Not Normal? An insight into doping and the 21 biggest riders from LeMond to Armstrong to Evans

[Blackadder]

This is a very interesting study, intended to use extraordinary-superhuman performances rather than PED's as a marker of doping. The assumption is that it is possible to determine limits of human capability, and categorise performances that transcend these as variously "suspicious" (Evans and Wiggins), "miraculous" (Froome and Andy Schleck); and "mutant" (Contador, Indurain, Ullrich and Armstrong).

 

As the author puts it: “Forget ‘I never tested positive.’ It needs to be replaced by ‘I was never clocked by a radar doing 430 watts standard in the final col of a long mountain stage.’ It’s utterly more convincing.”

 

Most or the top riders come under a fair degree of scrutiny.

 

For a short summary, see: http://velonews.comp...-present_290708

 

For the full report. see: http://www.joomag.co...766001370594539

[SwissVan]

"suspicious" (Evans and Wiggins)

"miraculous" (Froome and Andy Schleck)

"mutant" (Contador, Indurain, Ullrich and Armstrong).

 

 

Hmmm there hasn't been a good cycling argument here for a while

[T-Bob]

That's based off the same research papers that are the basis for the Le Monde articles (and here) that have been running recently. Google translate them.

 

I was interested until I saw it was Vayer's report. That guys work is sketchy at best. Here's a link to an article on the Science In Sport website ripping apart Vayer's methods.

 

http://www.sportsscientists.com/search?q=vayer

 

The guy is basically a 'rent-a-quote' for newspapers that want a doping story when inconveniently there isn't one.

[Blackadder]

That's based off the same research papers that are the basis for the Le Monde articles (and here) that have been running recently. Google translate them.

 

I was interested until I saw it was Vayer's report. That guys work is sketchy at best. Here's a link to an article on the Science In Sport website ripping apart Vayer's methods.

 

http://www.sportssci.../search?q=vayer

 

The guy is basically a 'rent-a-quote' for newspapers that want a doping story when inconveniently there isn't one.

 

Indeed, puts a dampener on his calculations

['Dale]

Intriguing

[T-Bob]

"In English language publications (eg CCN website) he likes to be billed as a 'Professor'. His job - 'Professeur de l'EPS - actually means PE teacher - which is what he was before he started providing Le Monde figures they asked for"

 

Apparently there was a massive twitter spat between people calling his 'methods' into question and Jamie Fuller of Skins who's been championing the report & sponsoring the publication as part of his not-so-secret campaign to get rid of Pat MQ.

 

Ended up looking like sulky children all squabbling and shouting 'it's true, I know it is, it is, it is, it is. Right, I'm taking my ball and going home...'

[jcza]

Speculative I would say, however anyone going up the HC climbs at Pantani/Armstrong speeds are suspicious in my book.

[T-Bob]

Speculative I would say, however anyone going up the HC climbs at Pantani/Armstrong speeds are suspicious in my book.

 

Hell yeah, there not a question about them being dope fuelled drug manics from Armstrong through to Pantani and all around. The issue for me is the rhetoric and validity of the data, what agenda it's being championed for and passed around as wholesale.

 

You have to remember that the UCI has a ban on compression clothing in competition so Skins and Jamie F have a vested interest in removing Pat MQ since all the money they pumped into trying to change that rule has come to nothing far.

 

 

Big Mig is an interesting one. Don't what to believe that he was doped up like a prize race horse but looking back on it...

[V12man]

"In English language publications (eg CCN website) he likes to be billed as a 'Professor'. His job - 'Professeur de l'EPS - actually means PE teacher - which is what he was before he started providing Le Monde figures they asked for"

 

Apparently there was a massive twitter spat between people calling his 'methods' into question and Jamie Fuller of Skins who's been championing the report & sponsoring the publication as part of his not-so-secret campaign to get rid of Pat MQ.

 

Ended up looking like sulky children all squabbling and shouting 'it's true, I know it is, it is, it is, it is. Right, I'm taking my ball and going home...'

 

Jaime is just on to it as a marketing exercise... ANYTHING for publicity...