In light of Lances coming out party last night, and Jonathan Vaughters comments recently, how does a team like Slipstream be dope free, and still compete in todays racing environment? I guess you could also ask, how does anyone (top ITU, Ironman, Cycling, Olympic races, etc.) place in the top 5 (or whatever) and be dope free? Is it possible? I hear people say, “well train harder”. The problem is is that I can’t recover now that I’m 44 - to train harder and place in the top 5.
It may not be possible,
it may be that the peak of doping was 10 years ago and testing now is good enough that a great natural cyclist can win against a decent doped cyclist
Maybe the vast majority of pros now see what happened to LA and stopped doping.
Many other possibilities. But the one thing that gives me hope that some performances may be legit is Bob Beamon. While doping may have been around than, nothing was very effective, and his LJ is stil the 2nd farthest ever and would have won every OG and WC except one. So exceptional clean performances are possible.
…and I truly hope that Ryder’s Giro win was one of those exceptional performances. I really do given that it is the only Canadian Grand Tour win. However, my Canadian bubble was burst by Ben Johnson in 1988 so I’ve lost all my optimism on that front. Unless it is an athlete like Beckie Scott shouting at every chance she gets about anti doping (or Nicole Cooke), I’m always guarded in my optimism.
In light of Lances coming out party last night, and Jonathan Vaughters comments recently, how does a team like Slipstream be dope free, and still compete in todays racing environment? I guess you could also ask, how does anyone (top ITU, Ironman, Cycling, Olympic races, etc.) place in the top 5 (or whatever) and be dope free? Is it possible? I hear people say, “well train harder”. The problem is is that I can’t recover now that I’m 44 - to train harder and place in the top 5.
So the five guys that placed in the 40-44 age group are all doping?
Bob Beaman - thanks - I’ll have to research it.
I guess I also question the local races - those who come in the top 5 - or lets say top 3. I know people who do. I would like to still believe they are clean.
Either
-
the biopassport works to an extent, and there is evidence of this ( slower climbs, less crazy blood values than before)
-
they aren’t, and are cheating too.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they had some riders here and there that were up to no good, but I do believe the team is dead set against it.
In light of Lances coming out party last night, and Jonathan Vaughters comments recently, how does a team like Slipstream be dope free, and still compete in todays racing environment? I guess you could also ask, how does anyone (top ITU, Ironman, Cycling, Olympic races, etc.) place in the top 5 (or whatever) and be dope free? Is it possible? I hear people say, “well train harder”. The problem is is that I can’t recover now that I’m 44 - to train harder and place in the top 5.
No, I’m not saying that…I want to believe they are clean. I was just posing the question that if you place in the top 5 - especially at an ITU race, for example, doping comes into play, or does it not?
At an elite level I’d say that a clean athlete will never know if they were beat by a another clean or doped up athlete unless there is testing.
hi Jack
you said: I wouldn’t be surprised if they had some riders here and there that were up to no good, but I do believe the team is dead set against it.
My question is still, how do you compete if your clean like JV slipstream team? How do you go as fast, as long, day after day, naturally?
Is there any research or website on how the speeds of cycling races have changed over years. You mention slower climbs.
I’ll tell you one thing, the upcoming cycling races (tour of california, tour de france, etc) should be interesting. The discussions around doping, testing, etc.
They don’t have a lot of awesome GC results in the TDF for one, aside from wiggins, who is either the best athlete in the world, or one of those riders who may have been up to no good.
Their other big results - the Giro, was very recent, when perhaps the biopassport is working, or some classics stages where a bit of tactics and luck and anybody can win.
But yes there is some indication they are going up the big climbs slower now, and some indications that riders blood values are less suspicious now. There is not hard proof of this, timing people up climbs is subject to a lot of error. But it seems things have slowed down.
Their recent performance in Colorado was impressive but they were the only big team bringing their A-team roster to that race, so it was expected.
My question is still, how do you compete if your clean like JV slipstream team? How do you go as fast, as long, day after day, naturally?
Is there any research or website on how the speeds of cycling races have changed over years. You mention slower climbs.
I’ll tell you one thing, the upcoming cycling races (tour of california, tour de france, etc) should be interesting. The discussions around doping, testing, etc.
Jack,
I really doubt the slight changes in the climbing speeds are indicative of a cleaner sport, rather a change in racing tactics (the Schlecks brought about the go hard, then sit up methodology which has brought down overall climbing speeds from the pure all out Pantani type efforts). If you look at the 09/10 TDF, LA was getting treated like a second tier pro at key moments (TT, steep climbs) by guys who were supposedly of the new ‘clean’ generation.
I think that almost all sports are full of cheating with very few top performers being clean. Sad for sure.
Jack
Climbing speds in road stages are a rough indication, but TTs up climbs would give pretty good results. Weight is controlled, aero doesn’t matter, other than weather its pretty static. I’d love to see L"Alpe Huez used every year as a TT course, just to track whats going on.
Like I said, the timing climb angle is fraught with error, but there is a long history of a certain climbing rate, and then there is a clear spike, and a clear drop again around the introduction of the biopassport. Could it just be coincidental changes in tactics? Maybe. This last tour featured a variety of big names trying to drop wiggins in the climbs though, and steady TT’s by his team up them to bring them all back. Tactically it was very similar to the Postal service, but not as fast.
along with data like the chart below, it is encouraging:
This doesn’t mean I don’t think cheating is still happening, but the biopassport really limits how effectively you can tweak your blood values, and if that means you only gain 1 or 2% power instead of 5 or 10%, it makes a massive difference in how well you can compete clean.
Word from the cheats is that you have to microdose now to get away with epo or blood doping. The world MICRO is progress there =)
Jack,
I really doubt the slight changes in the climbing speeds are indicative of a cleaner sport, rather a change in racing tactics (the Schlecks brought about the go hard, then sit up methodology which has brought down overall climbing speeds from the pure all out Pantani type efforts). If you look at the 09/10 TDF, LA was getting treated like a second tier pro at key moments (TT, steep climbs) by guys who were supposedly of the new ‘clean’ generation.
I think that almost all sports are full of cheating with very few top performers being clean. Sad for sure.
Jack
The real question is how do they do it on R5s instead of S5s?!?!
=)
The P5 no doubt helps a wee bit, but they are not the only team with TT bikes that are really good.
I agree with what I gather are Jack’s main points:
- They don’t focus on the races where doping is quite as beneficial
- the peloton may be cleaner
One other thing to keep in mind, is that there are a lot of ways to get benefits without doping, and if you have a smart person like Allen Lim(is he still with them?), and you exploit every possible legal benefit, maybe you can get close.
I think Garmin was the first team to do things like cooling vests before TTs, space legs; dietary things like drinking beet juice apparently can increase oxygen use, maybe they use altitude tents(I’m not sure), clearly a data driven team when it comes to equipment. The little things can add up.
It may not be possible,
it may be that the peak of doping was 10 years ago and testing now is good enough that a great natural cyclist can win against a decent doped cyclist
Maybe the vast majority of pros now see what happened to LA and stopped doping.
Many other possibilities. But the one thing that gives me hope that some performances may be legit is Bob Beamon. While doping may have been around than, nothing was very effective, and his LJ is stil the 2nd farthest ever and would have won every OG and WC except one. So exceptional clean performances are possible.
I wouldn’t hold that up as a good example, as it wasn’t repeatable in any fashion. It was an astounding feat, but it was pretty much a one-off freak occurrence. That jump was 20 inches further than his lifetime best before that, and after that he never jumped further than 27 feet (2 feet less than his record).
I’d point at Edwin Moses and his records as consistent, above average and sustainable domination.
John