ataglance wrote:
When people say "doped" do you mean:
a) took out his own blood and then had it re-injected at some point during the TdF.
b) was taking various drugs like EPO, test. etc..
c) both
Blood doping refers to increase in red blood cells. Originally that applied to transfusions of blood to achieve it. Later applied also to EPO etc. that caused the same effect. so both
of course some people just casually say "doped" when they mean any sort of shenanigans
InWyo wrote:
I'm amazed how many people are saying LeMond.
The Science of Sport guys recently had a post of suspicious performances, and the one that sticks out the most is LeMond's 1984 Time Trial. The only two with an average speed faster were a short prologues in 1994 (likely doped) and 2005 (likely doped). And the bike technology in 1984 put him at a severe disadvantage.
Greg is the MOST suspicious rider I can think of.
That was downhill, you idiot.
lol lol lol lol wrote:
InWyo wrote:I'm amazed how many people are saying LeMond.
The Science of Sport guys recently had a post of suspicious performances, and the one that sticks out the most is LeMond's 1984 Time Trial. The only two with an average speed faster were a short prologues in 1994 (likely doped) and 2005 (likely doped). And the bike technology in 1984 put him at a severe disadvantage.
Greg is the MOST suspicious rider I can think of.
That was downhill, you idiot.
Not only that Lemond had been a World champion as a junior and rapidly progressed through the adult ranks.No spikes in improvement just steady improvement, He took on the Soviet Olumpic squad by himself in the Coors Classic and beat them soundly. There were no drugs available at that time like EPO, that would help you dominate like that.
In addition Lance Armstrong is always touted as having a tremendous natural advantage with a VO2 Max of 83
Lemonds VO2Max was far higher 94. In races like a time trial that is a tremendous advantage.
Barakus Obama wrote:
Completely agree with Ignorance Here is Amazing, but one thing I forgot to mention:
The Sky team is the most scientific team in the sport. They are extremely detailed oriented, has Kurt Asle Arvesen with his extreme knowledge, tactical skills and experience in the management.
You may notice that they keep looking down at how much watt they are using, they KNOW what they each are capable of. This is planned very well. Its not normal for teams to behave like this. US Postal was the only one in its time, and everyone cheated at that time.
Solid points in general, though I would say Siutsou/Sivtsov is actually quite a talented climber, not just a big engine on the flats! Without his abandonment, that team would be even more scary.
And I just want to reiterate: I'm not saying nobody on Sky is doping. I wouldn't say that about ANY professional sporting team. My point is just that there is NOTHING about Team Sky that's more suspicious than any other team, and no specific evidence pointing toward any of their riders doping. Nor have any of them (except perhaps Froome, and see above for some explanation) performed above expectations based on their previous results--Wiggins's being quite recent, of course, though his progression is sensible and mapable too.
I just hate when uneducated people go off all with all their hackneyed accusations, pretending they have some knowledge of the subject. If you don't, don't drag someone's name through the mud. Many cyclists have doped, yes, and are doping. That said, not all are. I personally know a half dozen current and former pros (that started w/ the amateur cycling team I rode for before moving to running full time); none of them are currently riding at the ProTour level, but they are still pros, and at least 3 of them I'd bet my life haven't touched dope.
oldhalfmileguy wrote:
Lemonds VO2Max was far higher 94. In races like a time trial that is a tremendous advantage.
You're pulling that number straight out of your ass. Find some documentation and prove it.
If I'm wrong, more props to you, but I've scoured a lot of "top V02max" lists w/o seeing Greg LeMond at 94, which is approaching the highest ever recorded (which I believe is from a nordic guy and right around 97? Maybe Bjorn Daehlie?)
My gf has a whooty! wrote:
Oh please wrote:I think the last rider that was never linked was LeMond
LeMond blood doped.
I'd say it goes waaaaaay back. Maybe never. Even now it's "legal" to blood dope so long as your hg count isn't above 40 (Hamilton got busted for this, his count was too high). So as of today everyone dopes. It's just legal as long as you stay within their limit.
Wow you are so wrong.
First in case you didn't know the level where you are not allowed to compete is a 50
Second it is illegal to blood dope. No transfusions, not even saline IV's are allowed.
Third the biggest anti drug advocate Paul Kimmage explained in his first book that he did not know who all was on dope, but he could definitely state there was one rider beyond reproach, and that rider was Lemond. He said it was painfully apparent that he had an ability to suffer and a need to succeed far beyond anyone else. Lemond got sick early in one tour Kimmage said you could smell him from far away as the diarreaha was just streaming down his legs as he rode the stage. But he hung in and finished. the next stage was more of the same and Kimmage said he wondered what would make someone suffer like that and keep going.
Greg persevered and ended up winning that tour.
Not one of Gregs competitors ever accused him of doping
most of said that there is no doubt he was clean
Steve Tilford said Greg was like no one else
http://stevetilford.com/?p=11375Andy Hampsten also says Greg was clean
we know that Greg had a VO2 Max far higher than any other cyclist 94 Lance was said to have the highest of his time and yet it was only 83. Quite a difference.
If you think Lemond was dirty it only shows how stupid you are, but then you tough blood doping was legal...
You're pulling that number straight out of your ass. Find some documentation and prove it.
If I'm wrong, more props to you, but I've scoured a lot of "top V02max" lists w/o seeing Greg LeMond at 94, which is approaching the highest ever recorded (which I believe is from a nordic guy and right around 97? Maybe Bjorn Daehlie?)[/quote]
HA HA HA straight out of my ass huh?
try Lance armstrongs wiki page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lance_Armstrong
"Armstrong has recorded an aerobic capacity of 83.8 mL/kg/min (VO2 max),[35][36] much higher than the average person (40–50), but lower than some other Tour De France winners, Greg LeMond (92.5)"
sorry i was off a little but i was going from memory
and yes at the time Lemond was the highest ever recorded
You're pulling that number straight out of your ass. Find some documentation and prove it.
you sure you have a search engine? first google result
96.0 Espen Harald Bjerke Norwegian cross country skier This score was achieved in 2005 (7.3 liter/min, 76 kg body weight), listed in an article on
.
96.0 Bjørn Dæhlie Norwegian cross country skier though another source has him recording a best of 90 ml/kg/min.
93.0 Kurt Asle Arvesen Road Cycling a Norwegian professional road bicycle racer for Team Sky. Figure taken from article on syklingens verden website, said to be from 1997.
92.5 Greg LeMond cycling US professional cyclist
92.0 Matt Carpenter runner Pikes Peak marathon course record holder
92.0 Tore Ruud Hofstad Norwegian cross country skier achieved in 2005
oldhalfmileguy wrote:
Not only that Lemond had been a World champion as a junior and rapidly progressed through the adult ranks.No spikes in improvement just steady improvement, He took on the Soviet Olumpic squad by himself in the Coors Classic and beat them soundly. There were no drugs available at that time like EPO, that would help you dominate like that.
In addition Lance Armstrong is always touted as having a tremendous natural advantage with a VO2 Max of 83
Lemonds VO2Max was far higher 94. In races like a time trial that is a tremendous advantage.
The biggest piece of circumstantial evidence that Lemond was clean is that when the EPO era started, he got left in the dust. Had he been an Armstrong, he would have just started to take what soon almost everyone in the peloton was taking.
Read:
http://archive.mensjournal.com/greg-lemond-vs-the-worldignorance here really is amazing :)))
InWyo wrote:
I'm amazed how many people are saying LeMond.
The Science of Sport guys recently had a post of suspicious performances, and the one that sticks out the most is LeMond's 1984 Time Trial. The only two with an average speed faster were a short prologues in 1994 (likely doped) and 2005 (likely doped). And the bike technology in 1984 put him at a severe disadvantage.
Greg is the MOST suspicious rider I can think of.
Hi Lance...nice to see you read lets run.
Who cares, why the drugs are illegal in the first place is beyond me, it does more to hurt the rider more than help.
Dying at the age of 50 because I doped myself to the gills during my 20s and mid-late 30s is no way to be remembered.
The easiest way to tell who the dopers are would be to see who lived the longest.
Frank Schleck sent a check for a large amount of money to some infamous doping coaching. This came out a few months ago.
If you know their names, and they are getting air time on TV they are doped. It is not possible now to ride clean.
My uncle rode with Lemond when Lemond was just started cycling and as a 15 year old he was the best in the United States. Lemond was the last clean winner. The fact that after EPO was introduced Lemond had to drop out of the tour because he couldn't keep on the FLATS says a lot.
Never...
Ignorance Here is Amazing wrote:
Solid points in general, though I would say Siutsou/Sivtsov is actually quite a talented climber, not just a big engine on the flats! Without his abandonment, that team would be even more scary.
And I just want to reiterate: I'm not saying nobody on Sky is doping. I wouldn't say that about ANY professional sporting team. My point is just that there is NOTHING about Team Sky that's more suspicious than any other team, and no specific evidence pointing toward any of their riders doping. Nor have any of them (except perhaps Froome, and see above for some explanation) performed above expectations based on their previous results--Wiggins's being quite recent, of course, though his progression is sensible and mapable too.
I just hate when uneducated people go off all with all their hackneyed accusations, pretending they have some knowledge of the subject. If you don't, don't drag someone's name through the mud. Many cyclists have doped, yes, and are doping. That said, not all are. I personally know a half dozen current and former pros (that started w/ the amateur cycling team I rode for before moving to running full time); none of them are currently riding at the ProTour level, but they are still pros, and at least 3 of them I'd bet my life haven't touched dope.
Yeah, I agree, not only a big engine on the flats. Whats sad about him leavings that it makes Edvalds chances to go for a stage victory even less. And sure, like you said, some of them might dope, you can say that about everyone. But people just assume they are cheating because they are a great team.
Cyclist to pro runner? Strange combo. I always get concrete legs when trying to run after cycling.
Ignorane Here is Amazing wrote:
oldhalfmileguy wrote:Lemonds VO2Max was far higher 94. In races like a time trial that is a tremendous advantage.
You're pulling that number straight out of your ass. Find some documentation and prove it.
If I'm wrong, more props to you, but I've scoured a lot of "top V02max" lists w/o seeing Greg LeMond at 94, which is approaching the highest ever recorded (which I believe is from a nordic guy and right around 97? Maybe Bjorn Daehlie?)
Correct, Bjørn Dæhli it was.
Secondly, did he just mention 83 is a great number? Thats a fairly 'normal' number.
oldhalfmileguy wrote:
You're pulling that number straight out of your ass. Find some documentation and prove it.
If I'm wrong, more props to you, but I've scoured a lot of "top V02max" lists w/o seeing Greg LeMond at 94, which is approaching the highest ever recorded (which I believe is from a nordic guy and right around 97? Maybe Bjorn Daehlie?)
HA HA HA straight out of my ass huh?
try Lance armstrongs wiki page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lance_Armstrong"Armstrong has recorded an aerobic capacity of 83.8 mL/kg/min (VO2 max),[35][36] much higher than the average person (40–50), but lower than some other Tour De France winners, Greg LeMond (92.5)"
sorry i was off a little but i was going from memory
and yes at the time Lemond was the highest ever recorded[/quote]
Wow, this is hilarious. You cannot compare a professional athletes VO2 max against an average person. Armstrong was not born with 83 VO2 max.
rekrunner wrote:
I find it's not hard at all to believe that Andy Schleck (and brother Frank), Cadel Evans, and Greg Lemond are, were, and always have been, clean.
We are no longer seeing the super-human performances of the 90's.
What!? The Chicken Michael Rasmussen, Vinokourov, Ricardo Ricco, the champ Floyd Landis, World Time Trial winner David Millar, the Grand Poobah himself, Lancey, and many, many more. Here's a list of known cheaters
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cyclingUnfortunately we don't hear much about the mafioso doctors, directors and sponsors.
Maybe if Lance ever gets out of court/jail he can make this his new cause. I might actually buy a bracelet for that.
adhd wrote:
What!? The Chicken Michael Rasmussen, Vinokourov
Are you seriously calling Vinokourov a chicken? I know he is a drug cheat but among the overall contenders, he was probably the most aggressive since Merckx. Remember how he won the final stage in Paris (2003 or so). That was BALLZ.