'd also like to see Ryder do exactly what Chris has done (and everybody else for that matter). Then comparisons can be done.

Could be a huge day and perhaps a bit of a tipping point.
 
Catwhoorg said:
Comparing 2009 data for the time around the Giro

Lance's ret% 4/30 0.98% 5/7 1.33% 5/18 0.72%
Lances HGB drops from 14.9 14.8 13.6 g/dL over those three dates

Chris ret% 4/30 0.68% 5/7 1.01% 5/18 0.75%
Chris's HGB drops from 15.5 14.6 14.2 g/dL

Same pattern as a convicted blood doper, same dates.
but wasn't the argument that Lance's Giro numbers were actually "clean"? His Giro numbers were nothing out of the ordinary, whereas his Tour numbers when compared were ridiculous.
 
Catwhoorg said:
Comparing 2009 data for the time around the Giro

Lance's ret% 4/30 0.98% 5/7 1.33% 5/18 0.72%
Lances HGB drops from 14.9 14.8 13.6 g/dL over those three dates

Chris ret% 4/30 0.68% 5/7 1.01% 5/18 0.75%
Chris's HGB drops from 15.5 14.6 14.2 g/dL

Same pattern as a convicted blood doper, same dates.
Except that most analysts think LA's Giro data are OK. The HT/Hb drop as they should. It's his TDF data that year that are suspicious, and particularly when compared to the Giro, which is used as a baseline of what would be normal.

OTOH, as someone else pointed out, Horner's Vuelta data are a little suspicious. I looked at 5 tests during periods when I was pretty sure he wasn’t racing (Nov – early Feb., various years). His mean HT in those 5 tests was 44.1 +/- 0.90, with a range of 43.2 – 45.1. His pre-Vuelta value of 45.4 is consistent with that (though certainly on the high side), and the value of 40.0 early in the Vuelta is as expected, but the subsequent rise to 43 is not. That is within his normal range, which of course is not what you would expect deep into a GT.

This is the point Ashenden raised wrt LA. A rider can have a "clean" passport, one that does not trigger the criterion, as long as his parameters stay within the baseline. But in a GT, the baseline changes, the HT/Hb drop, so that values that are within the normal baseline may in fact not be within what would be normal within a GT. But the passport does not take this into account. Horner's 43% HT late in the Vuelta is within his normal range, but it may not be within his normal range after plasma expansion. It's still not a huge rise from 40% (which was a single value, so itself has some uncertainty as being representative), but this just reflects how easy it is to stay within acceptable values while still getting a significant benefit.

Not saying that these data show Horner doped, but he could have doped, and substantially, and gotten numbers like these.
 
Oct 17, 2011
1,315
0
0
Von Mises said:
Pre and during Vuelta


22.Aug
Biological Parameters
haemoglobin 15.2 g/dL
hematocrit 45.4 %
immature reticulocyte fraction %
mean corpuscular haemoglobin 33.5 pg
mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration 33.5 g/dL
mean corpuscular volume 100.0 fL
OFF-Score 96.70
red cell distribution width fL
red cells 4.54 10^6/uL
reticulocytes (in absolute number) 0.0386 10^6/uL
reticulocytes (in percentage) 0.85 %

29. AUg
haemoglobin 14.4 g/dL
hematocrit 42.7 %
immature reticulocyte fraction %
mean corpuscular haemoglobin 33.6 pg
mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration 33.7 g/dL
mean corpuscular volume 99.5 fL
OFF-Score 106.53
red cell distribution width fL
red cells 4.29 10^6/uL
reticulocytes (in absolute number) 0.0167 10^6/uL
reticulocytes (in percentage) 0.39 %

03.Sep
Biological Parameters
haemoglobin 13.5 g/dL
hematocrit 40.0 %
immature reticulocyte fraction %
mean corpuscular haemoglobin 33.4 pg
mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration 33.8 g/dL
mean corpuscular volume 99.0 fL
OFF-Score 90.91
red cell distribution width fL
red cells 4.04 10^6/uL
reticulocytes (in absolute number) 0.0218 10^6/uL
reticulocytes (in percentage) 0.54 %

07.Sep
Biological Parameters
haemoglobin 14.3 g/dL
hematocrit 42.9 %
immature reticulocyte fraction %
mean corpuscular haemoglobin 33.0 pg
mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration 33.3 g/dL
mean corpuscular volume 99.1 fL
OFF-Score 98.50
red cell distribution width fL
red cells 4.33 10^6/uL
reticulocytes (in absolute number) 0.0238 10^6/uL
reticulocytes (in percentage) 0.55 %

14.Sep
Biological Parameters
haemoglobin 14.6 g/dL
hematocrit 43.1 %
immature reticulocyte fraction %
mean corpuscular haemoglobin 33.6 pg
mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration 33.9 g/dL
mean corpuscular volume 99.3 fL
OFF-Score 101.10
red cell distribution width fL
red cells 4.34 10^6/uL
reticulocytes (in absolute number) 0.0243 10^6/uL
reticulocytes (in percentage) 0.56 %
So both his hematocrit and haemoglobin raised during the vuelta 0.o

03.Sep
haemoglobin 13.5 g/dL
hematocrit 40.0 %

07.Sep
haemoglobin 14.3 g/dL
hematocrit 42.9 %

Nice being old apparently does some nice things with your blood ^^
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
My first thoughts on seeing the documents is why did they cover up the "testing sample" number? (Maybe its said Rider 15, haha)

But the only way for those in a position to verify the numbers would be through that. This leaves a question mark about the actual numbers posted.
 


Thats my look at 2013 for Chris.

I think to say there are valid questions to be asked is an understatement.

I do think that all biopassport data should be released en masse at the end of each season.

Cookson if he gets the UCI presidency needs to make this happen through agreements with the relevant bodies. Heck, make it a condition of getting a UCI pro licence that you agree to this release.
 
pmcg76 said:
To the experts, how does this compare to Ryder's 2012 Giro values?
Ryder started with a HGb of 16, then dropped (expansion) to 14 - 14.5. there was some fluctuation (16- 14.1 - 14.4 -14.1 -14.1) but all the during results are fairly consistent

Ret% Started with a high value 1.76 -1.56 - 1.74 - 1.34 -1.71

outside the bold result, again pretty consistent.

Ryders retic% is much higher than Horners, but it consistently so over all the data he (or JV) released.


(Also not an expert, just an interested party)
 

EnacheV

BANNED
Jul 7, 2013
1,441
0
0
therhodeo said:
Ok so tell me this. Posting these numbers. Ignorance, stupidity, or arrogance?
You are looking for Ignorance, stupidity, or arrogance in the wrong place.

Probably these numbers are ok and within what anti-doping rules say.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
EnacheV said:
You are looking for Ignorance, stupidity, or arrogance in the wrong place.

Probably these numbers are ok and within what anti-doping rules say.
Yes. He's clean because he's not dirty.

According to the rules.
 
Sep 13, 2013
2
0
0
I noticed the Immature Reticulocyte Percent numbers missing as well. From what I've read online, the percentage of new cells vs old cells could tell something. Specifically, if the rider got a blood tranfusion with more old cells, the immature percent should drop. Interesting that this key marker is not being show.
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
goggalor said:
Horner is a ****ing idiot. His interviews always gave that impression, this confirms it.
Bingo. Why somebody would publish something they are not required to do, that will have zero benefit and potentially high backlash, is beyond me.
 
CesarTrouble said:
I noticed the Immature Reticulocyte Percent numbers missing as well. From what I've read online, the percentage of new cells vs old cells could tell something. Specifically, if the rider got a blood tranfusion with more old cells, the immature percent should drop. Interesting that this key marker is not being show.
WADA doesn't specify it as part of the biopassport.


The following Markers are considered within the Athlete Biological Passport haematological module:
HCT: Hematocrit
HGB: Haemoglobin
RBC: Red blood cells count
RET%: The percentage of reticulocyte
RET#: Reticulocytes count
MCV: Mean corpuscular volume
MCH: Mean corpuscular haemoglobin
MCHC: Mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration
Further calculated Markers specific to the haematological module include OFF-hr Score (OFFS), which is a combination of HGB and RET%, and Abnormal Blood Profile Score (ABPS), which is a combination of HCT, HGB, RBC, RET%, MCV, MCH, and MCHC


OFFScore is calculated and shown, but the ABPS isn't shown. I'm not even sure the method for calculating ABPS is in public domain thought charts using it certainly are.
 
Nov 29, 2009
267
2
9,030
Horner

Have to admit that the passport might as well be in russian for what I know or understand about it, but I wonder if it looks dodgy why havnt the UCI experts picked up on it ????

Oh yes there is an election and Fat Pat says cycling is clean !!!!!
 
orbeas said:
Have to admit that the passport might as well be in russian for what I know or understand about it, but I wonder if it looks dodgy why havnt the UCI experts picked up on it ????

Oh yes there is an election and Fat Pat says cycling is clean !!!!!
The UCI can't act on passports that are merely dodgy. They would never stand before CAS.
 

EnacheV

BANNED
Jul 7, 2013
1,441
0
0
from the comments section, i find it funny

So from now on. Only riders between 20 and 35 will be allowed to win any tour. They must be voted in by a board of self appointed cycling fan who will be known as "the experts". If at any time a rider happens to do anything that the group of experts think is too much or something they couldn't do or if they are just having a ****y day the rider will be thrown out of the tour. And any rider who attempts to defend himself will immediately be tarred and feathered.
 
CesarTrouble said:
I noticed the Immature Reticulocyte Percent numbers missing as well. From what I've read online, the percentage of new cells vs old cells could tell something. Specifically, if the rider got a blood tranfusion with more old cells, the immature percent should drop. Interesting that this key marker is not being show.
Are you aware that reticulocytes ARE immature red blood cells? And that this % is given in all the PDFs?

You are correct that retics are suppressed by a transfusion, which is why the old off-score was based on a ratio of red blood cells (Hb or HT) to retics. A high ratio suggests a transfusion, whereas a low ratio suggests a withdrawal (which stimulates synthesis of retics).

So from now on. People will not be allowed to express their views, though they have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the sanctioning process, unless they are voted in by self-appointed cycling fans who believe that anyone who tests negative cannot possibly be positive. If at any time someone expresses an opinion suggesting someone is doping who has not tested positive, this poster will be treated as though he personally had thrown the rider out of the tour. And any poster who attempts to defend his position on the basis of knowledge and experience will immediately be subjected to criticism, not based on evidence against his view, but just because of what his view is.
 
The trigger threshold is set to 99.9% which is 3.3 standard deviations (assuming normal data) before an expert gets to review it.

Then that expert decides if there is a need for a three expert panel to review it.
At this points its entirely anonymous. the three person panel has to unanimously agree there is a case

If they decide its worth proceeding, then they get further data (such as race program of the athlete) and make another assessment, and again this has to be unanimous.

Then the athlete gets to provide an explanation for consideration, which the panel sees.

Then and only then is a case raised.


Better a 1000 dopers escape, than a single clean athlete be expect to account for a swing in their profile.


They could easily set the first cutoff at 95% (2 SD) with the other checks and balances along the way.



And that's not even accounting for the inherent weakness of the system. Because someones trigger limits are set by their historical values, a blood doper will naturally have more generous limits than a clean athlete.



A few years ago I 'bought into' the bio passport hype, and truly believed it helped clean up the sport. Now I have learned more about the details, can see dopers get away with doping, and nothing being done about as they just aren't doping enough to trigger a case.

Of course part of me wonders just how bad the passports for those sanctioned actually were.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY