Doctor alleged to have doped British Tour de France cyclists

[raptor-22]

Here is the old list.... look where Nairo would slot (39min22) in and look at some of the names well below him on the list who rode in the "Very doped" years.... i.e. maxed out EPO doses.

 

http://www.climbing-records.com/2013/07/all-time-top-100-fastest-rides-on.html

 

I concede that Nairo is a small climber but, but arguably has a higher BMI (20.8) than Michael Rasmussen (34th) 19.49.... so physcially a guy like Rasmussen is just as capable of going uphill as fast (if not faster) based on body weight. There are a number of guys on the list that are of similar height and weight to Nairo. Oh, and we know Rasmussen is a convicted doper.

 

In my mind there is enough info to say that a performance like this was more on the abnormal than normal side.

 

 

Where are the facts around Rasmussen's BMI being equal to Quintana.

You believe they are similar based on the "Chicken" photo? or did you weight them both the morning before the performances in question?

[Headshot]

Why is it being stated by some that "there's no way they can ride like that for three weeks without doping".

What are the facts forming this opinion? Surely one must have participated in several studies with well trained and pro athletes to understand the limits of human endurance .

 

Or does it stem from getting a 2:61 Argust time and therefore if you can't do it those who do must be doping?

 

Still seeing throw it out there arguments with no basis of fact to opinion

I think that you chaps who think the TDF peleton is clean or even partly clean are also on something - its an old remedy for avoiding the obvious called "blinkers". 

 

If local yokels like Kev the Hev and Davey George were doping, along with several others, whats the chance that many if not all the top road pro's are? The best dopers can eek out that 1% over the lesser dopers and win. That's my opinion and there are plenty of facts and a bit of logic to back it up too. 

[jcza]

Where are the facts around Rasmussen's BMI being equal to Quintana.

You believe they are similar based on the "Chicken" photo? or did you weight them both the morning before the performances in question?

 

But chicken never tested positive? Forgot to mention he was going to Mexico if I remember correctly. 

[Andrew Steer]

Here is the old list.... look where Nairo would slot (39min22) in and look at some of the names well below him on the list who rode in the "Very doped" years.... i.e. maxed out EPO doses.

 

http://www.climbing-records.com/2013/07/all-time-top-100-fastest-rides-on.html

 

I concede that Nairo is a small climber but, but arguably has a higher BMI (20.8) than Michael Rasmussen (34th) 19.49.... so physcially a guy like Rasmussen is just as capable of going uphill as fast (if not faster) based on body weight. There are a number of guys on the list that are of similar height and weight to Nairo. Oh, and we know Rasmussen is a convicted doper.

 

In my mind there is enough info to say that a performance like this was more on the abnormal than normal side.

 

Is his BMI really that high - never noted it? There are of course many other factors to pull in... but that is new info to me. 

 

Looking at that list, I'm looking for a clean rider as a marker, the only one I think I can find is: 

42. 2004: 39:56 David Moncoutié 20.73 km/h

 

Moncoutie is widely regarded as a rider that has avoided the doping plague in the sport. Whether he actually did is another matter entirely, but I like to believe in him.

 

For those who don't know much about the rider, this is a nice read: http://inrng.com/2014/02/book-review-ma-liberte-de-rouler-moncoutie/

 

Quintana beating Moncoutie up Alpe d"Huez by 36seconds - that seems reasonable to me.

 

Do any of us know anything for sure... Nope 

[Fat Boab]

Out of curiosity, what does the list look like up Mt Ventoux?

 

If Wiki is to be believed........

 

[Gen]

But chicken never tested positive? Forgot to mention he was going to Mexico if I remember correctly.

No.. but he did admit to doping in 2013.. his PEDS list was long very long he also used PEDS from. Late '90 to like 2010.

 

I never liked him.. hubby did.. and I lagged my arse off when he was kicked out of the TDF.

 

I do however enjoy his tweets.. is rather sharp with the humour.

[Fat Boab]

Religion & doping - zero proof either way but still the most hotly debated threads on thehub.

 

Crazy no?

 

Amen to that......

[Gen]

If Wiki is to be believed........

 

ventoux.png

Erm

 

PANTANI doesn't hold the record[emoji102]

 

Hey check BERT AND FROOME'S times are close.

 

 

Oh can you do ones for my other climbs.. I am too laze to go Google [emoji6]

 

MADELEINE and Galilbier?

[Andrew Steer]

If Wiki is to be believed........

 

ventoux.png

 

Those 2004 times that litter the leader board, if I remember correctly, were for a time trial... so on fresh legs 

[raptor-22]

If Wiki is to be believed........

 

ventoux.png

 

 

interesting that Froome's time 2013 is only 23rd fastest.

Despite only "marginal gains", and casing the fraction percent improvements.

Slower than Moncoutie too....

 

I guess he must be clean (or isn't this how the believer game is played?)

[Fat Boab]

Erm

 

PANTANI doesn't hold the record[emoji102]

 

Hey check BERT AND FROOME'S times are close.

 

 

Oh can you do ones for my other climbs.. I am too laze to go Google [emoji6]

 

MADELEINE and Galilbier?

 

Look, Armstrong and Froome have the same time. Proof positive, that if one doped, so did the other....

[jcza]

Is his BMI really that high - never noted it? There are of course many other factors to pull in... but that is new info to me. 

 

Looking at that list, I'm looking for a clean rider as a marker, the only one I think I can find is: 

42. 2004: 39:56 David Moncoutié 20.73 km/h

 

Moncoutie is widely regarded as a rider that has avoided the doping plague in the sport. Whether he actually did is another matter entirely, but I like to believe in him.

 

For those who don't know much about the rider, this is a nice read: http://inrng.com/2014/02/book-review-ma-liberte-de-rouler-moncoutie/

 

Quintana beating Moncoutie up Alpe d"Huez by 36seconds - that seems reasonable to me.

 

Do any of us know anything for sure... Nope 

 

Isn't Sastre the first "clean" rider on the list? 

[Gen]

Seems 21.9ish seems to be the going rate...

 

Well they are going up there again this year.. so we can get the stop watches ready lol

[Gen]

Okay.. this has been fun...ish, but it's definitely more fun getting hyped up for Roubaix. .

[Andrew Steer]

Isn't Sastre the first "clean" rider on the list? 

 

Years riding under Riis... not so sure.

 

Once upon a time...

There was a CSC cycling team, with an awesome documentary and some really compelling behind the scenes footage and insights. It was everything you wanted to believe cycling was. But then one fateful day half the riders got busted, the manager admitted to doping and the whole castle came tumbling down...

 

The end.

[Patchelicious]

I think that you chaps who think the TDF peleton is clean or even partly clean are also on something - its an old remedy for avoiding the obvious called "blinkers".

 

If local yokels like Kev the Hev and Davey George were doping, along with several others, whats the chance that many if not all the top road pro's are? The best dopers can eek out that 1% over the lesser dopers and win. That's my opinion and there are plenty of facts and a bit of logic to back it up too.

If we brand them ALL clean or ALL as doper we are equally as guilty of putting blinders on.

 

Both approaches are lazy and not accurate.

 

It is statistically impossible that either of these extremes is the truth.

 

The truth lies somewhere on the spectrum between these two extremes and that is what we need to try and discuss.

 

Is the truth moving more towards the clean side, yes I think so. Both from the number of people doping as well as the level of doping I think it's on the decline, even if only marginal. Well it ever be totally clean, of course not.