Wiggins to release blood test records

[Jonathan]

The deal is: nobody loves to hate Twiggo... unlike another rider in the peloton.

I think I mentioned that if "someone else" had posted these numbers, there'd be an outrage.

Lo and behold. That "other guy" did post similar numbers, and we have a massive discussion about it.

It's not science. It's favoritism.

There is a credible reason why so much criticism (and defence) centers on Armstrong and not on Wiggins. It does not have to do with who is considered more likely to be guilty - although there is a lot more evidence against Armstrong.

I posted a column-like message about this in a thread called 'Stop bashing Armstrong' or something like that. I can look it up if you're interested in a nuanced opinion about why Armstrong gets so much attention. Ofcourse, if you only want a stick to beat the 'haters' with, I cannot provide it.

 

[Cobblestones]

I hardly participate in Armstrong threads at all. Too much tedium. I'm very happy to see a lot of the Armstrong discussion confined in one thread here. Of course Armstrong will pop up in any thread eventually, but I usually make a point not to respond to that.

Anyway, I fully understand. Armstrong is in a league by himself when it comes to publicity, PR, emotional response on message boards etc. Of course two riders doing the same thing, one of them Armstrong, people will focus on Armstrong by more than 10:1. For me, it's more interesting to discuss any rider but Armstrong, because you don't have to sift through two pages of garbage and back and forth bickering for the one post with actual, real content.

Finally, I'm pleased to see that what I wrote about Wiggins's passport values on the previous page (Htc and off score going up during the TdF at least once, and never drop significantly below the Monaco levels) has been labeled 'suspicious' for a certain other rider by a Danish scientist.

 

[Escarabajo]

Did we ever get an explanation for the following?

During the Giro, Wiggins's off score took a dive from 85 to 65 and his hemoglobin from 15 to somewhat above 13 g/dl.

During the TdF, the Sion value shows an increase over the Limoges value from 85 to almost 100 for the off score and from 14 to somewhat over 15 g/dl for hemoglobin. Between Sion and Ventoux, he then showed a similar drop as during the Giro with almost -20 on the off score and not quite -2 g/dl for the hemoglobin.

However, due to the aforementioned +jump of the Sion values, the overall decrease in off score and hemoglobin throughout the TdF is practically negligible, compared to the large overall decrease he experienced in the Giro.

The blood data also reflect Wiggins's results in the third weeks of the Giro and TdF. I would argue that the different blood parameter curves are the reason for the difference in performance. Now, what is the reason for the different curves?

What's the deal here?

Hi Cobbles,
Read the Jonathan Vaughters wants to sign Contador Thread. The explanation was given by Jonathan himself.

 

[Cobblestones]

Hi Cobbles,
Read the Jonathan Vaughters wants to sign Contador Thread. The explanation was given by Jonathan himself.

Oh crap I completely missed that thread.

And it's a long one.

 

[RhodriM]

Finally, I'm pleased to see that what I wrote about Wiggins's passport values on the previous page (Htc and off score going up during the TdF at least once, and never drop significantly below the Monaco levels) has been labeled 'suspicious' for a certain other rider by a Danish scientist.

Hmm, but at least Wiggins' off-score did drop overall during the tour.

I don't think the off-score will neccesarily drop every day? There's surely always fluctuations; it's just how much of a rise/drop is suspicious?

I just wonder why cyclists are publishing these results if they're supposed to be suspicious. And do we know what blood values for the tour are supposed to look like if these are apparently iffy?

 

[Dude17]

Oh crap I completely missed that thread.

And it's a long one.

Good thread. If you ignore the trolling crap, it is pretty manageable.

 

[RhodriM]

Good thread. If you ignore the trolling crap, it is pretty manageable.

It's rather long though... does it again boil down to people trying to guess Contador's VO2max based on how quick he rode up a climb by comparing it to other riders on other climbs in other races?

 

[Cobblestones]

Ok, I think I found what JV wrote in the other thread. I'll just copy it here for reference:

Re Wiggos change in hemoglobin in the Tour: He has the exact same profile in the Giro: 15 at the start, drops to 14 after 10 days, then up to 15 at two weeks, then down to 13 for Ventoux (or last day of Giro). I'm not sure what this is about, but there is no correlating change in retics, mcv, or mch, so I dont think much of it.
Sometimes transport or different analysis machines (Coulter vs Sysmex) can cause changes in hct and hb. Its only when those changes correlate to a change in retics, mcv, etc that I get concerned. The interesting part with Wiggo is that his profile is the same in both 3 week Tours. One in which he was riding for GC, the other which he was just riding grupetto the last 10 days. It may be some shift in plasma volume that Wiggo has as he adapts to the load. Another factor may be that the other tests were taken on race days, the "jump" one was on a rest day. I also dont have know what time these tests were taken, so AM vs PM plasma volume changes quite a bit, hydration status aside. Ever notice how you feel stiff and puffy in the AM, but then that clears out by the afternoon? Thats water shifting from under your skin/in your muscles to in your bloodstream. Its more pronounced in athletes that are undergoing extreme inflammation. Not saying I have any specific information that any of these things caused this, I'm just thinking out loud.
In my experience in viewing a lot of these profiles, this is not an "at risk" profile, but of course I understand the concern that a 1pt hb jump would cause you guys. Its not an invalid concern. However, I have seen a lot of these and I just dont have that concern.

JV

Now, first of all, I think his assertion is wrong that the profile of the Giro and the TdF are the same. Look at the Giro graph vs. the TdF graph (careful, the Giro graph has two points long before the Giro, so we only have two points for the actual Giro.

In that respect, the first part of JV's answer is manifestly wrong (unless he has more or different data points to work with than we). Giro: drop of 2 points in Hb and 20 points in off score. TdF: overall drop of maybe 1 point in Hb and maybe 10 points in off score. Giro: no increase ever, TdF: one spike evident.

A lot of the other stuff is doubtful. Different analysis machines do not produce changes by one whole point or more (which would be almost 10% or the effect of a one-pint-refill). Sure, there is some effect on plasma volume by am/pm testing, level of hydration etc. But for it to make sense, it requires that it 'fits' precisely, i.e. that the one test is in the morning and/or low hydration while the other tests in the afternoon and good hydration. Doesn't he know precisely when Wiggins got tested or is that not talked about during the team meetings? In any case, in order to gauge if any of his possible explanations hold water, it would be interesting to see some of the other values such as protein, retic counts etc beside Hb and off score. Unfortunately, they're not graphed. Will they be made public at some point?

 

[Escarabajo]

In that respect, the first part of JV's answer is manifestly wrong (unless he has more or different data points to work with than we). Giro: drop of 2 points in Hb and 20 points in off score. TdF: overall drop of maybe 1 point in Hb and maybe 10 points in off score. Giro: no increase ever, TdF: one spike evident.

A lot of the other stuff is doubtful. Different analysis machines do not produce changes by one whole point or more (which would be almost 10% or the effect of a one-pint-refill). Sure, there is some effect on plasma volume by am/pm testing, level of hydration etc. But for it to make sense, it requires that it 'fits' precisely, i.e. that the one test is in the morning and/or low hydration while the other tests in the afternoon and good hydration. Doesn't he know precisely when Wiggins got tested or is that not talked about during the team meetings? In any case, in order to gauge if any of his possible explanations hold water, it would be interesting to see some of the other values such as protein, retic counts etc beside Hb and off score. Unfortunately, they're not graphed. Will they be made public at some point?

Even if JV was not accurate on his assessment, can we conclude anything from the Tour Blood values? It looks like it would be hard to tell of any blood manipulation. Having said that, I have a couple of comments or questions:

1- Is GARMIN or Wiggins that much better than Lance Armstrong in covering the blood doping? I would find that a little hard to believe. I am not sure it they are that good. So maybe he was just clean, or mostly clean (No Blood manipulation only).

2- Or maybe they are just as good as the Astana boys in covering the blood doping, but maybe, just maybe, Lance pushed it a little to the limit because of pride and the inside fighting that he had with Contador?

I'll be happy to hear what other forists think about this, which in part is related with the new Lance's blood doping affair.

 

[Cobblestones]

Even if JV was not accurate on his assessment, can we conclude anything from the Tour Blood values? It looks like it would be hard to tell of any blood manipulation. Having said that, I have a couple of comments or questions:

1- Is GARMIN or Wiggins that much better than Lance Armstrong in covering the blood doping? I would find that a little hard to believe. I am not sure it they are that good. So maybe he was just clean, or mostly clean (No Blood manipulation only).

2- Or maybe they are just as good as the Astana boys in covering the blood doping, but maybe, just maybe, Lance pushed it a little to the limit because of pride and the inside fighting that he had with Contador?

I'll be happy to hear what other forists think about this, which in part is related with the new Lance's blood doping affair.

I think LA is probably the best responder to doping of the whole lot.

 

[RHitaliano]

It's rather long though... does it again boil down to people trying to guess Contador's VO2max based on how quick he rode up a climb by comparing it to other riders on other climbs in other races?

I make VO2 calculations based on Television coverage. I am scientist also.

 

[Escarabajo]

I think LA is probably the best responder to doping of the whole lot.

My point is that the two blood profiles look different. So is that a response of each individual rider to the "same" or "somehow similar" amount of blood infused into the system or just that they use different amounts and that's why the two riders have different profiles?

If they used different amounts, and let's say Armstrong was more aggressive, then that would not prove that Lance is a very good responder, just that the others are more cautious.

This is what I understand from "Good Responder": Under similar amounts of blood doping one rider gets a better kick than the other and therefore blood parameters will show changes more accentuated than normal. Please feel free to correct me since I am not scientist on this topic.
Thanks.

 

[RhodriM]

I make VO2 calculations based on Television coverage. I am scientist also.

Probably not a very good one then.

Don't get me wrong, Contador may be guilty as sin, but his links with Puerto etc are far more damning than woolly science based on watching someone ride up a hill on TV.

There are far too many factors in a road race to calculate such things, the only accurate way is in a lab.

 

[blackcat]

actually no, the lab tests are for lab outputs. What riders put out on race day, is more important. Some riders test well, some like Cavendish test mediocre.

 

[RhodriM]

actually no, the lab tests are for lab outputs. What riders put out on race day, is more important. Some riders test well, some like Cavendish test mediocre.

So how do you accurately measure VO2max on race day? Have them breathe into a bag?

I'm all for catching dopers but guessing their physiological data based on how quickly they ride a climb isn't going to do it. Though if it raises suspicion that prompts more careful scrutiny of a rider it's a start I guess.

Be nice if AC's (and the whole peloton's) blood values were released.

 

[blackcat]

check his SRM/powertap, compare it to what he would put out in a lab, and what that VO2 is. Ofcourse, that is not like to like, even with the same contact points on the ero in the lab.

 

[Cobber]

OK... as requested by Escarabajo. Once again, normal ranges shaded blue. The values were "estimated" from the graphs posted earlier (and on the website I quoted), so they will not be 100% accurate. (but they will be close! )

 

[Escarabajo]

OK... as requested by Escarabajo. Once again, normal ranges shaded blue. The values were "estimated" from the graphs posted earlier (and on the website I quoted), so they will not be 100% accurate. (but they will be close! )

Excellent. Thanks a lot Cobber.
Giro. Only drops.
Tour. Only one slight spike.

Numbers less telling than Armstrong's profile. Lance Armstrong had more data as oppose to Wiggins. That probably has some impact in the evaluation of the chart. Let's see what others have to say.

 

[Cobblestones]

My point is that the two blood profiles look different. So is that a response of each individual rider to the "same" or "somehow similar" amount of blood infused into the system or just that they use different amounts and that's why the two riders have different profiles?

If they used different amounts, and let's say Armstrong was more aggressive, then that would not prove that Lance is a very good responder, just that the others are more cautious.

This is what I understand from "Good Responder": Under similar amounts of blood doping one rider gets a better kick than the other and therefore blood parameters will show changes more accentuated than normal. Please feel free to correct me since I am not scientist on this topic.
Thanks.

Ah, let me explain what I meant with 'good responder'. First of all, topping off with a pint of packed cells will increase Hb concentration by a certain amount. It's simple math and has nothing to do with being a good or bad responder. It is an altogether different question how your body responds to the additional pint. How much power do you gain from it. Also, transfusions will temporarily shut down production of new RBC, hence the retic count goes down and the off-score up. That is a body response to doping. Moreover, other forms of doping such as using EPO-type products provoke a physiological response.

A 'good responder' can mean a lot, and you're right by asking for clarification. I didn't use the term consistently. I think LA is a good responder when it comes to power output due to increased crit or Hb. He gets relatively more out of it than most other riders. In an undoped peloton, he might be an able rouleur, but his freak response puts him on top of other (doped) riders.

I don't think LA's and Wiggins's curves look all that different. Wiggins started the Giro with 85 off score and 15 g/dl. In the end he had 65 and somewhat above 13. He then started the TdF with almost 95 and 15, went up to just below 100, and ended on the Ventoux barely below 85 and 14. In other words, his off score jumped from 65 to almost 100 in the few weeks from end of May to mid July. Armstrong's went from maybe 70 to around 110. A similar argument could be made for the Hb.

The most telling point is when you compare Giro vs TdF for one and the same rider. You see that both Wiggins and LA have a pretty steady TdF curve, while their Giro curves look like something dropping off a cliff. I don't think comparing smaller details between curves is very useful because who knows when the data were taken with respect to the transfusions, and anyway the two riders might follow somewhat different schedules in the first place. Maybe one of them got tested right before and then only a week or so after the transfusion while the other got tested the day after which would make stick the result out more.

ETA: ha, I wrote my post before Cobber put his plot up. I think the plot shows it better than my explanation. Let me try to say it in a different way. I think Wiggins got juiced up between the third and second last point on the graph. The transfusion had the effect of elevating the last two point on each curve. If you move them both down by 10-20% (where they would be without the extra pint) both ends of the curves would be a nice replica of the Giro part.

 

[Cobber]

Excellent. Thanks a lot Cobber.
Giro. Only drops.
Tour. Only one slight spike.

Numbers less telling than Armstrong's profile. Lance Armstrong had more data as opose to Wiggins. That probably has some impact in the evalaution of the chart. Let's see what others have to say.

My pleasure!

I agree that these values look a lot more innocent than Armstrong's graph, but that could either be that he is completely innocent or not tested on the right days. If you look at the Armstrong graph, it would also be a lot more innocent without the 6/16/09 and 6/17/09 values. I would love to know the circumstances around these tests... maybe the Hog ran out of coffee the morning of the test?!

I also wonder if the fact that the tour profiles don't change much for both Wiggo and LA is a reflection of how tough (or lack of) this year's TdF was.

Also, if anyone has any more values for Wiggo, it will be very easy to update the graph.

 

[Escarabajo]

Ah, let me explain what I meant with 'good responder'. First of all, ....

The most telling point is when you compare Giro vs TdF for one and the same rider. You see that both Wiggins and LA have a pretty steady TdF curve, while their Giro curves look like something dropping off a cliff. I don't think comparing smaller details between curves is very useful ....

Thanks. I guess I need to read between the lines.

 

[Cobblestones]

What I would really like to see is a profile of someone who faded badly. Are there enough data on Menchov or Evans? Or maybe a young guy such as Tony Martin?

 

[Cobblestones]

Thanks. I guess I need to read between the lines.

Ok, I deserved that.

 

[Anonymous]

What I would really like to see is a profile of someone who faded badly. Are there enough data on Menchov or Evans? Or maybe a young guy such as Tony Martin?

+1, I would love to see Evans' profile.

 

[blackcat]

Evans actually did not have a bad Tour. He just was out of it after the TTT. I think his split up Ventoux was the same than of the GC leaders, he just missed a split in the field eariler, because he was not vigilant, or down the back.

So, if Evans was on a squad that supported him, and rode high in the TTT, he would have been thereabouts Wiggins and Armstrong. Still a few rungs behind Contador and Schleck tho