Lemond doubts Bertie!!!

[rich p]

what's under the bonnet?

 

[Chuffy]

He's working off VO2 max calculations isn't he? I like Lemond, he's one of the good guys as far as I'm concerned, but I don't understand the science enough. Bertie's responses weren't impressive though.

 

[Will1985]

He's not the only one. I haven't since 2007 - especially when he was the only one able to go with Ricco in the Giro last year.

To put it into perspective, Indurain had a VO2 of 90 which was in part due to a massive pair of lungs at over 8 litres capacity. Armstrong and other top cyclists have VO2/maxes between 80 and 85. If the calculations are correct, then something smells very bad because no human in history has ever had a recorded VO2 above 92 IIRC.

 

[iLB]

would give wiggo a nice bump towards the podium tho...

 

[Bigtwin]

Bertie's whacked off his tits on stuff like most of the rest of them.

Pulling the throttle at the end of the TT today was a pretty clear "oops, this may be a bit obvious" moment.

Clock's ticking, let's just wait till it all unfolds.

 

[simon_brooke]

I've been thinking since the beginning of the tour that Astana were probably doping. They collectively have such a history of it. But I got a real sinking watching Contador today. OK, he did take it easy on the run in yesterday, and he did not seem as stressed as the Schleck brothers on the Columbie. But it isn't reasonable that someone should be both the best climber in the peloton and also the best time trialist. Something isn't right.

The fact that both Menchov and Sastre are obviously performing significantly less well than they were in the Giro is also depressing. I can't help suspecting that that could mean they were doping then but aren't now. And while I don't particularly mind about Menchov, it would be sad to think Sastre was doping.

I have this naive belief that one day we could have a sport in which we didn't have to look askance at every champion... but I don't believe we've got there yet.

 

[Will1985]

Next article: http://www.bikeradar.com/blogs/article/contadors-annecy-faux-pas-22537.

You don't say "next question" three times and completely ignore doping related questions. Methinks L'Equipe are about to start their next witch-hunt.

 

[johnnyh]

not being that up on doping and detection methods, is there a chance he could be doing something and it not be detectable?

 

[Will1985]

I'd like to think that any pharmaceutical company is ethical enough to collaborate with WADA just like Roche did with Micera to help develop a test even before it had been approved for medical use.

On the other hand, it took 2 months for Di Luca's Giro sample to be declared positive. I can only assume that further testing and cross checking is done after the inital screening at the event. Now we just need to wait for Menchov to be positive from the Giro...

 

[maurice]

Two months is about sixty days too long.

It does strike me that no-ones been caught out this year, strangely that lowers my confidence in the 'cleanliness', someone should have been had by now!

Maybe should have had the same guys operating the tests as did last year, rather than the uci...?

 

[yenrod]

I've never considered AC for one reason: the 'tour he won was blighted by Rasmussen.

He equalled than man (rasmussen) pedal rev for pedal rev on some HEAVY HARD LONG TORTUOUS MOUNTAINS (tour 07) - now its either he's got a phenomenal ability or the ether can provide the answers...



Its all a bit of joke to me...

 

[mr-marty-martin]

i reckon he's doping...

waching yesterdays stage when he attacked the two brothers and ended up dropping his team m8 it looked dodgy

like he almost though, hold on a min, its looking to obvious, i'll go back to them...

 

[Priscilla Parsley]

no no no

i'm only 12 months into this pro cycling fanatacism and I am fortunate that I have not been stung by doping revelations by cyclists that i have emotional investment in. i read blogs and feeds and I fear becoming that jaded. I revel in my naievity, i think its the best place to be.i weep with joy for Contodor and brothers schleck


xx

 

[MacB]

not being that up on doping and detection methods, is there a chance he could be doing something and it not be detectable?

Since reading the Death of Marco Pantani, I've done a bit of background reading on doping, so I'll have a go at an answer.

The reports indicate that doping, in the last 20 years, has been progressively moving towards natural mimicking, and seemingly undetectable, methods. EPO and blood doping(transfusing your own or another blood as needed) have had the aim of increasing the volume of red blood cells(RBC's) and thus the ability to transport/consume oxygen. The haemocrit(HTC) level is the amount of RBC's present as a %age of blood volume. The normal ranges for men are stated as 41-50% and so testing is looking for HTC's above 50% as an indication of doping. This type of test doesn't prove the use of EPO or blood doping. It's also given dopers a ceiling to aim at. Other reports indicate that, with 20 mins warning, they can dilute, using stored plasma, back to a 50% level.

They are trying to refine tests to detect EPO but it breaks down in the system long before it's effects wear off. Cyclists could use EPO several weeks in advance of competition thus ensuring no traces are detectable. For blood doping they're looking at tests to determine if RBC's are from another source. If the riders own blood is used then they're now looking at the actual breakout of the RBC's. A possible method is the by ratio of mature to immature RBC's. If a rider has blood doped he would theoretically have an anomalous amount of mature v immature RBC's present. There is a fair bit of secrecy around testing methods being looked at, presumably to stop people finding ways round them. Equally there's plenty of research into improving enhancement methods, the military have trialled quite a bit. The blood passport idea makes some sense as it's a rolling record of various stats including HTC levels. Apparently your HTC level is pretty constant and any big alterations would be highly suspicious.

Previously my attitude to doping was quite different, having done a bit of reading, I now realise just how much of a benefit, and how dangerous, it can be. I've seen performance improvements as high as 20% cited. Even if it's only a fraction of this, couple it with improved recovery, and it would make a mockery of any clean riders attempts to win a big tour. The jury is still out on the longer term impact to health but the short term can be devastating. I hadn't realised how much some of the doping could thicken the blood. The idea that it gets so thick, the heart struggles to pump it, scares me. I've read of cyclists having to exercise at intervals through the night to avoid heart failure.

I've always considered myself quite cynical but, given these risks, I'm shocked by the amount of 'medical' professionals, linked to cyling, that have been involved.

 

[Skip Madness]

Lemond seems certain that the VO2 max is a sound method of detecting doping - is there any reason it isn't being used?

Looking at the Wikipedia page, it says that VO2 max improves with training. So isn't it possible that your VO2 max will alter depending on your condition? And if you peaked for a major sporting event wouldn't your VO2 max be highest at that point? I find it confusing.