I want to ask you something probably you never thought about.
When we have 2 different athletes, showing the same biomechanical efficiency, having about the same morphology, WHICH IS THE POINT MAKING THEM DIFFERENT IN THEIR PERFORMANCE (for example, 2:05 vs 2:07) ?
How many times we see some athlete running in amazing technical way, we think he can become a champion, and after we discover he never can reach the top level, because he lacks something important (that, believe me, is not the motivation or the will to fatigue or the ability in suffering : many athletes of medium level can have these qualities at the same level of top runners) ?
So, which is the characteristic making the difference ?
The characteristic is something we can't see, because is inside their body, and depends on their specific physiology. If physiological principles are the same for everybody, the levels of physiological attitudes are not the same.
One of these characteristics is THE ELASTICITY OF THEIR TISSUES. When se explain that, with 3-4 months of correct and hard aerobic training of high specific intensity, some athletes can increase their total volume of blood of 25% (it means to have 1 and half liter of blood more than before in their body), the problem is if the circulatory system is so elastic to be able to accept this extra-volume, or, as in the most part of cases, doesn't have the possibility to house any increase in the total blood volume.
This means that, if all the parameters of the 2 athletes are the same, but there is this difference, THAT'S THE REASON BECAUSE ONE RUNS 2:05 and the other 2:07.
EPO can work with the athletes of second group : all athletes with not high elasticity in their tissues, and specifically with a circulatory system that is more "blocked" for the personal genetic composition.
Many think EPO can help more long distances. I already explained several times that, when we have a competition of long duration, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS TO HAVE LOW VISCOSITY IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE PERIFERAL RESISTANCES AT THE BLOOD CIRCULATION. Since with EPO we can enhance the POWER of the engine, but for Marathon we use a percentage of that power, IT'S MORE IMPORTANT TO ENHANCE THE PERCENTAGE OF AEROBIC POWER WE CAN USE, THAN TO ENHANCE THE AEROBIC POWER ITSELF. Our goal is to reduce the consumption of glycogen at the specific speed (far from the possibilities of the athlete) in order to last longer at Marathon Pace, NOT TO ENHANCE THE POWER OF THE ENGINE WITH THE EFFECT TO USE MORE GLYCOGEN AND TO FINISH THE FUEL BEFORE THE END OF THE RACE.
For that reason, EPO doesn't help marathon runners. This fact doesn't mean all marathon runners are clean. Of course, some of them believes in doping, and tries to have advantages taking EPO. But the real advantage they can have is only connected with one factor : TAKING EPO, THEY FINALLY THINK POSSIBLE TO INCREASE THE VOLUME AND THE QUALITY OF THEIR TRAINING, AND THAT THE REASON BECAUSE AT THE END THEY CAN IMPROVE.
In cycling, EPO was only a little part of doping. EPO could be considered the "base of support" for the REAL doping, that is specifically for increasing both muscle strength and recovery. If you want to move from 20 km of speed to 22 on a mountain, you need to be able to use one tooth more in the gear of the bike, and THIS MEANS STRENGTH. The fact of lasting long time using this level of strength is more connected with the ability in transporting Oxygen, and this can be connected with EPO. But, listening the specialists of cycling, EPO IS IMPORTANT ESSENTIALLY FOR RECOVERING AFTER VERY HARD EFFORTS, so particularly in the competitions with several stages (Tour de France, Giro d'Italia, Vuelta de Espana). Also coaches and doctors connected witrh cycling say this is not important in races of one day.
So, in athletics there are competitions with many stages ? And, about recovering hard workouts, are we sure that training hard almost every day can produce better results than training at very high specific intensity may be once every 4-5 days, waiting your bpody can recover NATURALLY the previous hard training, without helping this recovery with any external support ?
So, I think everybody has to start to meditate about what I write, instead insulting basing everything in some research with completely different subject. And, please, don't put in the same pott every sport based on endurance : cycling, running middle distances, running long distances, cross skiing and swimming are different sports, and their requests are completely different.