Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 20 of 52 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,177 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So Ricco, Sella, DiLuca, Simoni, Contador, Menchov duked it out in the Giro, which looks to be far harder than this years tour. Why did Ricco, Sella NOT get busted in Italy? If Ricco's performance in France was too good to be true, the Sella's in Italy is Double that.
It's obvious that what goes on in one GT is different than another.
So Ricco, who tried VERY HARD to win the Giro DIDN'T dope in the Giro, but DID in the Tour de France? I don't think so..
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
608 Posts
Information from Ricco's Giro tests was used to target him in the TdF. The testers saw strange things in his Giro samples. They knew it was a large molecule and suspected it was CERA. They then worked with the LNDD lab and apparently Roche, the manufacturer of CERA, to develop a test.

How Contador, who did his training kicked back on a beach, beat a super doped up Ricco is nothing to worry about, I assure you. It's not like a Leipheimer rejoined Bruyneel and had a huge, inexplicable step up in performance, is it? Riders on Bruyneel's teams just train harder than everyone else. This allows them to actually get better in the third week of a GT. :rolleyes:

You think you can make your sig any bigger and more obnoxious?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Hate to bust your bubble about the whole Contador and Levi thing but as I recall Ricco blew Contador off his wheel in every mountain stage. Just so happens that Ricco can't time trial as well as Contador. Also, maybe you saw the stage last year when Rasmussen absolutely dropped Contador and Levi after they had been attacking him the entire stage. I'm not saying that I know for sure if they did/didn't dope but, maybe a strong rider with a good team surrounding him can beat a doped up climber in the long run.
 

·
Bea Arthur's Army of Evil
Joined
·
236 Posts
Under ACrookedSky said:
How Contador, who did his training kicked back on a beach, beat a super doped up Ricco is nothing to worry about, I assure you. It's not like a Leipheimer rejoined Bruyneel and had a huge, inexplicable step up in performance, is it? Riders on Bruyneel's teams just train harder than everyone else. This allows them to actually get better in the third week of a GT. :rolleyes:
I would say Contador's performance during the 07 Tour was much more suspect than his in the Giro. I mean, during that whole Giro, the only thing that got him the win was better time trialing than all the other favorites, he didn't win a single mountain stage and was dropped a bunch of times. Levi and Kloden had awful performances. During the 2007 Tour, yes, those were suspect performances, but I didn't see anything truly suspect from Astana during the Giro.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
608 Posts
parker3375 said:
Hate to bust your bubble about the whole Contador and Levi thing but as I recall Ricco blew Contador off his wheel in every mountain stage. Just so happens that Ricco can't time trial as well as Contador. Also, maybe you saw the stage last year when Rasmussen absolutely dropped Contador and Levi after they had been attacking him the entire stage. I'm not saying that I know for sure if they did/didn't dope but, maybe a strong rider with a good team surrounding him can beat a doped up climber in the long run.
Yeah, because we all know that a good team will increase your power and help recovery more than dope will. It is probably just a coincidence that Contador came from a team with an ingrained doping problem, Werner Franke has the doping schedule he used at Liberty Seguros, and he got even better when he joined Bruyneel.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
169 Posts
parker3375 said:
Hate to bust your bubble about the whole Contador and Levi thing but as I recall Ricco blew Contador off his wheel in every mountain stage. Just so happens that Ricco can't time trial as well as Contador. Also, maybe you saw the stage last year when Rasmussen absolutely dropped Contador and Levi after they had been attacking him the entire stage. I'm not saying that I know for sure if they did/didn't dope but, maybe a strong rider with a good team surrounding him can beat a doped up climber in the long run.

A high crit shows itself the most in TT's.

Ricco had more watts per kilo than Contradoper but less total wattage but that doesn't mean that Contradoper wasn't doped.

I have done epo ...and yes go ahead and flame me all you children out there like you already have. The power gains(and especially repeatability) from even a moderately elevated hematocrit are STAGGERING to say the least!

I can tell you one thing FOR SURE....if you have two talented riders, and both Ricco and Contradoper are very talented, the guy that has a normal crit would not even get close to the doped rider in any event. If Ricco was doped and Contradoper was not you would not see Contradoper anywhere near Ricco in the mountains. In fact, in a long mountain climbs Ricco would win by at least 10 minutes...and Ricco would also kick his butt in any TT.

This is why I know that all the top GC, and especially Contradoper, has a crit of at least 49-50%. If they didn't they would not be riding with guys like Ricco up mountains passes for even 10 minutes.You get a very big gain in sustainable power even from a 49-50% crit!

If these remaining top GC guys are really clean they would make their tour crits known to the public...you would see them show their 41 hematocrits and being proud of it! Lets see their crits!!!

Almost nobody walks around with a 49-50% hematocrit, save for a person living at very high altitude or chain smokers that are chronically hypoxic, and especially not high end aerobic athletes who ALL have somewhat hemodiluted blood due to the nature of their training.
..before some pretend doctor flames me I'll say this...OK there is the odd freak that has a 50% crit naturally but at least 99.5% have a crit between 40 and 45%....even a 46-47 is rarely seen.
I look at hematocrits five days a week and have been doing so for 20 years and I have never seen a 50% crit in anyone that was not a heavy smoker. In fact I sit up and take note when I see a 47.

They can micro dose with human identical Dynepo to get a 49-50 crit before the tour and they can continue during the tour...no probs whatever.

My .02

Flame away kids

RG :)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,241 Posts
Realgains said:
Almost nobody walks around with a 49-50% hematocrit, save for a person living at very high altitude or chain smokers that are chronically hypoxic, and especially not high end aerobic athletes who ALL have somewhat hemodiluted blood due to the nature of their training.
..before some pretend doctor flames me I'll say this...OK there is the odd freak that has a 50% crit naturally but at least 99.5% have a crit between 40 and 45%....even a 46-47 is rarely seen.
I look at hematocrits five days a week and have been doing so for 20 years and I have never seen a 50% crit in anyone that was not a heavy smoker. In fact I sit up and take note when I see a 47.
Some have posted, with no supporting evidence, that 16% of people have a crit over 50% and over 60% is common. Have you seen anything to support this?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
169 Posts
bigpinkt said:
Some have posted, with no supporting evidence, that 16% of people have a crit over 50% and over 60% is common. Have you seen anything to support this?

Yeah....20 years of looking at hematocrits five days a week all day long.

No way it's 16% for 50% and up. Almost everyone(healthy) I see has a crit of between 40 and 46%and 47 is more rare. Now as I mentioned heavy smokers can have a higher crit since they are constantly hypoxic. This scews the "average" upward because they have to take into consideration the smokers out there when "average " is figured. Also, there are lot of fat people around and many of them have obstructive sleep apnea and they too have higher crist and they too scew the average upward. If you could eliminate the smokers and the fat people with sleep apnea then the average would probably be about 43% for men.



Even people living in the mountains of South America at 14,000 plus feet don't have 60% crits. Some(not all can get up to 55% and the odd one will get a bit higher)

I have NEVER EVER seen an aerobic athlete with a 50% crit.....it does not happen without epo, doping or living at at least 12,000 feet. That doesn't mean that there is not the odd freak out there that might.
As I mentioned high end aerobic athletes ALWAYS run a little on the low side....this is a well established fact.

The 50% limit is a joke....and a compromise.

If you saw the natural crits of the best riders in the GC they would be on the low side of normal for the most part....most would come in at 40-43 %.


Hypoxic tents(altitude tents) can raise your crit a couple points(max) but your quality of sleep goes to and thus your day to day recovery does too(re: deprived O2 at night) so the riders don't use them. The same can be said of living at altitude. If you do live at altitude you must come down to train daily because you cannot train properly at altitude for various reasons.


Lets see the riders crits in the tour! Why are they not made know to the general public? Because most of them are at 50% or very close. If they are tested after a stage and their crit is say 53% they just say they are dehydrated and go off to the hotel or motor home to get IV saline infusions with a pump...and they can also throw in some "volume expanders" to keep the fluid in circulation longer....then they can be safely re-tested when they are re-hydrated HA!

Cheers
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,241 Posts
Realgains said:
Yeah....20 years of looking at hematocrits five days a week all day long.

No way it's 16% for 50% and up. Almost everyone(healthy) I see has a crit of between 40 and 46%and 47 is more rare. Now as I mentioned heavy smokers can have a higher crit since they are constantly hypoxic. This scews the "average" upward because they have to take into consideration the smokers out there when "average " is figured. Also, there are lot of fat people around and many of them have obstructive sleep apnea and they too have higher crist and they too scew the average upward. If you could eliminate the smokers and the fat people with sleep apnea then the average would probably be about 43% for men.



Even people living in the mountains of South America at 14,000 plus feet don't have 60% crits. Some(not all can get up to 55% and the odd one will get a bit higher)

I have NEVER EVER seen an aerobic athlete with a 50% crit.....it does not happen without epo, doping or living at at least 12,000 feet. That doesn't mean that there is not the odd freak out there that might.
As I mentioned high end aerobic athletes ALWAYS run a little on the low side....this is a well established fact.

The 50% limit is a joke....and a compromise.

If you saw the natural crits of the best riders in the GC they would be on the low side of normal for the most part....most would come in at 40-43 %.


Hypoxic tents(altitude tents) can raise your crit a couple points(max) but your quality of sleep goes to and thus your day to day recovery does too(re: deprived O2 at night) so the riders don't use them. The same can be said of living at altitude. If you do live at altitude you must come down to train daily because you cannot train properly at altitude for various reasons.


Lets see the riders crits in the tour! Why are they not made know to the general public? Because most of them are at 50% or very close. If they are tested after a stage and their crit is say 53% they just say they are dehydrated and go off to the hotel or motor home to get IV saline infusions with a pump...and they can also throw in some "volume expanders" to keep the fluid in circulation longer....then they can be safely re-tested when they are re-hydrated HA!

Cheers
That is what I thought. So Armstrong's claim of raising his Hct from 41 to 48.5 by sleeping in a tent would be a lie.... Wouldn't be the first time.

I asked these questions earlier but you may have missed them.

- have you found that some riders respond better then others to PED's?
-Do you find that riders with denser muscular structure (Armstrong, Ulrich, Indurain) benefit more from EPO then riders with less muscle mass (Light weight climbers)?
-Can you think of a rational reason for EPO to be found in 6 of Armstrong's samples from the 99 Tour?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
169 Posts
bigpinkt said:
That is what I thought. So Armstrong's claim of raising his Hct from 41 to 48.5 by sleeping in a tent would be a lie.... Wouldn't be the first time.

I asked these questions earlier but you may have missed them.

- have you found that some riders respond better then others to PED's?
-Do you find that riders with denser muscular structure (Armstrong, Ulrich, Indurain) benefit more from EPO then riders with less muscle mass (Light weight climbers)?
-Can you think of a rational reason for EPO to be found in 6 of Armstrong's samples from the 99 Tour?

Armstrong is of course full of :) It's hard enough recovering from hard training sleeping in a normal room air environment. Sleeping at a simulated O2 percentage that you would find at 10,000 feet makes it pretty much impossible to recover.
Also, the people that manufacture these tents will tell you that raising your crit as Armstrong said he did is not possible. You have to live at high altitude and not just visit a simulated O2 content for 10 hours a day in order to stimulate enough epo release to raise crit that much.

Without a doubt some riders respond better to PEDS than others do. PED therapy does not produce the samer gains, percentage wise, with all riders. The man with the lower crit like Armstrong, Pantani, and Riis, benefit the most form a high crit.
Some guys can get unreal recovery abilty from as little as 2 iu's of growth a day while others get less benefit from even 4-6 iu's. Some guys cannot feel their legs on cortico steroids and can hammer all day while others get less of a boost.

So universal use does not "even the playing field" at all.

I don't know about muscle density but in my oipinion a high crit benefits the pure power TT men over climbers to some degree. It helps climbers a lot too of course but they have other advantages that make it seem like a high crit helps them the most. So any time you see a rider with unreal TT times and that can also hang with the little climbers(especially known dopers) then you pretty much know for sure that he is jacked.

Armstrong was already caught doped.....he had cortisone in system. Then a back dated doctors script came out of nowhere for a saddle cream with cortisone in it. Anyone that knows pro cycling knows that cortisone was the most common PED used in pro cycling up until very resently.
Armstrong had 6 positives for epo because he was jacked on epo. There was no test for epo back in 99 as you know so he would have been nuts not to use it...after all he wanted to make as much money off cycling as possible and he knew damn well that everyone else was jacked on epo too.

As I have said before you simply cannot keep up with talented riders with a high crit if you don't have a high crit. Armstrong would not have even been in the top 50 if he did nopt use epo in 99...thus is the unreal power of jacking your red cells through the roof.

Cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,752 Posts
Realgains said:
Armstrong is of course full of :) It's hard enough recovering from hard training sleeping in a normal room air environment. Sleeping at a simulated O2 percentage that you would find at 10,000 feet makes it pretty much impossible to recover.
Also, the people that manufacture these tents will tell you that raising your crit as Armstrong said he did is not possible. You have to live at high altitude and not just visit a simulated O2 content for 10 hours a day in order to stimulate enough epo release to raise crit that much.

Without a doubt some riders respond better to PEDS than others do. PED therapy does not produce the samer gains, percentage wise, with all riders. The man with the lower crit like Armstrong, Pantani, and Riis, benefit the most form a high crit.
Some guys can get unreal recovery abilty from as little as 2 iu's of growth a day while others get less benefit from even 4-6 iu's. Some guys cannot feel their legs on cortico steroids and can hammer all day while others get less of a boost.

So universal use does not "even the playing field" at all.

I don't know about muscle density but in my oipinion a high crit benefits the pure power TT men over climbers to some degree. It helps climbers a lot too of course but they have other advantages that make it seem like a high crit helps them the most. So any time you see a rider with unreal TT times and that can also hang with the little climbers(especially known dopers) then you pretty much know for sure that he is jacked.

Armstrong was already caught doped.....he had cortisone in system. Then a back dated doctors script came out of nowhere for a saddle cream with cortisone in it. Anyone that knows pro cycling knows that cortisone was the most common PED used in pro cycling up until very resently.
Armstrong had 6 positives for epo because he was jacked on epo. There was no test for epo back in 99 as you know so he would have been nuts not to use it...after all he wanted to make as much money off cycling as possible and he knew damn well that everyone else was jacked on epo too.

As I have said before you simply cannot keep up with talented riders with a high crit if you don't have a high crit. Armstrong would not have even been in the top 50 if he did nopt use epo in 99...thus is the unreal power of jacking your red cells through the roof.

Cheers
So the alleged clean "new school" teams of Garmin and Columbia are pulling a scam upon a scam? What would they have to gain from making the claims they do about their drug programs?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,241 Posts
Realgains said:
Armstrong is of course full of :) It's hard enough recovering from hard training sleeping in a normal room air environment. Sleeping at a simulated O2 percentage that you would find at 10,000 feet makes it pretty much impossible to recover.
Also, the people that manufacture these tents will tell you that raising your crit as Armstrong said he did is not possible. You have to live at high altitude and not just visit a simulated O2 content for 10 hours a day in order to stimulate enough epo release to raise crit that much.

Without a doubt some riders respond better to PEDS than others do. PED therapy does not produce the samer gains, percentage wise, with all riders. The man with the lower crit like Armstrong, Pantani, and Riis, benefit the most form a high crit.
Some guys can get unreal recovery abilty from as little as 2 iu's of growth a day while others get less benefit from even 4-6 iu's. Some guys cannot feel their legs on cortico steroids and can hammer all day while others get less of a boost.

So universal use does not "even the playing field" at all.

I don't know about muscle density but in my oipinion a high crit benefits the pure power TT men over climbers to some degree. It helps climbers a lot too of course but they have other advantages that make it seem like a high crit helps them the most. So any time you see a rider with unreal TT times and that can also hang with the little climbers(especially known dopers) then you pretty much know for sure that he is jacked.

Armstrong was already caught doped.....he had cortisone in system. Then a back dated doctors script came out of nowhere for a saddle cream with cortisone in it. Anyone that knows pro cycling knows that cortisone was the most common PED used in pro cycling up until very resently.
Armstrong had 6 positives for epo because he was jacked on epo. There was no test for epo back in 99 as you know so he would have been nuts not to use it...after all he wanted to make as much money off cycling as possible and he knew damn well that everyone else was jacked on epo too.

As I have said before you simply cannot keep up with talented riders with a high crit if you don't have a high crit. Armstrong would not have even been in the top 50 if he did nopt use epo in 99...thus is the unreal power of jacking your red cells through the roof.

Cheers
Thanks, that is what I thought.

Funny thing about the Armstrong Cortisone positive. He was caught in much the same way as Ricco was caught. Prior to the 99 Tour the test for synthetic Cortisone was perfected, but the riders were not told (This was before the $500,000 "Donation") It was a big surprise to everyone when he got caught and had to some up with a quick excuse.
 

·
Back from the dead
Joined
·
20,800 Posts
bigpinkt said:
Thanks, that is what I thought.
Really? He gave you a generic answer to your generic question, which, no offense to Realgains, was a pretty obvious answer. Different people respond to drugs differently. Of course they do. That's why there is so much boilerplate in drug ads about possible side effects.

What you were hoping he would say, which he did NOT say, is that Armstrong is a "super-responder" to EPO, as you love to claim, with zero basis in fact.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,241 Posts
mohair_chair said:
Your imagination is running wild again. Show me where I ever said that different people do not respond differently to drugs. I never said anything of the sort. Not having said it, how could I possibly be wrong?
Now that you agree with me that some riders benefited from PED's greater then others (Super Responders) the next step would be to recognize who the most obvious of these riders would be.

The most obvious examples would be riders who preformed poorly in early tours, then suddenly became world beaters when introduced to EPO. Riis, Indurain, and Armstrong are the most obvious but I would also put Bugno and Chiappucci on that list as well.

.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,241 Posts
shorelocal said:
What, if any, are the medical side effects / drawbacks to using EPO? I'm sure everyone's heard what they are for steroids (ie. back acne, roid rage, shrunken member, etc), but what about EPO?
It is as safe as Orange Juice
 

·
Back from the dead
Joined
·
20,800 Posts
bigpinkt said:
Now that you agree with me that some riders benefited from PED's greater then others (Super Responders) the next step would be to recognize who the most obvious of these riders would be.
There you go, putting words in my mouth again. Any wonder why you can never keep straight what I actually say, and what you want me to say?

The thing about Armstrong is that he has several actual doctors (imagine that) who treated him for cancer with EPO who KNOW whether or not he is a "super responder." Unlike you, they know for certain. Unless you hear it from them, you don't have any basis for making that claim.

I'm sure you agree with me.
 
1 - 20 of 52 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top