why I didn't dope

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 23, 2012
60
0
0
In a similar vein to Greggs article, there are several good posts over at Tilford's site within the comment section. Hoping we have a trend going!

Roberto has been noticeably absent during this firestorm :D
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
GreggGermer said:
When I wrote "everything legal" I was trying to convey the lengths I was going to to ride naturally. Spending to much time in the Clinic can lead to people auto-replacing keywords in articles with their doping euphemisms.

I'll repeat that I never took anything and never did anything to bring any of my levels of blood or testosterone up to some wada defined variable. I explored as many natural ways to get the most out of what my body would give. I am not a naturally gifted road cyclist, so I had to work quite hard at it. Doing anything illegal to bring ones levels up to the "legal" limit is still illegal last time I checked ... it may present a moral loophole to some, but not to me.

Also, I want people to know I do believe there were others who rode clean and made it to the top. How many? I don't know? I can only speak for myself. I do know there were others who couldn't ride their way out of wet paper bag while on dope, so it isn't always the "magic sauce" people believe.

Gregg

In your article you also touch on the fine line of what doping is. Like when you mention caffeine. So many people take supplements of all sorts, eat special diets, etc, to try and gain an advantage. It is a wonder to me sometimes how you can keep it clean.

A good example is ephedrine, and ephedra. I used to use ephedra tea as a decongestant. It works great. Now it is a WADA illegal substance (and now is also illegal in most countries, too). Now I use ephedrine for the same purpose. Same deal. My wife is an asthmatic, and uses multiple inhalers. I've known riders who claimed to be asthma sufferers. All those inhalers are illegal, I'm sure. Etc, etc.

So many things used everyday by people, but are illegal for athletes. I recognize that they can be overused and abused, but it seems like it becomes difficult to me, in some ways, to do what you can, legally, to improve physically for marginal gains. My only point is that it seems to me it would become an extra chore to avoid doing something that could get you in trouble. The line between doping and non-doping seems like it could be very difficult to me. EPO is obviously over that line, but there is so much available as everyday substances that are not.
 

LauraLyn

BANNED
Jul 13, 2012
594
0
0
hiero2 said:
. . . . My only point is that it seems to me it would become an extra chore to avoid doing something that could get you in trouble. The line between doping and non-doping seems like it could be very difficult to me. EPO is obviously over that line, but there is so much available as everyday substances that are not.

Maybe two points about that line:

1. There are clear rules about things that are not allowed. And there are rules about "exceptions." Those rules need to be followed.

2. Sure, adding sugar to your bidon or sipping Coca-cola is giving you "a performance enhancing advantage." What is most important is that these things are done in broad daylight and they are open to discussion and debate.
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
Cloxxki said:
. . . I know in my heart that supplements can make a great, healthy improvement on performance. I've seen my own results. Showing up to a race barely fit, a course that never suited me, and a cocktail of herbs before the race made it really, really, much better than was to be expected. . ..

Flux Capacity said:
Safron, turmeric and beetroot juice? :)

Actually - this is kinda what I was talking about. When does the food supplement cross the line? For instance, back when I raced, ephedra was legal. It is an herb, and a good and potent one. However, remember that coca and opium are also herbs and good and potent. So, ephedra supplements became commonplace, and got abused, and became illegal.

There are herbs that affect RBC production. I don't think they are currently WADA illegal. If it does the same thing as a micro-dose of EPO, should it be illegal? Is it doping to use it? Not technically. But once you have used it, how far away is the mental justification to use something similar when you can't get what you had?

There are herbs that affect energy level, like ephedra. Most of the supplement and herb market is just expensive filler for your toilet bowl. Some of it is real - or at least can be real when used properly. But that which is real probably also presents the possibility of abuse.

I am always disappointed in performances and behavior that I think is gained from a pill. But I also know that it must be a difficult line to draw sometimes. And, using "WADA legal" as a dividing line is not a good moral answer. Yet, if I were to race again, I don't know any other line.
 
hiero2 said:
Actually - this is kinda what I was talking about. When does the food supplement cross the line? For instance, back when I raced, ephedra was legal. It is an herb, and a good and potent one. However, remember that coca and opium are also herbs and good and potent. So, ephedra supplements became commonplace, and got abused, and became illegal.

There are herbs that affect RBC production. I don't think they are currently WADA illegal. If it does the same thing as a micro-dose of EPO, should it be illegal? Is it doping to use it? Not technically. But once you have used it, how far away is the mental justification to use something similar when you can't get what you had?

There are herbs that affect energy level, like ephedra. Most of the supplement and herb market is just expensive filler for your toilet bowl. Some of it is real - or at least can be real when used properly. But that which is real probably also presents the possibility of abuse.

I am always disappointed in performances and behavior that I think is gained from a pill. But I also know that it must be a difficult line to draw sometimes. And, using "WADA legal" as a dividing line is not a good moral answer. Yet, if I were to race again, I don't know any other line.

Thats part of what I was getting at earlier. The line between right and wrong can be much blurrier than legal and illegal
 
Mar 28, 2012
59
0
0
Yes, then there's the whole thing about altitude tents or breathing devices (especiallly at club level), which I'm sure has been discussed here a million times. And hat about the rich kids who can afford to train at altitude before the club championships?! Ha.

Slightly off topic, but I'd love to know if I've ever raced against a doper at club level. Chances are I probably have, at least someone who was on speed, especially back in the late '80s.

There's a story around here (Melbourne, Aus), which could be an urban myth, that word got out about drug testers turning up to a large club race, and about a dozen A-graders suddenly disappeared and decided not to race. :) I wonder...
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
Flux Capacity said:
There's a story around here (Melbourne, Aus), which could be an urban myth, that word got out about drug testers turning up to a large club race, and about a dozen A-graders suddenly disappeared and decided not to race. :) I wonder...

Would be fun to spread that rumour after a few NRS races and see who drops out all of a sudden inexplicably.
 
Mar 28, 2012
59
0
0
the big ring said:
Would be fun to spread that rumour after a few NRS races and see who drops out all of a sudden inexplicably.
Yes, that'd probably be more effective than the old trick of dropping a couple of 4mm bolts under your competitor's bike at the start line, then telling him they fell off his frame :)
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
Flux Capacity said:
Yes, that's probably be more effective than the old trick of dropping a couple of 4mm bolts under your competitor's bike at the start line, then telling him they fell off his frame :)

Way OT but I have built all 3 of my road bikes with Di2 and it would be ridiculously easy to sabotage someone. :eek:
 
Mar 28, 2012
59
0
0
the big ring said:
Way OT but I have built all 3 of my road bikes with Di2 and it would be ridiculously easy to sabotage someone. :eek:
Well then, in your case I could drop a loose wire under your bike at the start line, just to mess with your head. :D
 
Mar 11, 2010
68
0
0
hiero2 said:
Actually - this is kinda what I was talking about. When does the food supplement cross the line?

Easy, when it is listed on the WADA website. Supplements / Herbs / Vitamins are VERY different to chemical drugs. Mainly the fact that they are naturally occurring in the world, your body is evolutionarily designed to use them to be effective and to overdose on them take a ridiculous amount of each (generally speaking of course).

hiero2 said:
For instance, back when I raced, ephedra was legal. It is an herb, and a good and potent one. However, remember that coca and opium are also herbs and good and potent. So, ephedra supplements became commonplace, and got abused, and became illegal.

Actually, I think it's now legal in certain levels in the body, but can't be 100% as I haven't been focused on the details of things like this after I stopped racing pro. Caffeine was illegal in certain levels when I started racing, but was then relaxed later on when I was 18 to 19 I think. Even then, I would use it in limited amounts, 400mg split over a long race, and then only three times a month or so. I felt it helped, but it wasn't like it was a magic "not going to get dropped pill and be attacking like crazy" pill, but found it helped keep the cardiac lethargy effect at the end of a long race from being as dramatic.

My biggest stress with caffeine was flatting or crashing and then knowing that I was going to have all that caffeine in my system and be all race-amped and not get settled. It happened once or twice, but unlike real drugs, I wasn't concerned with it stopping my heart or worse.

hiero2 said:
There are herbs that affect RBC production. I don't think they are currently WADA illegal. If it does the same thing as a micro-dose of EPO, should it be illegal? Is it doping to use it? Not technically. But once you have used it, how far away is the mental justification to use something similar when you can't get what you had?

Iron effects the bloods ability to bind with oxygen, so is eating red meat (not Contodors :D), dark leafy greens or others iron rich food doping? Nope, and this is why ...

Generally speaking ... when you take a naturally occurring herb or supplement (ie Arginine alpha-ketoglutarate (AAKG) which affects both EPO and growth hormone production during sleep periods) you are in fact increasing your production of levels of naturally occurring performance enhancing substances in your body (EPO, red blood cells, testosterone). By it's very nature sleep is the number one performance enhancing thing we do. The difference lies in the fact that those herbs or supplements allow NATURALLY occurring increases in performance enhancing substances. Your body made them, not a lab ...

I fully know there is a grey area, but if you look at it objectively it's easy to see the back and the whites of the argument. For me it was about giving my body the best possible fuel it could that was derived from natural and legal sources that would allow it to recover and perform as to the best of it's ablity. But to compare the ergogenic effect of herbs and suppliments to those of synthetic drugs is like comparing the fire power of 22 caliber hand gun to that of an Abrams tank. Sure they both shoot bullets, but one is HIGHLY more effective than the other. One reason we generally don't let people have Abrams tanks :D

hiero2 said:
I am always disappointed in performances and behavior that I think is gained from a pill. But I also know that it must be a difficult line to draw sometimes. And, using "WADA legal" as a dividing line is not a good moral answer. Yet, if I were to race again, I don't know any other line.

The "WADA Legal" line is the line we all work by when a professional cyclist. It's what we all agree to and must abide with. If they said caffeine was banned from X point onwards, I would have stopped using caffeine.

If anything WADA's code is morally restrictive to CLEAN athletes. You can't take cortisone to treat minor allergic reactions, certain cold medications are illegal because they contain ingredients which could potentially be used for performance benefit ... and because WADA is unable to sparse the difference between what would be medically justified use of a drug and illegal use, we all accept that we can't use these things as part of the trade off of riding as professional cyclist.

The line is there and all the athletes out there know it. WADA's done a pretty good job of drawing it in regards to substances, but that doesn't stop people from trying to find loop-holes and ways around things.

Morally my line was the WADA code and anything else that could potentially harm my health in the long run.

-Gregg-

I will try to write a follow-up to the my opt-ed article at some point in the next week, but for now I've got to get back to my real life and some garden work.
 
I once topped of with caffeine to just under the legal amount. Turned out to be a hard race, spiining out my 42x12 gears for the first half hour+. So, I got the documenten side-effect: cramps. Didn't do that anymore, the ride back to the finish line was LONG, and I got dropped by each and every waaier that picked me up. That said, I may havee had advantage of being more "sharp" that day (beach race). I was gaining ground on the pro's in epic tail winds, and was able to navigate teh beach (streams and pools) perfectly. Bunny hopping over a stream at 50-55kph is "interesting" I can assure you. Insane the distance of ground you can skip, but the timing is still crucial.

I've not had side-efffects of legal supplements, ever. A friend tried sinefrine after it was taken off the list. He got heart beatings, couldn't sleep. Me, I just didn't notice a thing, and quit using it as for a borderline substance, it was just not worth it.

We live in relatively easy time to make moral decision based on the List. It's had great research and discussion to arrive where it's at right now. many future drugs are already banned before they're invented. This is different from a test existing for it, but for the athlete intending to be morally clean (rather than dope to da max without being caught), that's great to have as a guideline. Of course walking the line between ok and not ok, is a personal choice, and I would not advise anyone to go there. Being slightly dodgy doesn't make a substance more effective. There are great things that do so much for performance, and are totally legal, even healthy! Just make the effort and get some.
I suspect riders to get skinny on illegal drugs when they've not even gone through a good protein plan yet. Heck, I was delving into substances, albeit legal ones, before I'd gone full-protein also! It's just too easy to swallow a pill, and understand that it could work. Dropped carbs much as possible and loading up on lean meat and high-protein, low-fat dairy is quite easy to do, but who'll advise you? I got the advise, didn't understand it, bought a kg of nasty proteins, and gave up on it. Now over decade later, it's part of my daily life and don't foresee quitting on it. It's just that awesome. Old big boned fart running the track, FAST. When I was 23 and deep into cycling, I could not foresee that being possible. I sucked at running, always had. Nutricion matters. No-one should do anything fancy before having gone through a protein routine, and stockpiled chia seeds. I regard that as a starters kit now. Cheap, reliable, and totally non-risky. But youngster learn how to shoot themselves up before they learn to eat well.
Nutricion > supplements > no need to dope. Walk the line in that order.
 
May 22, 2010
111
0
8,830
GreggGermer said:
Morally my line was the WADA code and anything else that could potentially harm my health in the long run.

What about TUEs for asthma meds and who knows what else though? You do a great job of drawing a pretty clean line in your postings, and I really appreciate that, but still it seems you've avoided the most thorny issue when it comes to discussing the grey areas..
 
Sep 7, 2012
3
0
0
The Oudenaarde would be more interesting Bilu Wen, I had intended to stay. 7-9 in the 10-day competition sounds tempting.
 
Mar 11, 2010
68
0
0
Teddy Boom said:
What about TUEs for asthma meds and who knows what else though? You do a great job of drawing a pretty clean line in your postings, and I really appreciate that, but still it seems you've avoided the most thorny issue when it comes to discussing the grey areas..

TUE's are the grey area created to alleviate the medical necessity quandary I talked about earlier.

I don't have any TUE experience as I never had any. I know guys use them to further ride the line of what they can get away with. I don't believe the peloton has as much asthma as TUE's suggest, but guys get them with the idea they need them because others have them (very much part of the Omerta is the idea that others doing it, so I have to do it, therefore it's not cheating). This mentality is self-fueling as it creates cheaters and further "justifies" the need to cheat.

I know couple of riders who do have a legitimate TUE for the use of specific asthma medication, both of whom I know used them as they were intended (ie. for legitimate breathing problems).

I think the TUE program is needed, but is one area that could use improvement. Make it to lax and the cheaters have more options, make it to strict and clean athletes can be denied access to medication that allows them to be healthy(ier).

Any more questions on grey areas? I'm open to discussing any and all of the areas of doping that people want to know. Just know when it comest to direct doping that I don't have any of those juicy answers you guys crave, sorry :D .
 
Jul 13, 2010
185
0
0
GreggGermer said:
For me doping was only one part of the problem that impeded my career, financial considerations and regulations regarding the hiring of foreign riders in Belgium also had a large impact on my stopping. But to deny the hinderance of doping overall to my (and others) careers is not going to do the subject justice, which is why I wanted to tell my story.

This is a nice story, but to be honest, doping was not much of a hindrance to your career. The bigger part of the problem is that at 5.07 w/kg, training full time, you were barely pack fodder in a pro race. Lifestyle cyclists like you, even if they want to take themselves seriously, are not the same as the real talents who make a living out of this. Sure, good for you, you stayed clean. But there are 5.8 w/kg climbers who ride clean and can't get decent contracts. That's the real stumbling block, even if it is easy to blame the dope. To have even half a hope at that weight, you would have needed a threshold above 380w (or close to that plus a truly epic sprint), and any career on that kind of power still would have required some luck and some connections. You got to live the euro lifestyle... you had some nice experiences... you should be proud of that. But dopers really didn't rob you of that much. If you had doped, you would have been threatening the podium of some of those Kermesse's, robbing the occasional young, clean guy of a win. You might have squeezed another year or two out of your riding, but you wouldn't have been riding the true classics or rolling around the vuelta, short of putting a motor in your bike. Am I trying to be a *** in saying this? By no means... it's just that a couple of things bug me about this kind of story.

1. In saying that doping hindered you, you are effectively saying (almost) everyone better than you was on the gear. Not even close mate. You were not that good. This is casting aspersions on a lot of riders. Some of them were charging but plenty of them weren't.

2. In saying that doping hindered you, you lend credibility to the argument that riders who are much above your level must dope. As above. Rubbish. Paradoxically, I think this kind of logic actually encourages doping... what is a kid to think once they hit their natural limit* of 5.1 w/kg? They can stay clean and be mentally blocked by this kind of foolishness, or they can dope. Never mind that if they hadn't had all these people worrying about what the limits were they might have smashed through them.

*joke

3. This kind of preachy stuff from sub-elite riders takes away from the very, very few people who actually did face a hard decision and go the right way with it... Bassons, for example. What would you have actually done if you'd faced the decision to ride the tour or retire, contingent on using a bit of skin cream or a tablet, or not? Neither you nor I will ever know.

fn: I have data from calibrated power meters of a guy on 10 hrs/wk riding above 5 w/kg. I was ~ 4.8 w/kg (rarely tested properly, just from race data), eating pastries and drinking beer, with no program, just racing local stuff. Another friend of mine training properly is around 5.8 w/kg. He's serious, but no pro tour teams signing him yet and the wins don't come easily. This is just out of a couple of serious training bunches in one big city. Not in Europe. Not Girona or anything. We're all clean. The real lesson is, work hard, win local stuff. Once you really dominate your local elite racing, do national level stuff. Once you're smashing the national level, think about Europe. Don't think that eating croissant and waffles and learning another language will turn you from a moderately talented endurance athlete into a true elite.
 
GreggGermer said:
TUE's are the grey area created to alleviate the medical necessity quandary I talked about earlier.

I don't have any TUE experience as I never had any. I know guys use them to further ride the line of what they can get away with. I don't believe the peloton has as much asthma as TUE's suggest, but guys get them with the idea they need them because others have them (very much part of the Omerta is the idea that others doing it, so I have to do it, therefore it's not cheating). This mentality is self-fueling as it creates cheaters and further "justifies" the need to cheat.

I know couple of riders who do have a legitimate TUE for the use of specific asthma medication, both of whom I know used them as they were intended (ie. for legitimate breathing problems).

I think the TUE program is needed, but is one area that could use improvement. Make it to lax and the cheaters have more options, make it to strict and clean athletes can be denied access to medication that allows them to be healthy(ier).

Any more questions on grey areas? I'm open to discussing any and all of the areas of doping that people want to know. Just know when it comest to direct doping that I don't have any of those juicy answers you guys crave, sorry :D .

I've been making this argument with people for a long time. If you want "fairness" and a "level playing field", words the USADA loves to use all the time in just about every statement they release, then TUEs shouldn't exist.

You can't take anything, nor should any drug of any kind be allowed.

Next, there is no requirement for a TUE for any asthma drug, like albuterol. So the fact that WADA/USADA etc allow an FDA approved drug that technically can only be purchased in the US with a doctor's prescription, says they aren't interested in "fairness" and that level playing field at all.

They only focus on the general perceived perception of particularly drugs. EPO, Steroids, corticosteroids etc...

If they truly want a level playing field, you ride with what you were born with. If you have any physical issues and problems that require you to take any kind of drugs that allow you to compete, they should be banned and you are not allowed.

You ride with what you were born capable of. End of story. But once you start to make "exceptions" based on socially accepted/non-accepted ideas, not science and fact, you just made the sport "unfair". Way to go USADA/USA Cycling/CUI/WADA.

Albuterol in studies have been shown to help cyclist compete at a higher level. The numbers show that in the testing they did with cyclist and improvements it made led to the conclusion it might help cyclist perform at a higher level. But, it is 100% allowed without a TUE for cyclist to use.
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
Realist said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreggGermer View Post
For me doping was only one part of the problem that impeded my career, financial considerations and regulations regarding the hiring of foreign riders in Belgium also had a large impact on my stopping. But to deny the hinderance of doping overall to my (and others) careers is not going to do the subject justice, which is why I wanted to tell my story.

This is a nice story, but to be honest, doping was not much of a hindrance to your career. . . .

You know, you're slamming the guy, but you two aren't saying something that different. He didn't claim that doping was the thing that "impeded" his career. It was "one part of the problem".
 

LauraLyn

BANNED
Jul 13, 2012
594
0
0
zigmeister said:
I've been making this argument with people for a long time. If you want "fairness" and a "level playing field", words the USADA loves to use all the time in just about every statement they release, then TUEs shouldn't exist.

You can't take anything, nor should any drug of any kind be allowed.

Next, there is no requirement for a TUE for any asthma drug, like albuterol. So the fact that WADA/USADA etc allow an FDA approved drug that technically can only be purchased in the US with a doctor's prescription, says they aren't interested in "fairness" and that level playing field at all.

They only focus on the general perceived perception of particularly drugs. EPO, Steroids, corticosteroids etc...

If they truly want a level playing field, you ride with what you're were born with. If you have any physical issues and problems that require you to take any kind of drugs that allow you to compete, they should be banned and you are not allowed.

You ride with what you were born capable of. End of story. But once you start to make "exceptions" based on socially accepted/non-accepted ideas, not science and fact, you just made the sport "unfair". Way to go USADA/USA Cycling/CUI/WADA.

Albuterol in studies have been shown to help cyclist compete at a higher level. The numbers show that in the testing they did with cyclist and improvements it made led to the conclusion it might help cyclist perform at a higher level. But, it is 100% allowed without a TUE for cyclist to use.

I'm not sure about TUE's. My jury is still out on that. I am interested in a level playing field.

The "you ride with what you're were born with" might make sense. Are you going to to so far as to say that riders with metal plates and screws in their bones are disturbing " the level playing field? How do TUE's with people with asthma differ from that?
 
Mar 11, 2010
68
0
0
I'll answer your questions below ...

Realist said:
1. In saying that doping hindered you, you are effectively saying (almost) everyone better than you was on the gear. Not even close mate. You were not that good. This is casting aspersions on a lot of riders. Some of them were charging but plenty of them weren't.

You can look at my statement that way, but I never said a thing about any other riders or their clean/dirtiness. I only talked about MY ability and how the use of doping could have lead to very quick gains (ie. an extended career). This is all of course theoretical because we will never know how a doped me could have gone as far as performance.

Realist said:
2. In saying that doping hindered you, you lend credibility to the argument that riders who are much above your level must dope. As above. Rubbish. Paradoxically, I think this kind of logic actually encourages doping... what is a kid to think once they hit their natural limit* of 5.1 w/kg? They can stay clean and be mentally blocked by this kind of foolishness, or they can dope. Never mind that if they hadn't had all these people worrying about what the limits were they might have smashed through them.

Let me repeat, I never said anyone who was ahead of me was doper. This is exactly why I was so reserved about writing this article; because some random person on the internet will read it and jump to conclusions that aren't there.

Secondly, I never set any limit for others to follow, I talked about me and my story ... every kid I talk to I tell them there are no limits. I've known a rider who smashed a VO2Max ramp test only to make it 15 minutes in a kermis. Then a guy who was a full 50 watts below my power levels was the best rider on my team one year.

Power levels are a LOOSE and GENERAL guide of one's ability relative to others, but not a predictor of your ability to race a bike. It is however useful in tracking ones personal development as a rider. And I had seen steady improvement year on year, so who is to say I wouldn't have seen that if I continued?

Quick Analogy - Just because one boxer can hit with 1,000kg's of force and another with 1,500kg's doesn't mean the "stronger" boxer will win, because the contest isn't about power, it's about winning. As such, power is just a number and not relative to anyone but yourself.

Realist said:
3. This kind of preachy stuff from sub-elite riders takes away from the very, very few people who actually did face a hard decision and go the right way with it... Bassons, for example. What would you have actually done if you'd faced the decision to ride the tour or retire, contingent on using a bit of skin cream or a tablet, or not? Neither you nor I will ever know.

Yup it's preachy, but it should be because it's something I feel passionate about. I would LOVE to hear others who had more success than me stand up and write a story like I have. I haven't read one, so I decided mine was story worth telling. If you don't like it, don't accept it's worth. Not going to affect me one bit.

Realist said:
fn: I have data from calibrated power meters of a guy on 10 hrs/wk riding above 5 w/kg. I was ~ 4.8 w/kg (rarely tested properly, just from race data), eating pastries and drinking beer, with no program, just racing local stuff. Another friend of mine training properly is around 5.8 w/kg. He's serious, but no pro tour teams signing him yet and the wins don't come easily. This is just out of a couple of serious training bunches in one big city. Not in Europe. Not Girona or anything. We're all clean. The real lesson is, work hard, win local stuff. Once you really dominate your local elite racing, do national level stuff. Once you're smashing the national level, think about Europe. Don't think that eating croissant and waffles and learning another language will turn you from a moderately talented endurance athlete into a true elite.

Look, I put the numbers out there more to show that with a bump from doping I could have been putting out the numbers to be at a competitive level to continue my carrer. In reality the numbers aren't that important to the story.

However, doping did hinder my career and EVERYONES careers around mine (including other dopers). Why? Because the speed and level of the races was artificially increased. Do I know how good I would have been with a more level playing field? NO ... but neither do you.

I've seen first hand the bump doping has given riders and had races where a bump from doping would have led to results that lead to better contracts, which leads to better improvement when riding with better teams ... but as I and others have pointed out, not doping was just one part of the equation to my decision to stop.
 
zigmeister said:
I've been making this argument with people for a long time. If you want "fairness" and a "level playing field", words the USADA loves to use all the time in just about every statement they release, then TUEs shouldn't exist.

You can't take anything, nor should any drug of any kind be allowed.

Next, there is no requirement for a TUE for any asthma drug, like albuterol. So the fact that WADA/USADA etc allow an FDA approved drug that technically can only be purchased in the US with a doctor's prescription, says they aren't interested in "fairness" and that level playing field at all.

They only focus on the general perceived perception of particularly drugs. EPO, Steroids, corticosteroids etc...

If they truly want a level playing field, you ride with what you were born with. If you have any physical issues and problems that require you to take any kind of drugs that allow you to compete, they should be banned and you are not allowed.

You ride with what you were born capable of. End of story. But once you start to make "exceptions" based on socially accepted/non-accepted ideas, not science and fact, you just made the sport "unfair". Way to go USADA/USA Cycling/CUI/WADA.

Albuterol in studies have been shown to help cyclist compete at a higher level. The numbers show that in the testing they did with cyclist and improvements it made led to the conclusion it might help cyclist perform at a higher level. But, it is 100% allowed without a TUE for cyclist to use.
You don't know what you are talking about.

I have asthma.

I wasn't born with it.

I am not alone.

The number of people with asthma continues to grow. One in (10 children and) 12 people (about 25 million, or 8% of the U.S. population) had asthma in 2009, compared with 1 in 14 (about 20 million, or 7%) in 2001.

An estimated 300 million people worldwide suffer from asthma, with 250,000 annual deaths attributed to the disease.

It is estimated that the number of people with asthma will grow by more than 100 million by 2025.

Approximately 250,000 people die prematurely each year from asthma. Almost all of these deaths are avoidable


I have had extensive testing, and asthma medication does not return me to normal let alone above normal.

But, I would still be happy to take you on, without my asthma meds, one-on-one in a sprint or a TT.

Dave.
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
GreggGermer said:
I'll answer your questions below ...

Greg, it is very clear you have no tickets on yourself, and I do not see it the way "Realist" does.

Fully agree power output values can be deceptive. I've gone training with guys who clearly have more power than me, smashing me up every climb. Come race day the roles are reversed. I've also won races at 80% ftiness purely because I knew I was underdone so raced much more conservatively than I usually do.

If power was all it was about we wouldn't even have to race. Just jump on an ergo and bang out a ramp test to exhaustion.

There's so much more.