DC Wonk wrote:
The issue is not power outputs -- they were the same epo or no epo. The issue is to what extent epo allows the athlete to maximize how long and how efficiently they can produce a given power output. It allows your blood to carry more oxygen-rich blood, at the price/risk of making your heart work harder to pump thicker blood.
I'm amazed that elite cyclists can be as lightweight as many are and still produce hi wattage outputs. Of course, we're not talking about sprinters here -- I'm talking about the GC riders. Sprinters like Greipel still need explosive muscle mass to be successful. I doubt a rider like Peter Sagan can be any lighter than he is now and still produce enough explosive power to compete for sprints.
What you're saying doesn't make any sense. Think about it. If they were using more oxygen, then they would be using more glycogen too, so they would get tired quicker, they would not be able to produce high power outputs for longer.
What you're saying is the same old ridiculous nonsense that everyone has been saying for years, without even thinking logically. They just repeat the same stupid $hit over and over.
The reality of physiology is that elite athletes are more energy efficient. They produce either more power for the same amount of fuel, or use less fuel including oxygen for the same pace. Ultimately over the course of a race they use less glycogen and less oxygen than slower athletes and so they alos recover faster.
This should be common knowledge. But what passes for knowledge in the sport if very far from it.