bio-passport is a sham (was: state of the art in doping)

[wallymann]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/are-micro-dosing-riders-poking-holes-in-biological-passport

looks like the bio-passport is a sham, for those sufficiently motivated.

"If you’re training at altitude you can do 3-400 units of EPO every night at 10pm intravenously and be fine by the morning. You’re only required to answer the door to the testers during your one-hour window, so just make it 9am and you’ll be fine. That’s plenty of time. Over two weeks you’ll raise your HCT [haematocrit - the percentage of oxygen-carrying red blood cells -ed.] by 4-5 points but if you’re training hard your blood will be diluted and it won’t show on the test for the biological passport, and that’s conservative.”

“You’re fine with 800-1000 units with that amount of clearance time,” he added. “But then your HCT will rise faster so there’ a very small risk with the ABP. Human growth hormone? You can do as much as you want with an hour of clearance time. That alone will raise your HCT by 3-4 points over three weeks and double testosterone production. Once you’ve raised your HCT 4-6 points you’ve got two months of benefit – decreasing gradually over the second month. For the guy who is around 70kg a 6-8 point increase, which is very easy to manage, you’ve got 20-30 extra watts.”

[soulspinner]

Wow.

[wallymann]

+20 watts (i'm assuming at threshold, where it matters most) is and always will be a game-changer.

[MattTuck]

So, how does one get on this program? I could use an extra 20-30 watts.

If that is true, that the stuff clears that quickly with that much of a benefit, then I think the doping controls need to be allowed surprise inspections.

[malbecman]

...and never, never, underestimate the power of the placebo effect. If a rider were micro-dosing and there was no real measurable physiological difference, he might still think he is stronger & faster and ride that way.

[Look585]

What does this mean for doping in the Masters Fatty ranks? Likelihood of an out of competition test is effectively zero. If I am reading correctly, it seems like HGH and T must be rampant.

[Ti Designs]

Is there any way of doing this without knowing I'm doing it? The reason I've never cheated wasn't that someone else would find out, it's that I would always know...


when I start working with racers, one of the first questions is who are you doing this for? If it's bout how others see you, you'll probably go looking for ways to cheat. I have no interest in working with people like that. If it's for how you see yourself, you'll always kick yourself for going down that path.


In 650 years I'll look and sound just like Yoda...

[MattTuck]

I believe that Frank Schleck accused his team of dosing him with banned substances which he then got popped for. So, it is possible that a rider could be juicing without knowing it, I guess.

There was a documentary a while back about the East German sports program and many of those female athletes were given stuff without knowing what it was -- now though, they are men :(

[verticaldoug]

I assume if you are reading about it on a forum, it is no longer state of the art. I wonder what NOP is up to now?

[jr59]

I assume if you are reading about it on a forum, it is no longer state of the art. I wonder what NOP is up to now?

^^THIS^^

When we read about it it's already past history and on to something better.

If they understand the test/passport, then they can work around/cheat it.

-7 did not invent this, nor even perfect it. Just used it.

When big money is on the line, some/most people are going to give them selves every advantage. Just the way of pro sports.

[numbskull]

What does this mean for doping in the Masters Fatty ranks? Likelihood of an out of competition test is effectively zero. If I am reading correctly, it seems like HGH and T must be rampant.

Particularly when almost any aging male can convince his primary MD to prescribe testosterone for "medical" reasons if he really wants it (and accepts the cancer/ heart concerns that come along with it ). HGH not so much, at least legally.

[John H.]

Google "anti aging". Easy to get HGH prescribed. All it takes is $.
There are clinics all over the place.
The not so much would only be about your insurance paying.
If you have the cash you can easily obtain.

Particularly when almost any aging male can convince his primary MD to prescribe testosterone for "medical" reasons if he really wants it (and accepts the cancer/ heart concerns that come along with it ). HGH not so much, at least legally.

[Tony T]

I believe that Frank Schleck accused his team of dosing him with banned substances which he then got popped for. So, it is possible that a rider could be juicing without knowing it, I guess.(

Could also be in the beef he ate for dinner. :)

[tuscanyswe]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/are-micro-dosing-riders-poking-holes-in-biological-passport

looks like the bio-passport is a sham, for those sufficiently motivated.

"If you’re training at altitude you can do 3-400 units of EPO every night at 10pm intravenously and be fine by the morning. You’re only required to answer the door to the testers during your one-hour window, so just make it 9am and you’ll be fine. That’s plenty of time. Over two weeks you’ll raise your HCT [haematocrit - the percentage of oxygen-carrying red blood cells -ed.] by 4-5 points but if you’re training hard your blood will be diluted and it won’t show on the test for the biological passport, and that’s conservative.”

“You’re fine with 800-1000 units with that amount of clearance time,” he added. “But then your HCT will rise faster so there’ a very small risk with the ABP. Human growth hormone? You can do as much as you want with an hour of clearance time. That alone will raise your HCT by 3-4 points over three weeks and double testosterone production. Once you’ve raised your HCT 4-6 points you’ve got two months of benefit – decreasing gradually over the second month. For the guy who is around 70kg a 6-8 point increase, which is very easy to manage, you’ve got 20-30 extra watts.”

How does one get away with double testosterone levels without that being an anomoly in the passport? Doesn't make any sense to me.

[personicus]

I don't buy it-- maybe willful "unknowing" but to be entirely ignorant would be a stretch.

[mg2ride]

Is there any way of doing this without knowing I'm doing it?...

This WILL BE the exact claim that we hear from LeMond when the truth comes out about him.

He has spent the 20 year practicing being the victim so that he has it perfected when he needs it the most.

[russ46]

Does this mean all Colombian riders are dopers?

[harlond]

Also from the article:

Cyclingnews spoke to a leading anti-doping expert who did not want to be named and we presented him with the above testimony.

“I think 300-400 units won't achieve much,’ they told Cyclingnews.

“To achieve something you need to be taking 1500-6000 units a week but it’s all within the context of the athlete who will be looking to take things that won’t be detected rather than what’s going to give him the benefit. It’s hard to say where that benefit would come in, perhaps from 800-1000 units per day would see a real increase in haematocrit, I wouldn’t argue with that.”

[carpediemracing]

On "not knowing if it's done to you". Eric Kaiter, et al, US National team. The coach told the naive and "wanting to believe it's okay" riders that they were getting "extract of cortisone" (there's no such thing). In the old days, where needles were okay, the riders would get "Vitamin B shots" etc. Heck, even in the T-Mobile movie the opening credits show someone getting a shot from the soigneur. Now, with needles banned, it would be hard to slip a drug in pill form (the rider would test positive in a day, versus the micro dosing EPO thing which is done in the vein and clears out in hours, versus regular EPO which is done under the skin but takes days to clear out, but both of which require illegal needles).

On benefits to amateurs (i.e. non-pro riders like you and me). With virtually no out of competition tests a regular racer could really juice up. With pros it's a diminishing return thing - they can't do as much due to all the controls. Theyr'e not going to see 60% hematocrits because that's just way too far out there. An amateur could do that without much chance of detection because no one is checking. I bet there are Cat 1-3 racers, Masters and non-Masters, who are getting more of a gain through doping than any pro could get, simply because the pros are much more closely monitored.

One thing no one has mentioned is doing small transfusions daily instead of the massive "3 bags per Tour" thing. 3 bags would be 1500 ml. Instead of doing 500ml all at once why not do 100ml 15 times? I don't know the "wear and tear" on the vein/insertion point but the pros seem to have gotten away with that in the 500ml days. The smaller transfusions would keep the blood counts normal (reticulates etc) or at least within some smaller range, versus doing a big shot all at once. There'd be some natural decline, expected in a 3 week stage race, but overall it would be less than normal. You could time the "off days" to coincide with easy stages or you could actually be aggressive and transfuse more blood overall than before (meaning you're doping more than in, say, 2006). Ultimately the rider won't be as strong on a given day (like the day after a 500ml transfusion, versus 100ml daily), but they'll be more consistent throughout the race. That's that diminishing returns thing.

Finally, one thing that seems odd is no controls on thyroid medication. It would make sense to really rev up the thyroid to lose weight and lean out. I think that it might affect reticulates but I might have made that up. Kreuzinger is a guy whose reticulate count is suspect but it might be because of "legal doping", like using some kind of thyroid medication.

[verticaldoug]

Finally, one thing that seems odd is no controls on thyroid medication. It would make sense to really rev up the thyroid to lose weight and lean out. I think that it might affect reticulates but I might have made that up. Kreuzinger is a guy whose reticulate count is suspect but it might be because of "legal doping", like using some kind of thyroid medication.

This was/is one of the big thing NOP gets accused of. You visit the endocrinologist in Texas and get a TUE.

All Legal

[Mark McM]

Is there any way of doing this without knowing I'm doing it? The reason I've never cheated wasn't that someone else would find out, it's that I would always know...

John McEnroe claims that his trainers had given him steroids for 6 years without his knowledge.

Part of Barry Bond's defense against charges of lying to a grand jury (where he claimed to never having taking PEDs) was that his trainer did not tell him some of the substances administered to him were PEDs (thus he wasn't technically lying).

The truth to either claim? No idea ...

[Mark McM]

On "not knowing if it's done to you". Eric Kaiter, et al, US National team. The coach told the naive and "wanting to believe it's okay" riders that they were getting "extract of cortisone" (there's no such thing).

It should be mentioned that Eric Kaiter, et al, were minors competing on the US National Junior team. The fact that they were minors increases the chances that they really didn't know what was being administered to them (by adult authority figures), and increases the vileness of the coaches who did the administering.

That its, assuming the story is true - the coaches and managers of the US National Junior team still deny the allegations. Although it is also worth noting that one of the coaches involved, Chris Carmicheal (founder of Carmichael Training Systems and "Coach to Lance Armstrong") agreed to an out-of-court settlement before the Kaiter lawsuit came to trial.

[carpediemracing]

It should be mentioned that Eric Kaiter, et al, were minors competing on the US National Junior team. The fact that they were minors increases the chances that they really didn't know what was being administered to them (by adult authority figures), and increases the vileness of the coaches who did the administering.

That its, assuming the story is true - the coaches and managers of the US National Junior team still deny the allegations. Although it is also worth noting that one of the coaches involved, Chris Carmicheal (founder of Carmichael Training Systems and "Coach to Lance Armstrong") agreed to an out-of-court settlement before the Kaiter lawsuit came to trial.

True on the Juniors. However, based on what little stuff has been written on doping, it seems like racers wanted to justify the "vitamin B shot" even if they knew deep down that it wasn't Vit B. Joe Parkin alludes to that in his first book (and later he talks about taking speed during a race).

Until I read Tyler's book Secret Race I didn't realize how little EPO a rider actually injected (pencil eraser amount). SUch a thing could easily have been let into a bag of saline or the "dehydrated racer" bag that riders would talk about (whatever thing that PDM blamed for their team getting sick in that one Tour, A-something I think, some kind of carb/fluid replenishment thing). I thought it was a huge syringe of EPO or something but it's not.

[carpediemracing]

I should point out that I've never been good enough to ever be in a position where I had to choose. I have no idea what it's like to be presented with such a thing. I joke that doping couldn't possibly help me because my hematocrit is already pretty high (46-49%) and my FTP is still really low (210-220w). Massively doping would realistically bring me up to the mid/upper 200s at best, if HCT:watts is related, so maybe 60% HCT might mean 260w FTP (20% increase for both).

I know Cat 2s and higher who are lighter than me that have FTPs in the 350w range, and some of their casual references astonish me, like "so I just kept it under 370w until the break got established". For me 370w is a 90 second peak number, not something I casually do for 20 minutes "while the break got established".

Another guy, much better (Cat 1), told me his strategy for winning at race once he got away solo was to go 28 mph on the slow laps. If the field started to close the gap he'd go 31 mph for a few laps until the field gave up. He soloed for most of the 50 lap/mile race (P12 or P123) and won, in front of some pretty strong domestic-level pros (Jeff Rutter - or maybe it was Jim Copeland? - and Graeme Miller were two of the strongest ones in the field, they raced for Scott BiKyle that year). For me to do 28 mph for one lap on that course is a race ending effort. The other guy did it for 45 laps or so, with some faster 31 mph laps thrown in there for good measure. He was/is an avid antidoper, for whatever that's worth.

[wallymann]

loved reading this, another dude with lilliputian power levels. mine is the same as yours and my body-weight is around 175lbs...my power-to-weight is abysmal!!!

when i read about what pros do i'm so amazed. their power is orders-of-magnitude higher than mine...i know how hard it is to develop another 5 watts at threshold, so when they're putting out another 50% or more over my LT power...it just boggles the mind.

I should point out that I've never been good enough to ever be in a position where I had to choose. I have no idea what it's like to be presented with such a thing. I joke that doping couldn't possibly help me because my hematocrit is already pretty high (46-49%) and my FTP is still really low (210-220w). Massively doping would realistically bring me up to the mid/upper 200s at best, if HCT:watts is related, so maybe 60% HCT might mean 260w FTP (20% increase for both).

I know Cat 2s and higher who are lighter than me that have FTPs in the 350w range, and some of their casual references astonish me, like "so I just kept it under 370w until the break got established". For me 370w is a 90 second peak number, not something I casually do for 20 minutes "while the break got established".

Another guy, much better (Cat 1), told me his strategy for winning at race once he got away solo was to go 28 mph on the slow laps. If the field started to close the gap he'd go 31 mph for a few laps until the field gave up. He soloed for most of the 50 lap/mile race (P12 or P123) and won, in front of some pretty strong domestic-level pros (Jeff Rutter - or maybe it was Jim Copeland? - and Graeme Miller were two of the strongest ones in the field, they raced for Scott BiKyle that year). For me to do 28 mph for one lap on that course is a race ending effort. The other guy did it for 45 laps or so, with some faster 31 mph laps thrown in there for good measure. He was/is an avid antidoper, for whatever that's worth.

[Zoodles]

This WILL BE the exact claim that we hear from LeMond when the truth comes out about him.

He has spent the 20 year practicing being the victim so that he has it perfected when he needs it the most.

Every time doping comes up it seems like someone attempts to villify Lemond. In addition to having an unheard of VO2 max and unrivaled palmares against men there has never been confirmation Lemond used drugs - move on.

To the discussion, I think cycling suffers not only from it's past but also from the notion that punters (cat1 down) have that pro's must be juicing because they can ride at levels we can't fathom. Check out the training levels these guys are at - 4-6 hr days for years on end can transform the body in ways the average joe can't comprehend.

That said, sure, cheaters cheat and always will but I don't think it's as widespread as commonly thought.

[mg2ride]

.....In addition to having an unheard of VO2 max and unrivaled palmares against......


When things sound too good to be true it is most often proven that they were not true. At some point in his career he was beating the top dopers of the time. To Good to be True ATMO



Check out the training levels these guys are at - 4-6 hr days for years on end can transform the body in ways the average joe can't comprehend.

Sounds kinda like:

"I'm on my bike busting my ass 6 hours a day."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIl5RxhLZ5U

[carpediemracing]

loved reading this, another dude with lilliputian power levels. mine is the same as yours and my body-weight is around 175lbs...my power-to-weight is abysmal!!!

when i read about what pros do i'm so amazed. their power is orders-of-magnitude higher than mine...i know how hard it is to develop another 5 watts at threshold, so when they're putting out another 50% or more over my LT power...it just boggles the mind.

Mind you, in Nov I was 181 and I was in the 170s all last season. I'm struggling to stay near 160 now (161 this morning), and for many years I raced at 180-200 lbs (2003-2009, 2012-14) without training much in some of those years.

In 2010, at 155-160, similar power numbers, I placed enough to upgrade to Cat 2. I promptly downgraded as we wanted to start a family and I didn't want to downgrade after Junior showed up (no blaming Junior for me downgrading). I haven't come close to my 2010 form, but I'm close now in weight.

I'm just as astounded at the power numbers I hear now as I was before. The guy in my example, he did 500w 5 minute efforts (he showed me his power graph as an example of what I should do in a similar workout). 500w, that's just absolutely mind blowing, especially when you realize he did 5 at a time. Or my teammate that told me that i should just sit at the front and do 300-350w instead of burying myself for 20 seconds. He doesn't realize that my "steady effort" is so slow that I would never close a gap without going seriously anaerobic.

I mentioned the 500wx5m number to someone, a Cat 3. He didn't seem very impressed. "Oh, that's pretty good. I'm trying to hit 500w but right now I'm only at 485w for my 5 min intervals." Heh.

I remember seeing Voigt's power numbers on some stream (Tour of CA?). He was holding 400-425w and his HR was 140bpm or something. In other words he was totally within himself. For me that's an insane effort, for him he could still talk and such.

[carpediemracing]

Check out the training levels these guys are at - 4-6 hr days for years on end can transform the body in ways the average joe can't comprehend.

One of the things about doping is that it allows riders to train incredibly hard. It's not just the EPO and all that, it's also being able to stress the body to force it to overcompensate, aka "training".

In one of the doping documentaries someone said that they could do a max workout daily and be fully recovered the next day. Clean he said it would take him 3 days to recover. That's not hard work, that's doping.

In "Drug Test" in Outside Magazine the author (who doped for the article) said that after a 200km hard ride he felt fresh and ready the next day for another 200km ride. Again, it's doping that's allowing the huge workload, not discipline/etc.

Tyler said that even EPO and blood boosting, not really "recovery aids" like steroids/test/HGH, really helped with energy levels. Instead of being run down he said he felt invigorated.

When someone points out the hard work they're doing etc for me it's not an argument, it's actually a red flag for doping. It's a huge indicator of doping, to be able to work out super hard super consistently. It's simply not natural.

[velomonkey]

This WILL BE the exact claim that we hear from LeMond when the truth comes out about him.

He has spent the 20 year practicing being the victim so that he has it perfected when he needs it the most.

Post on ways to dope within the new regulations of UCI and it took 2 pages to get to proclaiming LeMond is a doper . . . .

Seems LeMond haters aren't as quick as they used to be. I know a way of getting another 30 to 40 watts at top end - send me a PM.

[Uncle Jam's Army]

Don't believe all the talk you hear about watts. One guy around here, a real beast in the 40+ masters, has power files that show normalized power of 338 watts for a two-hour race. For weeks I just shook my head how he could do that for that period of time as a 43 year old Cat 2. Then, his power figures for this weekend showed a 2,145 max watt effort in a crit (and he's not even a good sprinter; he's a breakaway specialist). The highest power numbers Greipel ever generated in a sprint are just over 1,800 watts. I said, that's it. I call B.S.

Turns out he runs Rotor Q-Rings, which highly exaggerate your power figures when using a crank-based power meter.

There's this one guy, Eder Freyre, he placed second in the Mexican national road race last year (to Luis Lemus). Last year, at the UCLA Road Race (on the Devil's Punchbowl course), he dropped a bunch of U-23 U.S. National team members (including Geoff Curran) on the last lap on the big climb and won the race solo. He told us they were going 350 watts and he punched it to 400 watts and held it up and over the climb. About a 15-20 minute effort.

Whenever I hear of high watts numbers, I think of Eder's UCLA effort, and the fact that the guys who WIN Pro Tour races put out low 400's normalized power figures.

[velomonkey]

To the discussion, I think cycling suffers not only from it's past but also from the notion that punters (cat1 down) have that pro's must be juicing because they can ride at levels we can't fathom.

So not true, I totally could have been a pro, was so close I could taste the EPO in my filings. Reasons why I didn't make it: and this is in no particular order

I wouldn't inject anything into my body
Bourbon
I wouldn't let my blood be taken out, stored and then put into my body, all done at some shady hotel in Europe
Steak sautéed in butter and Wine - I mean, come on, I'm not a robot.
Bourbon - did I list Bourbon?
I got a wife, she's hot - gotta put the work in there
And, lastly, Bourbon

Oh, and then there is the fact I needed like another 100 watts, but, really who is counting. Totally. Could. Have. Been. A. Contender. I mean to go on a 6 hour training ride, come home and take 2 sleeping pills and drink 2 litters of soda water and basically stay on the coach and repeat the next day. Who in their right mind doesn't want that?!?!?

[carpediemracing]

The watts/speed on the Cat 1 are realistically accurate. He got 3rd in the Elite RR the first? year it was open to all pros. Brice Jones even named his National RR post on CyclingNews after the guys' number ("Number 56"), because no one knew who he was. He bridged a minute gap solo over 5 miles, then after Brice yelled at him to pull he pulled the remaining 3 miles. He led out the sprint, Brice pulled out of his shoe, someone else just blew, so the guy got 3rd. PowerTap, his dad and granddad were Cat 1s, and he's pretty good about making sure things are working properly.

He also claims he's never broken 1200w peak, which I found astounding, because I can do that virtually every time I do a hard jump, even pulling away from a light or something. His dad had a hard time believe my numbers, having seen his son's for so long.

My teammate's power numbers, maybe not so much, but he's not prone to exaggerate. Once (2010) when I jumped at 1200-1300w he pulled away from me like I was standing still. He had lighter wheels but still, we're talking 10-15 meters immediately. I asked him after and he said that he did 1600w peak, which is the number he tossed around for the last 5 years (and my sprints are typically 1200-1300w peak, same numbers since 2008 or so when I first got a PM).

The 485w guy, he's soloed to a few wins as a 3. Trying to upgrade to 2. He's single handedly ripped apart breaks in the 3s simply by pushing for 4-5 minutes. He won last week.

I've seen/heard the opposite, meaning good pros that have low power numbers. Adam Myerson, in an NRC crit, did 249w or something (his power file was on Training Peaks). He placed 6th or 8th or something in the race, Boise. I think his sprint was 1250w, give or take. I took some encouragement with that.

Another local guy, spent a number of years in Europe, says he sees 220-240w sitting in the P123 races at a local flat course. It's efficient, yes, but still above my ability, and obviously it doesn't count the 500-800w efforts you have to make all over the place to stay in the group for the first 15-20 minutes.

[John H.]

I call BS on the 5x5@500 watts unless the guy weighs 90 kg or more.

Mind you, in Nov I was 181 and I was in the 170s all last season. I'm struggling to stay near 160 now (161 this morning), and for many years I raced at 180-200 lbs (2003-2009, 2012-14) without training much in some of those years.

In 2010, at 155-160, similar power numbers, I placed enough to upgrade to Cat 2. I promptly downgraded as we wanted to start a family and I didn't want to downgrade after Junior showed up (no blaming Junior for me downgrading). I haven't come close to my 2010 form, but I'm close now in weight.

I'm just as astounded at the power numbers I hear now as I was before. The guy in my example, he did 500w 5 minute efforts (he showed me his power graph as an example of what I should do in a similar workout). 500w, that's just absolutely mind blowing, especially when you realize he did 5 at a time. Or my teammate that told me that i should just sit at the front and do 300-350w instead of burying myself for 20 seconds. He doesn't realize that my "steady effort" is so slow that I would never close a gap without going seriously anaerobic.

I mentioned the 500wx5m number to someone, a Cat 3. He didn't seem very impressed. "Oh, that's pretty good. I'm trying to hit 500w but right now I'm only at 485w for my 5 min intervals." Heh.

I remember seeing Voigt's power numbers on some stream (Tour of CA?). He was holding 400-425w and his HR was 140bpm or something. In other words he was totally within himself. For me that's an insane effort, for him he could still talk and such.

[wallymann]

...every spring groveling at the back of cat-4 races, killing myself to sit in...who the hell are the strong motherf*ckers that are driving the field 28mph into this brutal headwind and how in the hell are they still 4s?!?!

[54ny77]

And here I thought this was a thread about LED lightbulbs and power savings.

[carpediemracing]

I call BS on the 5x5@500 watts unless the guy weighs 90 kg or more.

Mr 485 is tall but skinny, he was same weight as me when we met to discuss race promotion in Oct? At the time he weighed the same as me, 180 lbs. He's 6'5" or so. I'm guessing he's probably the same weight, he looks skinny and I can't believe he could get any lighter.

Mr 500 is heavy now, probably hit 240 or so, hasn't raced since 2012?, but at his peak in the early 2000s he was 160 or thereabouts. I'm guessing 5'10". 3rd in Elite RR doesn't come easy. I should see I have the graph saved somewhere, for a couple years he published all his power numbers on his now-defunct/removed blog. I've spoken with him and his dad at length. He (the rider) was less concerned with the numbers but the dad was pretty good about saying if stuff was good or not. He'd say "Oh, he did such and such watts but I think blah blah wasn't right". The 500w intervals, those I believe. One of his race graphs he points out where he averaged 900w for almost a minute to launch what would be a race winning attack in a P123 race.

It's okay, whatever you and I believe. I'm not them but I do believe both those guys, and I've had the privilege of getting ridden off their wheels.

The related numbers for Mr 500 make sense (I have no reference points for Mr 485, except his avg power in a race recently was about 340w). Like no 3000w peaks.

My numbers also seem to make sense - 170-200w avg seems low for races that absolutely waste me, and I was looking for patterns that would show me that I was really doing 300w. Unfortunatly I couldn't find anything like it. I'll hit 1200w peak or hold 1100w for an 18 second sprint in the same race and all the power stuff looks right. Makes the lows realistic, unfortunately.

[oldpotatoe]

This WILL BE the exact claim that we hear from LeMond when the truth comes out about him.

He has spent the 20 year practicing being the victim so that he has it perfected when he needs it the most.

The truth already has come out about him. Sorry.

[John H.]

I might believe 500 at 240.
Also believe 485 at 180. That is around 5.5 watt/kg. good number but not insane. Actually a big guy that can hold 5.5 likely has a bunch of good weapons.

Mr 485 is tall but skinny, he was same weight as me when we met to discuss race promotion in Oct? At the time he weighed the same as me, 180 lbs. He's 6'5" or so. I'm guessing he's probably the same weight, he looks skinny and I can't believe he could get any lighter.

Mr 500 is heavy now, probably hit 240 or so, hasn't raced since 2012?, but at his peak in the early 2000s he was 160 or thereabouts. I'm guessing 5'10". 3rd in Elite RR doesn't come easy. I should see I have the graph saved somewhere, for a couple years he published all his power numbers on his now-defunct/removed blog. I've spoken with him and his dad at length. He (the rider) was less concerned with the numbers but the dad was pretty good about saying if stuff was good or not. He'd say "Oh, he did such and such watts but I think blah blah wasn't right". The 500w intervals, those I believe. One of his race graphs he points out where he averaged 900w for almost a minute to launch what would be a race winning attack in a P123 race.

It's okay, whatever you and I believe. I'm not them but I do believe both those guys, and I've had the privilege of getting ridden off their wheels.

The related numbers for Mr 500 make sense (I have no reference points for Mr 485, except his avg power in a race recently was about 340w). Like no 3000w peaks.

My numbers also seem to make sense - 170-200w avg seems low for races that absolutely waste me, and I was looking for patterns that would show me that I was really doing 300w. Unfortunatly I couldn't find anything like it. I'll hit 1200w peak or hold 1100w for an 18 second sprint in the same race and all the power stuff looks right. Makes the lows realistic, unfortunately.

[dcama5]

[QUOTE=wallymann;1730223]http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/are-micro-dosing-riders-poking-holes-in-biological-passport

looks like the bio-passport is a sham, for those sufficiently motivated.

The biological passport is not a "sham". It's a record of blood and biological values, for a professional cyclist, from multiple samples over time. It reveals any sudden spikes, or physiological irregularities that cannot be easily explained. It also compares in-competition blood values against physiological patterns that are known to occur during competition. For instance, hematocrit, which is the percentage of blood made up of red cells, should decrease after only a few days of a tough event like the Tour de France for two reasons: 1) plasma volume expansion, which is an adaptive reaction where the thin, watery (plasma) part of blood increases in volume after only a few days of hard exercise (red cell numbers cannot increase as rapidly so the blood gets thinner). And 2) exercise induced hemolysis, which is an accelerated rate of red cell death during extreme aerobic events. This occurs in cyclists, runners, and swimmers, but the mechanism is not fully understood. As a result of these two things, the hematocrit for any cyclist in the tour should fall during the event. Further, immature red cell (reticulocyte) production in bone marrow should increase in response to low red cell numbers caused by hemolysis or bleeding. This is the normal physiological response to a low hematocrit and restores normal oxygen carrying capacity. Conversely, reticulocyte production should slow down when hematocrit normalizes, or is high. If the UCI testers find, for a cyclist in the tour, a hematocrit that stays stable or increases, along with an abnormally low reticulocyte population, they can be pretty sure that manipulation has occurred – probably an autologous blood transfusion. These are difficult cases for testing agencies because the blood transfused was drawn from that same cyclist earlier in the year, frozen, and re-infused during the tour. There will be no alien cell population or synthetic EPO in the blood to make the infraction obvious; so unless the offender is caught in the act, it may go undetected. The biological passport is not perfect, but it can highlight suspicious cyclists and teams for more intense scrutiny. There will probably always be the dopers trying to game the system, but there are some pretty bright and knowledgeable folks in the bio passport system.

[CunegoFan]

One thing no one has mentioned is doing small transfusions daily instead of the massive "3 bags per Tour" thing. 3 bags would be 1500 ml. Instead of doing 500ml all at once why not do 100ml 15 times? I don't know the "wear and tear" on the vein/insertion point but the pros seem to have gotten away with that in the 500ml days. The smaller transfusions would keep the blood counts normal (reticulates etc) or at least within some smaller range, versus doing a big shot all at once. There'd be some natural decline, expected in a 3 week stage race, but overall it would be less than normal. You could time the "off days" to coincide with easy stages or you could actually be aggressive and transfuse more blood overall than before (meaning you're doping more than in, say, 2006). Ultimately the rider won't be as strong on a given day (like the day after a 500ml transfusion, versus 100ml daily), but they'll be more consistent throughout the race. That's that diminishing returns thing.


I asked Landis about that a while back. To me it seemed like a logical way to beat the bio-passport. He was not impressed. He said the logistics are more complicated and that increases the risks, blood does not store as well in small amounts as it does in larger amounts, and fooling the bio-passport with a regular bag was not difficult because the ABP's thresholds are extreme.

[dcama5]

I asked Landis about that a while back. To me it seemed like a logical way to beat the bio-passport. He was not impressed. He said the logistics are more complicated and that increases the risks, blood does not store as well in small amounts as it does in larger amounts, and fooling the bio-passport with a regular bag was not difficult because the ABP's thresholds are extreme.

Yes, there will always be guys trying to game the system (or so it seems anyway) but most of these guys don't understand the physiology so they do not know what really works and, of the things that work, which will be least likely to trip a trigger with the testers. Micro dosing everything is not new anymore and has limited returns in performance. The future of doping is probably some sort of genetic manipulation because that science is just taking off right now.

[carpediemracing]

I didn't know about the "micro-bag" disadvantages. Seemed like a natural thing though.

[Zoodles]

sure doping still exists...but...the peloton (at any level) is the equivalent of junior high. Every one knows everyone and gossip and innuendo are rampant. If an athlete's performance jumps beyond normal, based on history or simple appearances, it is easy to spot.

Whether or not the public hears about depends on how willing a rider is to put their career on the line for calling someone out (ie Matt Briemmer and the Tabriz Petrochemical team)

[54ny77]

i believe it's called the "douche-bag" disadvantage. for some, it's entirely natural.

;)

I didn't know about the "micro-bag" disadvantages. Seemed like a natural thing though.

[KWalker]

One of the things about doping is that it allows riders to train incredibly hard. It's not just the EPO and all that, it's also being able to stress the body to force it to overcompensate, aka "training".

In one of the doping documentaries someone said that they could do a max workout daily and be fully recovered the next day. Clean he said it would take him 3 days to recover. That's not hard work, that's doping.

In "Drug Test" in Outside Magazine the author (who doped for the article) said that after a 200km hard ride he felt fresh and ready the next day for another 200km ride. Again, it's doping that's allowing the huge workload, not discipline/etc.

Tyler said that even EPO and blood boosting, not really "recovery aids" like steroids/test/HGH, really helped with energy levels. Instead of being run down he said he felt invigorated.

When someone points out the hard work they're doing etc for me it's not an argument, it's actually a red flag for doping. It's a huge indicator of doping, to be able to work out super hard super consistently. It's simply not natural.

This is quite stupid logic. There are fast and slow responders to exercise and I know both. A teammate of mine can go out and smash his face in 5 days a week with massive amounts of intensity and/or volume. I could maybe do 2 or 3 of his sessions a week. In the end it takes him that workload to simply go from his off-season fitness to the 10% higher fitness during his peak period and he has to do it for months. He's never really worn down, but he is a smaller rider than I am and probably has more of a slow twitch balance to his fiber distribution. On the other hand, yet another teammate goes out and hammers 4-6 group rides per week, races on the weekend, and almost never takes off days. Same thing. It was the same in my former sport (weightlifting) in which you had those that benefitted from higher frequency/lower intensity and others lower frequency of high intensity.

That's also not taking rest, periodization, etc. in to account.

What is more telling to me is when I see a local Masters 1/2/3 field post up crit lap speeds that are 2mph faster than a P1/2 field. Or when I am on a group ride and the thin climbers are hammering out 5w/kg+ on a climb and a 180lb hulk of a masters racer just throttles all of us into the ground by a minute on a 20min climb. Basically, just go ride in Southern California and it becomes painfully obvious what is going on.

[mg2ride]

The truth already has come out about him. Sorry.

And Lance never failed a drug test.

Let go old tater, he is not the hero you want him to be and he sure as hell is not the only clean Tdf winner in the last 30+ years.

[wallymann]

i'm not denigrating all of the science and hard work that goes into the bio-passport program.

the bio-passport was introduced to improve cycling's ability to police for doping violations. the CIRC report shows that doping still happens in a big way in pro cycling, easily fooled by many means. in terms of the bio-passport program being *effective* in combating doping...the program is indeed a sham. i.e., a thing that is not what it is purported to be.

The biological passport is not a "sham".

[mcteague]

And Lance never failed a drug test.

Let go old tater, he is not the hero you want him to be and he sure as hell is not the only clean Tdf winner in the last 30+ years.

Actually he did. The team just worked up a fake, back dated, prescription to get him out of it.

Tim

[CunegoFan]

i'm not denigrating all of the science and hard work that goes into the bio-passport program.

the bio-passport was introduced to improve cycling's ability to police for doping violations. the CIRC report shows that doping still happens in a big way in pro cycling, easily fooled by many means. in terms of the bio-passport program being *effective* in combating doping...the program is indeed a sham. i.e., a thing that is not what it is purported to be.

This is what happened when the UCI added retics to the simple hematocrit test: The UCI's Dr. Zarzoli gave a presentation to each team. He did this every year. During Postal prsentation he used an overhead projector to display riders' blood results from previous years and how those results would have fared against the new test. The graphic did not have the riders' names attached to the data but the names were available to the team's doctors upon request. Basically it was a road map for how to evade the new testing.

So, yeah, the UCI's anti-doping program was a sham. It was a public relations campaign to convince outsiders that doping was being fought but the insiders were never meant to stop doping.

[dcama5]

i'm not denigrating all of the science and hard work that goes into the bio-passport program.

the bio-passport was introduced to improve cycling's ability to police for doping violations. the CIRC report shows that doping still happens in a big way in pro cycling, easily fooled by many means. in terms of the bio-passport program being *effective* in combating doping...the program is indeed a sham. i.e., a thing that is not what it is purported to be.

What page in the CIRC report does it say that "doping still happens in a big way in pro cycling"? I don't remember that.

[goonster]

There was a documentary a while back about the East German sports program and many of those female athletes were given stuff without knowing what it was -- now though, they are men :(
The East Germans knew they were doping.

They may not have been told exactly what they were being given, they may have stopped asking after a while, they were certainly never told of the long-term consequences, and this was all happening under an authoritarian state regime, but they were under no illusions of "clean" performance.

The athletes were, overall, victims of their system, but I don't buy that an elite athlete can unwittingly be given substances that significantly improves their performance.

edit: I need to qualify this. The DDR doping program was so large and pervasive, that there were almost certainly athletes who were doped unwittingly, i.e. mostly juniors who never advanced to international competition. Whatever euphemisms they used, there was no need to conceal doping to team officials, so I simply do not believe those few DDR elite athletes (e.g. Marita Koch), having doped for years with what are today considered extremely crude methods, who maintain they did not knowingly dope.

[velomonkey]

And Lance never failed a drug test.

Let go old tater, he is not the hero you want him to be and he sure as hell is not the only clean Tdf winner in the last 30+ years.

rock. solid. logic.

[verticaldoug]

There will always be cheats. The only question is how much are the federations willing to spend on enforcement. A federation which under funds enforcement is basically condoning doping. It is that simple.

I think cycling has done a lot to clean up.

For me, it is more interesting watching what is happening with doping in Track and field. Kenya, Ethiopia and Jamaica have dominated distance and sprint events over the past few years. Guess what? None of the national federations really conduct out of season testing locally.

It was so bad, International federation went and conducted a surprise check in Jamaica last winter and popped like 4 big name athletes. And guess what? Jamaican sprinting wasn't nearly as dominate last season.

Now for the kenyan marathoners...

[oldpotatoe]

And Lance never failed a drug test.

Let go old tater, he is not the hero you want him to be and he sure as hell is not the only clean Tdf winner in the last 30+ years.

He IS, however, the only American rider to win the TdF..mg. Try as you might, and in every doping thread we see.about LA, Lemond's name comes up and how 'dirty' he was. Well..Lemond is not 'my hero' but he's also not a prick like your boy lance.

[wallymann]

What page in the CIRC report does it say that "doping still happens in a big way in pro cycling"? I don't remember that.

you're right. bio-passport is perfect, enabling 100% effective identification of all doping practices and is 100% invulnerable to creative doping practices.

let us all rejoice -- cycling is a completely clean sport, all due to the absolute, infallible effectiveness of the bio-passport program! :rolleyes:

[dcama5]

you're right. bio-passport is perfect, enabling 100% effective identification of all doping practices and is 100% invulnerable to creative doping practices.

let us all rejoice -- cycling is a completely clean sport, all due to the absolute, infallible effectiveness of the bio-passport program! :rolleyes:

Now I have two questions: Where, in any of my posts, is this "cycling is a completely clean sport, all due to the absolute, infallible effectiveness of the bio-passport program"? And again, what page in the CIRC report has the statement you claimed was in the CIRC report that "doping still happens in a big way in pro cycling"?

[CunegoFan]

Now I have two questions: Where, in any of my posts, is this "cycling is a completely clean sport, all due to the absolute, infallible effectiveness of the bio-passport program"? And again, what page in the CIRC report has the statement you claimed was in the CIRC report that "doping still happens in a big way in pro cycling"?

Would that be the same CIRC report that cleared Dr. Zorzoli and bemoaned the rumors about him while pointing that out a couple of riders thought he was a great guy? That report?

[dcama5]

Cunegofan, if you are saying that you think the CIRC report is worthless, just say it without all the beating around the bush.

Wallymann, you are wrong about what I think, but since this is your post and I have worked for 35 years in and around the concepts and drugs that have been used for oxygen vector doping, here is my opinion: the oxygen doping of the past is dead except for a few goofballs. It's too easy to get caught. Micro-dosing doesn't pay off all that much and the bio passport can catch those guys too. EPO and autologous blood transfusions are all about increasing oxygen delivery to the muscles. The sideline stuff like perfluorocarbons (look up liquid ventilation) and Actovegin were still about oxygen doping. The weird stuff like GW501516 and AICAR are just too dangerous for any sane human being (GW501516 was abandoned before it hit the market because it was a powerful carcinogen). In my opinion, the title of this thread points directly to the new science of genetic manipulation. The guys that want to dope and the unethical scientists that want to profit on it will try this stuff. Gene therapists in specialty University hospitals are implanting synthetic genes in very sick patients with some good results in combating lethal disease. It's a short distance from there to genetic manipulation designed to improve aerobic ability. That's just my opinion but it seems likely to me.

[Gummee]

Every time doping comes up it seems like someone attempts to villify Lemond. In addition to having an unheard of VO2 max and unrivaled palmares against men there has never been confirmation Lemond used drugs - move on.
Iron shots for anemia anyone?

M

[wallymann]

i think we have compatible views on the state of doping:
- despite the hard work and science that goes into it, that the bio-passport is largely useless in the elimination of doping is hard to dispute.
- i agree that genetic manipulation is the next wave of doping, something the bio-passport doesnt even purport to address.

Wallymann, you are wrong about what I think, but since this is your post and I have worked for 35 years in and around the concepts and drugs that have been used for oxygen vector doping, here is my opinion: the oxygen doping of the past is dead except for a few goofballs. It's too easy to get caught. Micro-dosing doesn't pay off all that much and the bio passport can catch those guys too. EPO and autologous blood transfusions are all about increasing oxygen delivery to the muscles. The sideline stuff like perfluorocarbons (look up liquid ventilation) and Actovegin were still about oxygen doping. The weird stuff like GW501516 and AICAR are just too dangerous for any sane human being (GW501516 was abandoned before it hit the market because it was a powerful carcinogen). In my opinion, the title of this thread points directly to the new science of genetic manipulation. The guys that want to dope and the unethical scientists that want to profit on it will try this stuff. Gene therapists in specialty University hospitals are implanting synthetic genes in very sick patients with some good results in combating lethal disease. It's a short distance from there to genetic manipulation designed to improve aerobic ability. That's just my opinion but it seems likely to me.

[dcama5]

i think we have compatible views on the state of doping:
- despite the hard work and science that goes into it, that the bio-passport is largely useless in the elimination of doping is hard to dispute.
- i agree that genetic manipulation is the next wave of doping, something the bio-passport doesnt even purport to address.

Yes, true. The bio passport would not be able to do anything about gene doping, but from what I have read no one is really sure if any of this stuff has been attempted yet. The science is still fairly new.

I do have a different opinion than you on the effectiveness of the bio passport, possibly because I am familiar with some of the physiology that it is based on (keeping in mind that I do not know you so you may understand it as well). Basically, the human body does specific things when these doping techniques are applied to it and these things are hard to disguise. The bio passport looks at things that just should not happen given human physiology. It will not catch everything but it can flag a particular rider for closer scrutiny when irregularities are noticed. In those cases, the bio passport may not be the thing that finally catches some doper but it can be what highlighted that rider as someone to watch.