|
Sky Doping/Hate Thread
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:07
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
themajortard wrote:
Aquarius wrote:
Bikes and equipment weighed about 9 kg back then, and weigh about 8 now (6,8 kg for the bike, 300 g for the helmet, 300 g for the clothes, 400 g for the shoes, a little for water, etc.);
That weight is taken into account in indirect calculations. So, of course, that makes riders slightly faster uphill for a same produced power, but it doesn't make them more powerful (except for Cancellara's bike  ).
Thanks for explaining! Hah, I almost forgot about the period when he was accused of having some "help" inside his bike. Good times 
You said a few posts up that it's possible to produce more than 410 watts once in a while but if you produce a lot higher than that everytime you're probably on the juice? Just wondering as I hope Pinot is clean as I like him, but I have my doubts after yesterday... It seems that he's having a bad day today though maybe thats a sign that he just had his best day ever.
This is what makes me believe in him. He seems to be able to produce massively and pay for that next day, pretty realistic for young emerging star imo...
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:08
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Yes, that's exactly what I meant. Although having a bad day is not proof of cleanness either (you can never prove that you're clean, and even known dopers sometimes have bad days).
I'm not sure what to think of Pinot, I'm on a fence, but I haven't heard or read anything about him, so I'll keep watching, and hopefully time will tell more. |
| |
|
|
| samdiatmh |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:09
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 892
Joined: 29-12-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
themajortard wrote:Just wondering as I hope Pinot is clean as I like him, but I have my doubts after yesterday... It seems that he's having a bad day today though maybe thats a sign that he just had his best day ever.
would've taken a massive effort for someone like Pinot to have been up there, so he's paying for it today
he's had good results, but a 3 week tour is something completely different |
| |
|
|
| Smal |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:11
|
Free Agent
Posts: 122
Joined: 06-09-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Wiggins speaks out and condemns doping:
https://www.guardi...CMP=twt_gu |
| |
|
|
| Gaffeff |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:15
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 284
Joined: 23-09-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
kumazan wrote:
Gaffeff wrote:
Fair enough, I assumed (incorrectly it would seem) that doping gives an extra x% equally. Didn't realise it varied.
Not just that, you're also assuming that everyone was/is in the same program. That's just not possible, some programs are too expensive for some, and there're always people willing to take risks to their health that others won't.
Yes I made that assumption too, I thought taking EPO was pretty much the same. Learnt more about doping in the last hour than in the last few years :-)
Millar said recently that he was worried about medical exceptions. I believe EPO was actually a medicine? How does that work, If I take medicine to keep me alive that also has a performance effect? Always wondered if this was part of the Froome case. Can't tell whether he was held back by the illness (seem to remember he's got some strange tropical disease thats has effects a bit like malaria) or that curing the illness is helping him, but wondered if that was part of it?
Also, I believe WADA are more worried about genetic doping, how does that work? Can that be tested?
Sorry, actually genuinly interested :-) |
| |
|
|
| housoe |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:30
|
Stagiare
Posts: 225
Joined: 15-05-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
He argues he always been one of the best timetrialers and has now taken the final step to the level of Martin and Cancellara, if it as just that it would be perfectly credible.
But he also lost weight and improved in the mountains, isolated that is credible to.
The problem is he did both at the same time within a year... Is that credible.
It's equal to a top climber like Andy schleck gains some weight an improves a lot at the timetrials, and stil climbs better than ever. Would that be credible.
Manager of Team Vestas Wind Project, Pro Conti Team In the Pseudo man game
|
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:34
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Yeah, medical exceptions have been a joke for years. Asthma, for instance, affects to less than 10% of the adult population. The % increases to 50% in cycling. Uhm.
Not an expert on genetic doping sorry. I'm not sure how it works, but my guess is that there's no (efficient) testing for it.
|
| |
|
|
| Smal |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:36
|
Free Agent
Posts: 122
Joined: 06-09-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Where has this daft idea come from that you need to be heavy to be good at time trialing? It's a complete fallacy. It can help of course, but it isn't anything like the be all and end all. If you get fitter, get better endurance and have excellent style then you can be good at TT. Wiggins has vastly improved the first two from that list and he has always had the best style. Wiggins is naturally shaped perfectly for TT as well (narrow shoulders, tall etc.)
Anyway, he passionately says that he would not dope. That's case closed as far as I'm concerned.
Edited by Smal on 13-07-2012 13:37
|
| |
|
|
| CLURPR |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:46
|
Domestique
Posts: 452
Joined: 19-01-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
housoe wrote:
He argues he always been one of the best timetrialers and has now taken the final step to the level of Martin and Cancellara, if it as just that it would be perfectly credible.
But he also lost weight and improved in the mountains, isolated that is credible to.
The problem is he did both at the same time within a year... Is that credible.
It's equal to a top climber like Andy schleck gains some weight an improves a lot at the timetrials, and stil climbs better than ever. Would that be credible.
He never said in that article he was one of the best read it properly! He said he has shown that he had the potential to be one of the best. |
| |
|
|
| johannes-w |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:46
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 833
Joined: 24-04-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Smal wrote:
Where has this daft idea come from that you need to be heavy to be good at time trialing? It's a complete fallacy. It can help of course, but it isn't anything like the be all and end all. If you get fitter, get better endurance and have excellent style then you can be good at TT. Wiggins has vastly improved the first two from that list and he has always had the best style. Wiggins is naturally shaped perfectly for TT as well (narrow shoulders, tall etc.)
Anyway, he passionately says that he would not dope. That's case closed as far as I'm concerned.
Ok well although you can't see it right now, I passionately said, I'll never use the internet again!
Edited by johannes-w on 13-07-2012 13:47
|
| |
|
|
| johannes-w |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:47
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 833
Joined: 24-04-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Spoiler Don't worry I'm still here  |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 24-11-2024 01:50
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| drugsdontwork |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:48
|
Free Agent
Posts: 123
Joined: 20-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Very passionate article with a noteable shortage of four letter words.
I struggle to think of many other sportsmen (British) who could talk with such conviction (although granted it may have been ghost written a little).
After yesterdays struggle and this article I feel a little warmer about Wiggins performance, then again I'm easily please. 
Nobody is normal
|
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:58
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
mb2612 wrote:
SaddleSore wrote:
Results, yeah Wiggins has had a great year it happens in sport, Nadal, Djokovic, Federer, Spanish Football team, have played at a level above everyone else for a few years...dopers the lot of em....
Pretty much, tennis has a stated policy of not drug testing the winners of tennis matches. Football's drug testing policy is a joke.
Also that Operatione Fuentes linked him to Spanish football teams and tennis players, but that judge in Spain ordered the case sealed.
But this is a matter for another thread, if you search you can find plenty of posts on this on this forum and elsewhere.
My favourite post ever I think This thread is hilarious. |
| |
|
|
| Gustavovskiy |
Posted on 13-07-2012 13:59
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6036
Joined: 20-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Gaffeff wrote:
Also, I believe WADA are more worried about genetic doping, how does that work? Can that be tested?
Sorry, actually genuinly interested :-)
I'm not 100% sure on this, but I believe the concept of genetic doping relies on the integration of genes to your DNA that could improve your performance. For example people could identify the genes for the muscle legs of a cheetah or of a kangaroo and create a vector to transfer it to a human DNA sequence. However transferring DNA to a living human is no simple task and there are lots of problems like creating a compatible vector, or delivering the genes to the right cells, which is still a huge bummer for researching labs worldwide. But with my poor knowledge on the subject I can't be much more detailed, sorry.
One thing I can assure you is that it's nearly impossible with the scientific knowledge nowadays to believe that there is anyone able to reproduce such a scheme, given the intricate problems of the procedure. Genetic therapeutics is still a very pristine area in medicine, WADA should take their focus otherwise.
Interesting reading. Especially the part where he states that doping isn't such an issue in France than it is in GB 
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 13-07-2012 14:08
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Gaffeff wrote:
Yes I made that assumption too, I thought taking EPO was pretty much the same. Learnt more about doping in the last hour than in the last few years :-)
Millar said recently that he was worried about medical exceptions. I believe EPO was actually a medicine? How does that work, If I take medicine to keep me alive that also has a performance effect? Always wondered if this was part of the Froome case. Can't tell whether he was held back by the illness (seem to remember he's got some strange tropical disease thats has effects a bit like malaria) or that curing the illness is helping him, but wondered if that was part of it?
Also, I believe WADA are more worried about genetic doping, how does that work? Can that be tested?
Sorry, actually genuinly interested :-)
Steroids have been invented to help people from concentration camp (Jews mostly) regain muscles fastly after WW2. Amphetamines have been genuinely invented to make people stronger. They've been used by soldiers since WW2, maybe before, I'm not sure.
Corticoids are normally used for a lot of things. Allergies is one of the most frequent use.
EPO is normally used for people with a cancer and whose body can hardly produce enough red cells, it's also used for the elderly people who have troubles breathing. It's being argued whether our total number of red cells is defined for life (like 160-170 years, which would be the human body limit), or if we could keep on producing them forever. I've read contradictory statements about it. Still, 80+ people are never going to run short of them, even with EPO, so there's no big risk for them.
If you keep EPO to keep you alive, that'll improve your performance, yes. But if your health is such that you need EPO, your performance in sports should be the last thing to care about.
I don't know Froome case well enough to have an opinion on his disease and how it restrained his performances.
I don't know much about genetic doping either. It must work like genetic cures for some diseases. I'd say there are two possible ways : either a product stimulates a particular gene and that gene makes the body release a substance that'll improve your performances (more or less how EPO works), either that'll create a definitive mutation in your genes. Mutations happen all the time, but when they happen in the wrong place of the DNA, and that the mutated cell is not eliminated, that becomes a tumour, and then a cancer as it widespreads. The purpose of the mutation would be to affect genes that are directly related to performance. People with genes from Western Africa are naturally more prone to running fast on short distances because of some particular genes, people from Eastern Africa are better for endurance efforts for the same reasons. Some people have better muscles for this or that effort. The idea is to cheat nature and get the most convenient genes. Potentially dangerous game though...
As for asthma : practising endurance sports makes you more subject to that disease than being sedentary. Of course this leads to abuses. |
| |
|
|
| drugsdontwork |
Posted on 13-07-2012 14:10
|
Free Agent
Posts: 123
Joined: 20-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Gustavovskiy wrote:
Interesting reading. Especially the part where he states that doping isn't such an issue in France than it is in GB
Not less on an issue but a different attitude. As a Britain I understand what he trying to get at but I did find this the most uncomfortable part of the article when I read it.
I think all (most) nationalities take a negative view on doping but it is softer in some countries e.g. steroid use in MLB - only 50 game ban for first offence i think.
Nobody is normal
|
| |
|
|
| cosmic |
Posted on 13-07-2012 14:23
|
Stagiare
Posts: 171
Joined: 28-06-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
kumazan wrote:
Yeah, medical exceptions have been a joke for years. Asthma, for instance, affects to less than 10% of the adult population. The % increases to 50% in cycling. Uhm.
Not an expert on genetic doping sorry. I'm not sure how it works, but my guess is that there's no (efficient) testing for it.
Not just in cycling. Pretty much every endurance sport has large amounts of asthma cases. If there's a natural reason for it, related to pushing your body to its limits, or if it's just doctors signing off on it to allow the athletes to legally use performance enhancing stuff I couldn't say tho.
Edited by cosmic on 13-07-2012 14:24
|
| |
|
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 13-07-2012 14:27
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
drugsdontwork wrote:
Gustavovskiy wrote:
Interesting reading. Especially the part where he states that doping isn't such an issue in France than it is in GB
Not less on an issue but a different attitude. As a Britain I understand what he trying to get at but I did find this the most uncomfortable part of the article when I read it.
I think all (most) nationalities take a negative view on doping but it is softer in some countries e.g. steroid use in MLB - only 50 game ban for first offence i think.
That is correct. That doesn't make it less dissed. You will go through public hell and probably never be elected to the hall of fame. And for a second offense uyou can get two years. that's 324 games!
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 13-07-2012 14:28
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
cosmic wrote:
kumazan wrote:
Yeah, medical exceptions have been a joke for years. Asthma, for instance, affects to less than 10% of the adult population. The % increases to 50% in cycling. Uhm.
Not an expert on genetic doping sorry. I'm not sure how it works, but my guess is that there's no (efficient) testing for it.
Not just in cycling. Pretty much every endurance sport has large amounts of asthma cases. If there's a natural reason for it, related to pushing your body to its limits, or if it's just doctors signing off on it to allow the athletes to legally use performance enhancing stuff I couldn't say tho.
Both. Exercise-induced asthma causes part of that. But, form 7/8% to 50%? Don't think so. And yup it happens in many sports, but cycling leads by a long way, sadly.
|
| |
|
|
| drugsdontwork |
Posted on 13-07-2012 14:35
|
Free Agent
Posts: 123
Joined: 20-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
**Way Off Topic***
I think a second positive test is 100 games with a lifetime ban on a third.
I agree though that the biggest disincentive (for the best players) is the HoF vote. Wasn't the drugs policy a reason that baseball was dropped from the olympics? (or was it a test event?)
***Back on topic***
Anyhow this doesn't necessarily make what Wiggins says right but I do understand it. I still have that warm feeling about it all (hope I've not p*ssed my pants!).
Nobody is normal
|
| |
|
