Pantani
Comments
-
not wanting to join in with the Lance lovers/haters but this is a pretty dodgy photo looking back on them winners
........... :!:....................... :!:...................... :!:........................ :?:................................ :!:
0 -
That Bianchi kit looked fine on Jan and a team of Bianchi bikes, I find some enjoyment in remembering those Tours and in other ways they are empty.0
-
disgruntledgoat wrote:KKspeeder wrote:ShockedSoShocked wrote:disgruntledgoat wrote:le patron wrote:I can do a good realgains impression if I copy and paste from the cutting edge muscle forum.
Not that I'm necessarily saying all those facts and figures aren't accurate. They do get to the heart of the issue....what power output is being generated for how long by a rider weighing how much.
This is essentially what Lemond wanted and if measured against a baseline would go a long way to showing whether performances are unassisted or not.
Don't think we'll ever get those though.
Holy hell that forum is scary...
I know :shock: What chance have you got huh?
You guys, read the thread on how to beat a urine test. :P
Hint: It invoves getting a Catheter into your bladder; drain out that dirty urine and replace it with your friend's clean urine!
The UCI does not run DNA comparisons on the samples. Gotta love the good old UCI.
"IF you dont like the sport get the hell out."
-UCI president Hein Verbruggen in response to an Italian riders heart attack death
I'll be sure to bear that in mind should I ever have found myself needing to cheat a urine test to escape sanction after a 3rd cat race... Then i'll go home and shoot myself.
"Bro", there's a cat 4 on the forum using some Novedex XT and E too if I remember correctly... He's just moving his way up. He started with a FTP of only 240 (no sh$t) and now has MUCH higher. :P0 -
Your US cat 4 is the same level as our Cat 3 i think (one from the bottom?)
I would suggest that your Cat 4 needs to think about why he got into the sport in the first place, what attracted him to it? Was it the opportunity to scientifically log the effects of pharmaceuticals, or was it something else?
I'm not judging, just saying it's not for me."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
JC.152 wrote:not wanting to join in with the Lance lovers/haters but this is a pretty dodgy photo looking back on them winners
........... :!:....................... :!:...................... :!:........................ :?:................................ :!:
A small point. Why are there exclamation marks over Pantani and Ullrich but a question mark over Armstrong? Neither Pantani nor Ullrich were found positive and although it is widely accepted that they doped, there is a lot less evidence against them which is available in the public arena then there is in the case of Armstrong.
Pantani failed a UCI 50% haemocrit 'health check' and Ullrich, whist being linked to Fuentes and paying a substantial out of court settlement in order to put an end to a doping related fraud charge, continues to claim that he didn't dope.
On the other hand there is no question that Armstrong worked with Ferrari, the acknowledged 'king' of the doping doctors, Epo was found in his 1999 Tour samples, numerous ex teammates and team employees have revealed the doping practices within USP/ Discovery and so on. So in the interests of consistency why not place question marks over Ullrich and Pantani as well, or more realistically, put exclamation marks over all of them!0 -
Duplicate post!
(Please can't someone sort out the posting problems this forum keeps having? Twice I got a big delay, followed by the message 'HTPP gateway timed out. The address http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/posting.php, is currently unavailable'. Then both the posts appeared a few minutes later!).0 -
@ KKspeeder.
1. Despite being a high cycnic I reckon boardman was clean.
2. Do you reckon last year's winner should be on there?Dan0 -
aurelio wrote:
Pantani failed a UCI 50% haemocrit 'health check' and Ullrich, whist being linked to Fuentes and paying a substantial out of court settlement in order to put an end to a doping related fraud charge, continues to claim that he didn't dope.
On the other hand there is no question that Armstrong worked with Ferrari, the acknowledged 'king' of the doping doctors, Epo was found in his 1999 Tour samples, numerous ex teammates and team employees have revealed the doping practices within USP/ Discovery and so on. So in the interests of consistency why not place question marks over Ullrich and Pantani as well, or more realistically, put exclamation marks over all of them!
So a match of Ullrich's DNA to some of the blood bags from Puerto is less compelling evidence than a link to Dr Ferrari, an epo test on 6 year old sampels with no B test available and the testimony of ex-team-mates?
Oh no wait, Ullrich "continues to claim that he didn't dope." Well that's OK then.
Add this one to your collection of bookmarks
http://www.velonews.com/article/11987Le Blaireau (1)0 -
Oh jeebus... Normal service is resumed."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
I would say that the evidence is 'compelling' in both cases! My point was that, once again, it seems that different standards are being applied to Armstrong vs. everybody else.DaveyL wrote:So a match of Ullrich's DNA to some of the blood bags from Puerto is less compelling evidence than a link to Dr Ferrari, an epo test on 6 year old sampels with no B test available and the testimony of ex-team-mates?
What concrete evidence exists against Pantani?
I have little doubt that if Armstrong was a 'customer' of Fuentes rather than Ferrari, and one of those bags were his, his acolytes would be denying that a DNA-linked bag of blood was proof of anything. 'Could have been sent for testing'. 'Was going to be used for legitimate medical purposes', 'It's all part of a conspiracy on the part of the Spanish' and so on ad infinitum.0 -
-
aurelio wrote:I would say that the evidence is 'compelling' in both cases! My point was that, once again, it seems that different standards are being applied to Armstrong vs. everybody else.
What concrete evidence exists against Pantani?
I have little doubt that if Armstrong was a 'customer' of Fuentes rather than Ferrari, and one of those bags were his, his acolytes would be denying that a DNA-linked bag of blood was proof of anything. 'Could have been sent for testing'. 'Was going to be used for legitimate medical purposes', 'It's all part of a conspiracy on the part of the Spanish' and so on ad infinitum.
Absolutely the evidence is compelling in both cases, though not sure how that squares with "there is a lot less evidence against them which is available in the public arena then there is in the case of Armstrong. "
You are right though, it does seem that different standards are being applied to Armstrong vs everybody else...Le Blaireau (1)0 -
Just one piece of evidence can be compelling. As can half a dozen!DaveyL wrote:Absolutely the evidence is compelling in both cases, though not sure how that squares with "there is a lot less evidence against them which is available in the public arena then there is in the case of Armstrong. "0 -
So does it matter if there is "a lot less" evidence against Pantani and Ullrich?Le Blaireau (1)0
-
I think there is just as much evidence available against Ullrich. On top of the Puerto DNA, for every US Postal rider who left and got busted, you have a Telekom/T-Mobile rider who did likewise. You have serious evidence of an institututionalised doping programme at Telekom including the doctors at Freiburg, and confessions of Riis, Zabel and Aldag.Le Blaireau (1)0
-
Ok, so we have Armstrong and Ullrich 'bang to rights'.DaveyL wrote:I think there is just as much evidence available against Ullrich. On top of the Puerto DNA, for every US Postal rider who left and got busted, you have a Telekom/T-Mobile rider who did likewise. You have serious evidence of an institututionalised doping programme at Telekom including the doctors at Freiburg, and confessions of Riis, Zabel and Aldag.
How about Pantani who, after all, is the subject of this thread? 0 -
Well, I guess plenty has already been written on this thread about the evidence against him. I'd imagine that, due to him being a bit less, shall we say, in your face than Armstrong, and the very sad and tragic end he met, there aren't really many of those who would be "in the know" who feel like coming out in public and sticking the knife in.Le Blaireau (1)0
-
flattythehurdler wrote:@ KKspeeder.
1. Despite being a high cycnic I reckon boardman was clean.
2. Do you reckon last year's winner should be on there?
I dont believe its humanly possible to do better than about 5.7 w/kg for 1-hour strait totally clean. Genetic freaks like Hinault, LeMond, Fingon all had this and yes LeMond could beat these guys (competitive in races against Hinault at 18 years old!!). LeMond used corticoids at some point to treat injuries through anti- inflammitory... So maybe he had a bit of a boost sure; not totally clean... LeMond has about 5.8 w/kg and he was able to do about 390 watts for 1-hour strait at 67 kg. He won the Tour de France 3 times with this, he won 2 elite mens world championships with this. Not including the U23 worlds win in 1979...
Boardman's 1-hour was done at about 440 and the dude weighed about 69. If I remember correctly, its not even possible to do over 420 watts for an hour on anyone at any weight.
I race cat 1 guys that can hold close to 400 for 20 minutes or so and 350-360 for an hour at 150 pounds or so.... Let me put it this way, LeMond would not lap the senior 1-2 field solo as a 16 year old junior like he did in the 1970s.
I dont want to sound like a Jerk or a complete a**hole but I dont really think it was possible to finish the Tour de France totally clean 1992-2007. Maybe 2008 it was possible because not many dudes came in blood doping to a super high crit.
Not many dudes know how much a difference it actually makes over 3 weeks. It makes a big diff..... A field full of guys with "some talent" that are jacked with a high crit will destroy a genetic cycling freak who is clean. About 6 stages.... You can make about halfway through maybe... But if 50 guys come in with their crits at 55+ you cant do it because the pace will be so high... Eventually your body will just sh*t out and you will crash into a barrier at the side of the road because your anemic; like Bassons did. LeMond climbed off:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLiusWwYXIo
THis is a good one:
http://fora.tv/2008/02/17/Ethics_Doping ... chapter_12
Now.... Simeoni was not just spit on by USPO on stage 18 in 2004... The whole field that came in contact with him did. He had spit running off of him but it was in his hair too; so yes... It did get through his helmet vents...0 -
Bassons left the race because he was bullied out of it. Many riders have done the race clean in recent years, it can be done, only they couldn't expect results, having to resort to early attacks and hoping to outwit the sprinters once or twice to get a stage wins, their odds of even a stage win have been tiny.0
-
Doesn't the 440 W figure then estimate Boardman's CdA at about 0.3? That would be pretty high. That's using a W/CxA of 1450 Wm-2 as quoted for Merckx (and by comparison of hour times, Boardman) here:
http://www.biketechreview.com/performan ... t_doit.htm
How have you arrived at 440 W and do you have any comment on Boardman's CdA for his Hour attempt?Le Blaireau (1)0 -
I take that back on LeMond, his logo is still up on there.0
-
Kléber wrote:Bassons left the race because he was bullied out of it. Many riders have done the race clean in recent years, it can be done, only they couldn't expect results, having to resort to early attacks and hoping to outwit the sprinters once or twice to get a stage wins, their odds of even a stage win have been tiny.
Again "bro", I respect your opinion but I dont share it. I dont think anyone finishes if more than 20 or so come in blood doping with a super-high crit.
Sure, there HAVE been guys that went in with low crits. Did they finish it? I dont believe its possible if more than 20 dudes have over 6 w/kg but I do RESPECT your opinion. I have trouble believing in miracles but I do respect everybody's opinion and I do care what others have to say!
I still think Boardman was a great rider. Much like Levi here in the USA.0 -
DaveyL wrote:Doesn't the 440 W figure then estimate Boardman's CdA at about 0.3? That would be pretty high. That's using a W/CxA of 1450 Wm-2 as quoted for Merckx (and by comparison of hour times, Boardman) here:
http://www.biketechreview.com/performan ... t_doit.htm
How have you arrived at 440 W and do you have any comment on Boardman's CdA for his Hour attempt?
IIRC, Michael Hutchinson worked out that he'd need a Wattage somewhere in the mid to high 300s to attack Boardmans "Athletes Hour" record, based on SRM measurements in testing.'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'0 -
I have been looking at some of the figures in various research papers on this topic, and was having much the same thoughts as you.DaveyL wrote:Doesn't the 440 W figure then estimate Boardman's CdA at about 0.3? That would be pretty high. That's using a W/CxA of 1450 Wm-2 as quoted for Merckx (and by comparison of hour times, Boardman) here:
http://www.biketechreview.com/performan ... t_doit.htm
How have you arrived at 440 W and do you have any comment on Boardman's CdA for his Hour attempt?
Most of the papers give Boardman an output of around 440w, just as KK says. However this seems to be theoretical figure based on models that make quite a number of assumptions about the aerodynamic drag and so on.
We know from the huge difference between Boardman's 'ultimate' hour and his 'athletes' hour just how much difference aerodynamics can make. I also recall reading that many hours of testing went into designing Boardman’s equipment for the 'athletes' hour in order to make the most of the power he had available. For example, they found significant differences in drag between different handlebars, even though they all followed the basic 'drop bar' model as specified by the UCI. Similar gains were found with Boardman’s helmet and so on. In the end the bike Boardman used had a much lower drag than the one they started out with that was supposedly the same as that used by Merckx. Plus there was a lot of work done on Boardman's position, clothing, helmet and other equipment.
Taking all these together is it not possible that Boardman’s performance was within that allowed by the 'laws' of physiology?
By the way, the figures also show that the UCI were probably right when they said that Obree's position made such a difference that he would not beat 47 km on a 'standard' bike, although as Boardman and Keen found not all 'standard' bikes are equal.
The figures given for Indurain's hour are also 'interesting' at around 510W! At 76 kg this gives a 'theoretical' output of 6.7 w/kg!
It seems that in the end the purest measure of one's true power output is how fast one can climb!0 -
With the right aerodynamics the upper 300W range sounds about right to me as well.LangerDan wrote:IIRC, Michael Hutchinson worked out that he'd need a Wattage somewhere in the mid to high 300s to attack Boardmans "Athletes Hour" record, based on SRM measurements in testing.
When I was racing regularly I could do a '10' on a quiet evening on a standard road bike fitted with Tri-Bars in under 21 minutes, or at an average of 29 Mph, and I am pretty sure I have never sustained more than 320W in my life! Given that a 50km hour requires 31.25 Mph, 440 w for 49.4 km does seem rather high!0 -
DaveyL wrote:Doesn't the 440 W figure then estimate Boardman's CdA at about 0.3? That would be pretty high. That's using a W/CxA of 1450 Wm-2 as quoted for Merckx (and by comparison of hour times, Boardman) here:
http://www.biketechreview.com/performan ... t_doit.htm
How have you arrived at 440 W and do you have any comment on Boardman's CdA for his Hour attempt?
Chris Boardman's coach Peter Keen said he could average 442 and they used an SRM. Chris was very much obsessed with training and they know where he stood....
http://books.google.com/books?id=msdT4i ... &ct=result0 -
KKSpeeder, so are you saying riders like David Moncoutié and Sandy Casar are doping? Even Vaughters and Andreu, in their early morning IM conversation said Moreau, off Festina, was clean: "Cyclevaughters: believe me, as carzy as it sounds - Moreau was on nothing. Hct of 39%"0
