Official pro cycling "WTF are they on?" thread

[One More Solo]

In the interests of keeping the pro cycling thread "clean" ( ) I thought it might be best to keep any doping relating discussion in here.

I've struggled to warm to Froome because his performances are just ridiculous. Can anyone tell me what happened to the last guy that competed over both short, power climbs and long Alpine climbs whilst pedalling a ridiculous cadence? I think he recovered from a serious illness too that was used to explain away some of his performances...

I'm also really interested to see Nibali and Quintana in week 2 and 3. I'm wondering if they'll come back fighting when the rest of the peloton begins to tire.

People will dismiss this as conspiracy theorist nonsense, but we're watching an era of cycling where record times are being set up nearly every climb going, beating times from riders who we know were doping. Some of that can be ascribed to improvements in aero kit etc, but bike weights haven't changed and powermeters aren't a new invention. There just simply isn't enough tech to explain it (in my opinion).

On top of that, the rumours floating around that Sky are going to sign Landa (after Brailsford called for action to be taken against Astana just a few weeks ago) are an utter joke.

Discuss...

 

[touch]

but we're watching an era of cycling where record times are being set up nearly every climb going

...no we're not?

 

[One More Solo]

...no we're not?

That was an exaggeration, but the Giro saw fastest ever ascents on the Finestre and Sestriere. I guess the saving grace is that the Mortirolo ascents were slower than 1999.

Valverde set a record up the Mur de Huy last year which Froome and Rodriguez both came close to beating this year.

The Giro overall had the second fastest average speed ever.

I don't think riders will ever challenge the ridiculous times set up the Alpe and Hautacam in the 90s, but to me there is a trend that times are getting progressively faster over the last few years without any real explanation for it.

It doesn't make me enjoy watching cycling any less but I think it's healthy to maintain a questioning attitude!

 

[Hotwired]

So this isn't a doping thread it's a doping paranoia thread?

 

[Asprilla]

Some records are being set, but the overall race paces have dropped substantially. It's also worth noting that the guys who put in these herculean efforts are usually on the back foot in a big way the following day(s). It wasn't like that before.

I'd like to think that this is an indication that they are just picking their battles rather than riding everywhere as if it Dutch TT with a tailwind.

 

[Jonny69]

Riders are putting in times equivalent to and faster than the doping days.

When I went to that Etixx nutrition seminar it was brought up as a subject and there are a couple of key things in place that weren't back then. Firstly is nutrition. Massive gains have been made by keeping checks on riders' diets and controlling what they eat in training and during a tour. This was never in place back in the doping days and most teams didn't even have diet plans let alone a team chef. Riders just ate whatever rubbish they fancied. Second I think is physio and recovery. The Soigneur has been around for a while but physiological understanding has improved significantly which improves recovery times and therefore the rider is more capable of putting in big efforts day after day.

I'm not saying for a minute that I don't think there is doping, because I think it would be naive to think otherwise. I think there is a degree of micro-dosing and I think the current science is probably focussed on managing micro-dosing to remain within the allowable limits. It wouldn't surprise me for a minute if this is what has caught out Astana and I'm sure the bigger the team = the bigger the budget to maintain, monitor or disguise micro-dosing.

Additionally there are a HUGE number of legal supplements which give performance boosts and aid recovery which either weren't discovered or weren't available back then. Caffeine is a classic example of something that gives riders a massive physical and psychological boost pretty much on tap.

Froome IS riding differently this year. Much more aggressively, he's attacking rather than riding passively while watching his power meter, the elbows are out and he actually sounds passionate about it. Don't know what's happened and don't know if he can keep it up, but he's looking a lot more like a Tour rider.

 

[GSVBagpuss]

Surely the reliance on power meters also plays into this - if you know just how many watts to push then you will optimise performance better than doing it be old school feel.

 

[touch]

That was an exaggeration, but the Giro saw fastest ever ascents on the Finestre and Sestriere. I guess the saving grace is that the Mortirolo ascents were slower than 1999.

The side of the Finestre with the gravel road has only been used 3 times by the giro: 2005, 2011, 2015. It's not like they beat a time from the 80s or 90s.

Valverde set a record up the Mur de Huy last year which Froome and Rodriguez both came close to beating this year.

Froome + Rodriguez had the advantage of climbing it at the end of a short, flatish stage rather than a hard classics race.
Valverde's time is probably just due to the changing nature of the race: every year since 2004 the bunch has been together coming into the bottom of the climb, so it's naturally going to be faster.

I wouldnt be surprised if a few riders come close to some record times up the bigger alpine climbs this year. Not because any individual is riding faster but because we see whole teams driving the pace on the climbs now which didnt happen before.

 

[Thomas. PLease.]

Ventoux time as at 2013, some pretty conspicuous company...

1. 2004: 55:51 Iban Mayo 23.10 km/h
2. 2004: 56:26 Tyler Hamilton 22.86 km/h
3. 1999: 56:50 Jonathan Vaughters 22.70 km/h
4. 2004: 56:54 Oscar Sevilla 22.67 km/h
5. 1999: 57:33 Alexander Vinokourov 22.42 km/h
6. 1994: 57:34 Marco Pantani 22.41 km/h
7. 1999: 57:34 Wladimir Belli 22.41 km/h
8. 2004: 57:39 Juan Miguel Mercado 22.38 km/h
9. 1999: 57:42 Joseba Beloki 22.36 km/h
10. 2004: 57:49 Lance Armstrong 22.31 km/h
11. 1999: 57:52 Lance Armstrong 22.29 km/h
12. 2004: 58:14 Inigo Landaluze 22.15 km/h
13. 1999: 58:15 Kevin Livingston 22.15 km/h
14. 1999: 58:31 David Moncoutie 22.05 km/h
15. 2004: 58:35 José Enrique Gutierrez 22.02 km/h
16. 2009: 58:45 Andy Schleck 21.96 km/h
17. 2009: 58:45 Alberto Contador 21.96 km/h
18. 2009: 58:48 Lance Armstrong 21.94 km/h
19. 2009: 58:50 Fränk Schleck 21.93 km/h
20. 1999: 58:51 Unai Osa 21.92 km/h
21. 2009: 58:53 Roman Kreuziger 21.91 km/h
22. 2002: 59:00 Lance Armstrong 21.86 km/h
23. 2013: 59:00 Chris Froome 21.86 km/h
24. 1994: 59:02 Richard Virenque 21.85 km/h
25. 1994: 59:02 Armand De Las Cuevas 21.85 km/h
26. 1994: 59:02 Luc Leblanc 21.85 km/h
27. 1994: 59:02 Miguel Indurain 21.85 km/h
28. 1994: 59:02 Roberto Conti 21.85 km/h
29. 2009: 59:03 Franco Pellizotti 21.85 km/h
30. 2000: 59:05 Marco Pantani 21.83 km/h
31. 2000: 59:05 Lance Armstrong 21.83 km/h
32. 2009: 59:05 Vincenzo Nibali 21.83 km/h
33. 1994: 59:07 Pascal Lino 21.82 km/h
34. 1999: 59:08 Tyler Hamilton 21.82 km/h
35. 1999: 59:08 Roberto Laiseka 21.82 km/h
36. 2009: 59:10 Bradley Wiggins 21.80 km/h
37. 2004: 59:12 Levi Leipheimer 21.79 km/h
38. 2004: 59:24 Michael Rasmussen 21.72 km/h
39. 2004: 59:27 Stéphane Goubert 21.70 km/h
40. 2013: 59:29 Nairo Quintana 21.69 km/h
41. 2000: 59:30 Joseba Beloki 21.68 km/h
42. 2000: 59:34 Jan Ullrich 21.66 km/h
43. 1999: 59:35 Txema Del Olmo 21.65 km/h
44. 1999: 59:43 Kurt van de Wouwer 21.60 km/h
45. 2007: 59:44 Christophe Moreau 21.60 km/h
46. 2009: 59:46 Jurgen Van Den Broeck 21.58 km/h
47. 2004: 59:47 Oscar Pereiro 21.58 km/h
48. 2006: 59:47 Denis Menchov 21.58 km/h
49. 2006: 59:47 Christophe Moreau 21.58 km/h
50. 2009: 59:49 Andreas Klöden 21.57 km/h

 

[touch]

Yep, you can really see the difference when a 6man team sky TTT doesnt even get close to some historical ITT times.

 

[GSVBagpuss]

Ventoux time as at 2013, some pretty conspicuous company...

Not at all surprising to me - he's 10% slower than the fastest which is loads at this level.

 

[Grimley]

Having watched the tour every year for 25 years now, the dopers have been found out & punished. With all the money that the Tour brings to the French economy every year, the last thing the organisers want is another Lance Armstrong.

 

[SDK^]

Team doctors are always making advances and pushing the food and medicine technology forward.
Froome is 3+mins away from the top time up Ventoux which is night and day.

Contrast Froome's build to Lance Armstrong - Armstrong was well built, doing weight gym work building muscle. Froome is super lean, he probably couldn't lift any weight in the gym but puts out 7+ watts per kg on the bike.

 

[tedmaul]

Surely the reliance on power meters also plays into this - if you know just how many watts to push then you will optimise performance better than doing it be old school feel.

And not just during the race - it's the difference power meters have made to training which can't be underestimated. It's still evolving and teams are constantly improving training methods based on a level of data and analysis that was unthinkable even 10 years ago. And the top teams are doing it with a high level of professionalism, focus and investment that hasn't really been seen before either.

I was talking to a few folk that have been doing amateur racing for 20+ years recently and they were saying the standard at that level has jumped massively in the last decade compared to what it was. And they feel a lot of that is down to advances in training and the level of information that informs that training that is now available on a moderate budget to most serious riders.

Again, as others have said, i don't think many would be naive enough to suggest there is no doping any more. But it would be equally naive to suggest that major advances in performance can't be achieved in plenty of other ways.

 

[One More Solo]

Shirley Froome almost certainly couldn't dope without Team Sky knowing about it? If that's the case, I think I trust Brailsford and thus trust Froome's clean.

Is this Brailsford that hired Geert Leinders and Sean Yates onto a team with a zero tolerance doping policy without doing any apparent due diligence on them?

Yep, you can really see the difference when a 6man team sky TTT doesnt even get close to some historical ITT times.

Froome rode at least the last 7km with no teammates so that doesn't tell the whole story.

The point Jonny69 makes is a good one. The bio passport means riders can microdose within the set parameters. If you can't increase your power any further to reach the magic ~6w/kg, then you have to reduce your weight. The recent CIRC report highlighted that some teams are using corticoids to assist with weight loss and we know Froome along with plenty of other riders have had TUEs for those recently.

Now, don't get me wrong, people with naturally skinny builds exist. You look at someone like Tejvan Pettinger who has dominated the hill climb scene in the UK and has a very ectomorphic build. He's competitive in TTs too but he's never going to challenge the very top guys over a flat course. It's not natural that guys like Froome can compete with the likes of Tony Martin AND be competitive in the mountains. I don't believe there is a natural way to drop that much weight without losing muscle mass and therefore hinder TT performance.

I always thought GTs were meant to be a trade off between limiting your losses in the mountains or the TTs, depending on your build. It gets a bit silly when the same riders are challenging for the wins in both.

 

[touch]

Froome rode at least the last 7km with no teammates so that doesn't tell the whole story.

That's less than a third of the climb he rode on his own then.
whilst most others on the leaderboard rode the entire climb alone.

 

[One More Solo]

Most of the others rode the entire climb alone but they did so without 220km of racing in their legs. It's obviously hard to put an estimate on how much time that might save, but it would certainly be significant.

On top of that, an evenly paced TT effort will always be faster than a stage race over the same climb as Froome simply wouldn't have gone full gas bottom to top.

FWIW, Froome climbed Ventoux nearly a minute and a half quicker than Armstrong (2002) and Contador (2009) did in stage races.

 

[touch]

On top of that, an evenly paced TT effort will always be faster than a stage race over the same climb as Froome simply wouldn't have gone full gas bottom to top.

There's no way a rider doing an individual TT should beat a 6 man team taking turns.
Froome didnt need to go full gas the whole way up because his team was doing that for him. He could save himself for his attack with 7k to go.

FWIW, Froome climbed Ventoux nearly a minute and a half quicker than Armstrong (2002) and Contador (2009) did in stage races.

Not according to the times Thomas posted.

 

[One More Solo]

Apologies, that was based on the times recorded over the final 15km of the climb. Source: http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=indepth.view&id=139

The TTT approach relies on Sky riding a high enough tempo to prevent other riders attacking early on the climb. I'd say that would require a lower intensity level at the end of a hard stage than during an ITT. It's misleading to suggest Sky were rolling turns all the way up the mountain anyway.

Plus, Sky hardly invented the mountain train. Armstrong would have been protected until as far up the climb as possible too.

 

[Calpol]

I think we should all watch the sport with a healthy degree of scepticism. The sport has always had a high degree of "cheating" to seek advantage. From people taking short cuts, sabotage of other riders, drugs and alcohol abuse. The nature of the stage races, which were progressively made more and more demanding through the ages meant that recovery was the focus of most riders and team principals. These athletes are at the limits of endurance sport - more recently most of them have sought to extend those limits beyond what is humanly possible without doping.

I actually don't buy that we are seeing significantly suspicious performances too often in the top levels of the sport. We also aren't seeing significant advances in technology causing times to tumble. Consider Paris Roubaix - Peter Post still holds the record for the fastest edition at and average speed of 45kmph set in 1964! It might have been a day with favourable conditions but Degenkolb was 43kmph this year and Boonen hasnt been any faster. So carbon frames, deep rims, skin suits and aero gear arent really making a massive impact on those races.

Where things are definitely progressing is concerning sport nutrition, training and strength in depth of the teams. The sport in the 70s and early 80s was totally dominated by a few riders. Merkxx, HInault, Moser and Anquetil won everything as all round riders. You just don't get that now.

Where it gets hard to believe is when Astana have like 6 men in the top 40 of a grand tour and they are drilling the race day after day almost without a blip. I don't have too many doubts about Froome. Chances are the top riders are tested so much that the 10% gains that epo and other blood doping methods gave are a thing of the past but I am convinced that some riders are microdosing. There will also be riders who are are still taking epo because WADA and the UCI can't have enough testers to erradicate the problem.

It probably best is some ways not to believe too much of what you see is real. Its a bit like WWE. You know its not real but its sports entertainment to be enjoyed. That said I am enjoying the tour and am looking forward to the rest of the race

THis site is quite interesting
http://sportsscientists.com/2014/07/the-2014-tour-performance-implications-a-reflection-on-the-origins/