Pantani
Comments
-
But even the most 'jacked up' riders tend to save their energy for the final climbs and TT's, and the average Tour speed is not insanely higher than it was in the past. True it is faster, but perhaps that is partly a reflection of the big fields these days. Back in 70's a field of 130 starters with less than 100 finishers was the norm.KKspeeder wrote: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
So, in order to survive a clean rider need not try to match the Armstrong’s of the world. Instead they need to ride tempo and limit their losses until the 'big guns' launch their assaults on the last climb. The also-rans then have until the time-limit cuts in to make it to the line, and from what I have seen they often have an extra 20 minutes or more over the 'big guns' to make it up the final climb to the finish. In short they can get around without producing the big wattages needed to get high in the GC, as long as they have plenty of endurance.
As Ferrari himself has noted, this 'model' of racing also accounts for the change in the type of rider who wins the Tour these days. In the past the winner was the rider with the greatest endurance. Today it is the rider who can put out the greatest power during those all-important TT's and summit finishes. Meanwhile, the clean riders are getting around largely on old-fashioned endurance and suffering!
In the last few years we have seen how the dominance of certain teams greatly conditioned the name of the final winner in the most important stage races.
The strength of such teams has been so dominant that it's been rather easy for them to control and determine the sequence of events during the most crucial stages, imposing such a high pace as to discourage and "clip the wings off" those riders fighting for the general classification and brave enough to attack early in the race.
All of this with the goal of preparing the ground for the attack of their captain/s just a few km from the finish.
We have indeed witnessed the extolling and triumph of aerobic POWER over ENDURANCE.
http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=article&id=730 -
But that book says Keen "estimated" Boardman's Hour as 442 W. At those speeds, a tiny change in aerodynamics makes a hug difference in Watts. I would really like to see what data they had on his CdA (he was renowned for having a pretty good aero position I believe) before making a call on what Wattge he might have done, in the absence of SRM data to confirm.
Aurelio, I am not sure Indurain was as low as 76 kg, but 510 W is extra-terrestrial no matter what your weight.Le Blaireau (1)0 -
Kléber wrote: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%"
It depends on how many dudes are coming into the Tour jacked with a high crit. Certainly it was not possible in 1994 to finish. Its not just the Big Men, its their whole teams totally jacked setting a super high pace in the mountains, and attacking like crazies on the flat stages too. Just constant. LeMond would get dropped on the little climbs too.
Vaughters and Andreu were totally full of sh$t in that IM bro.
The truth is brutal.
Garmin is lying.
Again, I respect people's wishes and thoughts. But I have my convictions and I know for a fact Boardman was doing 442 for an hour on the SRM Powermeter on his cranks before he attempted the record. He was training with the thing and Keen knew what the dude could do, he was Boardman's f-ing trainer! And they were using the SRM powermeter. If I am doping FTP intervals at 390 right now, I'm not going to suddenly claim I can do 442. This has to be considered.....
because there's no way Keen would lie about something like that. Why?
Lance armstrong could hold over 495 watts for 35 minutes and 460 for an hour at sea level after a blood refill. Lance cannot break the record or VERY close to barely being able to do it, mainly because he does not have enough gas and his back is F-d up from running head on into a car in the mountains some years ago. He cant get down into the position and his barrel chest doesnt help either.0 -
Only saying the words of the book are that Keen "estimated" Boardman at 442 W. If they had measured it with an SRM why say "estimate"? OK, it could just be a slip by the authors. Still, I'd like to see what there is out there on Boardman's CdA. At least that would help us see whether it ties in with 440 W.
I'd say Boardman had a much better position than Armstrong, probably Zabriskie is the closest in the current peloton.Le Blaireau (1)0 -
Zabriskie is an absolute billiards dart he starves himself down to 150 pounds at 6 feet 0!0
-
Bloody hell!Le Blaireau (1)0
-
I've got Boardman's out of print Complete Book Of Cycling, and there's a swathe of ramp test results in the back. I've no idea which figures are relevant, but here's threshold power if that's any use ?
25/07/89 (Age 20) - 375 Watts
13/08/90 (Age 21) - 360 Watts
19/04/91 (Age 22) - 395 Watts
16/04/92 (Age 23) - 410 Watts
13/05/92 (Age 23) - 412 Watts
Keen reckoned he needed to hold 430 watts for his first hour record0 -
Ste_S wrote:I've got Boardman's out of print Complete Book Of Cycling, and there's a swathe of ramp test results in the back. I've no idea which figures are relevant, but here's threshold power if that's any use ?
25/07/89 (Age 20) - 375 Watts
13/08/90 (Age 21) - 360 Watts
19/04/91 (Age 22) - 395 Watts
16/04/92 (Age 23) - 410 Watts
13/05/92 (Age 23) - 412 Watts
Keen reckoned he needed to hold 430 watts for his first hour record
Now way he could do 375 watts at 20 unless jacked on EPO and O2 carriers in 1989! Not in 1989, NO WAY. LeMond used the the first generation SRM in 1990 and he could hold 390 at 152 pounds (Boardman's weight.) Greg LeMond and his Grand Tour competitors were genetically superior freaks that did not yet have EPO to dope with. These were the best of the best and there is no way without bloody heck Boardman would get close to LeMond's 5.8 w/kg FTP at 20 years old (without blood doping.)
After jacking EPO for 12 weeks maybe Boardman got a true 400 watts FTP at 23 yeas old. But... You have to throw in the HGH and IGF-1 and Testosterone in there to get maximum gains.. This totally changes the ballgame and FTP intervals can be done almost all the time.... Boardman was probably 370 range pre-doping and post he could top out at 442......
And the Pot Belge too. The hour record holder Andrea Sosenka tested positive for methamphetamine at his TT nationals too....
There was NO WAY boardman would have had 395 at 20 years old because he would have been top 10 in the Tour de France and been World TT champ every year! Do you know how many watts that is at 150 pounds dudes?
Ricco has about 360 watts before he tested positive last year, Evans had 390 or so, Sastre 360 or so and they were all blood doping with their deep frozen red cells. The Cera animal EPO was to keep their rectics up so they wouldnt test positive for blood refilling!
A true 6 watts per kilo at FTP is Unreal. I doubt ANYBODY in the world right now has a true FTP/kilo of 6.0+ except for maybe Leipheimer with his 385 at 62 kilos.... and Zabriskie, and maybe Rogers are all up there but... all 3 and a good 10 others are "topping off" in their motorhomes before hand.0 -
If you say Floyd is as bad as Lance, then, really, Basso, Ulrich, Riise and the whole crew are as bad.0
-
3SpeedsRtheonlyBike wrote:If you say Floyd is as bad as Lance, then, really, Basso, Ulrich, Riise and the whole crew are as bad.
Floyd was not as heavily doped as Lance but close.... Floyd had an un-doped VO2 max of 90 when he was a teenager. How do I know Lance was MUCH more heavily doped than Landis? Becaus THE HIGHEST Lance ever got in a VO2 max test was an 81.2. VO2 max (the maximum amount of oxygen your body can assimilate per kilogram of bodyweight per minute) IS the number 1 predictor of potential grand Tour performace. Floyd has a 90 un-doped, Lance NEVER got higher than 80 but once or twice. 70s EVERY other time. You know somebody is a super-responder to doping and is doping HEAVILY with Ferrari when they only have an un-doped VO2 max at low level domestic Pro or cat 1 level and they are WINNING THE TOUR DE FRANCE.
Lance would never crack 5.2 w/kg at FTP TOTALLY clean with no doping.... How do you know this? Because his VO2 max power AT BEST would be 450 watts. That does NOT give you much ceiling to develop sustainable power for a heavily doped Grand Tour. If everybody was totally clean and there was no drugs in racing, Lance would not crack the top 50 in a Grand Tour, or top 20 in a one day classic. Its that bad. This is why Christophe Bassons and several others wanted to sit down in the middle of the highway in 1999 and protest drugs. They saw this guy and his un-doped VO2 max and it made them sick to their stomachs.
Now... No doubt Floyd doped with his own blood during his postal years and of course with Phonak... But he had more talent than Lance at JUST the bike. But he didnt 'respond' as well to having extra oxygen....
And... Floyd Landis NEVER got to work with Michele Ferrari, the doping gurus of the gurus of the European Pro Cycling doping community! NOT many riders do. It was a fluke Lance was hooked up with Ferrari by Eddie Merckx in the fall of 1995 and they have been buddies ever since.... No many dudes get to see Ferrari, even super talents like Landis. And.... Lance Armstrong and Johan Burneel---They did not like Floyd riding so fast in 2004 on Alp D'Huez for the TT. They thought he should save his energy to work for Lance later in the Tour... So, according to the crazy IM conversation above, which is partially accurate no doubt... They dumped his 800cc blood refill down the toilet in front of him as punishment.
Lance has screwed over a lot of people over time no doubt... There is a lot of bad stories about him out there and a lot of them revolve around him being an asshole on charity rides of all things, and charging appearance fees for them too.0 -
Not quite. Riis should be given a lot of credit for coming clean about his doping.3SpeedsRtheonlyBike wrote:If you say Floyd is as bad as Lance, then, really, Basso, Ulrich, Riise and the whole crew are as bad.
Also Basso and Ullrich, unlike Landis, haven't done their best to undermine the whole system of dope testing and create a situation where a rider can fail multiple positive tests using definitive and sophisticated testing methods and still have the front to claim that they were clean!0 -
Two weeks before Landis' arbitration hearing at Pepperdine University in May, a retired cyclist named Matt DeCanio issued a news release that, without a PR firm handling the distribution, largely escaped public view.KKspeeder wrote:Floyd was not as heavily doped as Lance but close....
DeCanio admits to using banned substances during the 2003 U.S. racing season and, he says, “came clean with the world in 2004 after being disillusioned with the pressures, state, and reality of pro cycling.” He now operates a Web site that serves as a clearinghouse for anti-doping information as it relates to cycling and, in some instances, can be highly graphic.
In the May 1 news release, DeCanio recounts his career and when, how and why he began using banned substances. He says he bought endurance-boosting erythropoietin (EPO) and muscle-building human growth hormone (HGH) for $300 from teammate and “former best friend” David Clinger, who he says had acquired them from an unidentified physician in Los Angeles. Then DeCanio says this:
“Clinger told me that while he was racing in 2002 on the United States Postal Service Pro Cycling Team he used HGH, testosterone and EPO along with Floyd Landis. David told me, and I quote, 'Landis used more HGH than anyone he had ever witnessed before. He would use entire vials of HGH and he is crazy.' ”
http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/20 ... andis.html0 -
I thought this was a Pantani thread, turns out its another doping debate, just what was needed!0
-
I recall Boardman discussing this very point a few years ago, and he said that whilst on paper he could produce the power needed to get in the top 10 in the Tour, he was never going to do this as he was limited by other factors, most notably a low natural testosterone level that mean he slowly fell to pieces in a long stage race.KKspeeder wrote:There was NO WAY boardman would have had 395 at 20 years old because he would have been top 10 in the Tour de France and been World TT champ every year!
A case of 'horses for courses' perhaps, rather than evidence of doping.
Could it not be that another reason Boardman was not world TT champion every year was that he was up against riders who had 'jacked up' their power levels way beyond his 395w threshold level?0 -
aurelio wrote:
I recall Boardman discussing this very point a few years ago, and he said that whilst on paper he could produce the power needed to get in the top 10 in the Tour, he was never going to do this as he was limited by other factors, most notably a low natural testosterone level that mean he slowly fell to pieces in a long stage race.KKspeeder wrote:There was NO WAY boardman would have had 395 at 20 years old because he would have been top 10 in the Tour de France and been World TT champ every year!
A case of 'horses for courses' perhaps, rather than evidence of doping.
Could it not be that another reason Boardman was not world TT champion every year was that he was up against riders who had 'jacked up' their power levels way beyond his 395w threshold level?
Now I know why LeMond dropped the pressure off Lance, the UCI & and left after InterBike:
LOOK AT THIS is all I have to say:
http://www.velonews.com/article/88344/g ... he-solvang
"This new SRM data file also made us aware that we need to update his functional threshold power (FTP) value from the original setting of 415w. Gustav’s FTP is now set at 470 watts"
Can you imagine what Levi's FTP/kilo is if this dude at 80 kg is doing 6w/kg. OMG, I was wrong. The level right now will be what it was in 2005-2007 this year.... Nothing has changed at all. Maybe its even gotten faster. Levi needs atleast 420 watts to stay even with that guy on the flats! 6.8 watts/kilo for Levi over 30 minutes....0 -
Leipheimer does benefit from a uniquely aero position but beating someone who's doing 6W/Kg is saying something.0
-
Holy smoke that is remarkable! 6w/kg+ at 80kg for 30mins!!!!!!!!!!!! :shock:
This whole topic should really be taken to the training forum.0 -
Somebody who is a freak will not put on 70 watts in 2 months.... let along 5 days....
The media freds and Homers of this world are looking at this and they do not understand what they are looking at! You are looking at a blood refill. His FTP on Monday was 415 watts. Then on Friday it is 470.
Guys, he averaged 529 in the Prologue TT over 4 minutes 30 seconds.
Then yesterday, after 20 minutes of TTing he pushed 542 up the climb and kept 480 up on the whole way back down averaging 486 for 30 minutes.
You are viewing the effects of autologous blood doping. Anybody who is riding clean in this race is below 40th place, and they are suffering unimaginable amounts of trauma.0 -
I fully agree. And this also means that the true 'heros' of the sport are no longer those who are getting on the podium. As Bradley Wiggins put it:KKspeeder wrote:You are viewing the effects of autologous blood doping. Anybody who is riding clean in this race is below 40th place, and they are suffering unimaginable amounts of trauma.
Vinokourov - hopefully we'll never see him back in the sport which is encouraging for me really. These guys are looked upon as heroes to some young guys - but for me they're not the heroes of the Tour de France - they never were for me. I spent a lot of time in the group finishing an hour down most days and that's where the heroes are for me. Guys like Geriant Thomas, 21 years old - for the last two weeks I've watched him drag himself through the Alps and the Pyrenees on nothing but bread and water - for me - they are the real heroes of the Tour de France - not the guys on the million Euro contracts who are being done for blood transfusions and things like that.
http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/web/si ... script.asp
"For me the true heroes are guys like Sylvain Chavanel and Thor Hushovd who are dragging their arses through the mountains, hanging on, getting dropped, and doing it clean."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_s ... 917199.stm0 -
And as to why all this matters:
Drugs have stolen the soul of cycling. Like a cancer, they've eaten it up from the inside. They're the one cancer Armstrong thinks no one should talk about. They have transformed riders and they have transformed the Tour. The French philosopher Robert Redeker best sums up the situation the sport finds itself in today: "The athletic type represented by Lance Armstrong - unlike Fausto Coppi or Jean Robic - is coming closer to Lara Croft, the virtually fabricated cyber-heroine." According to Redeker, "Cycling is becoming a video game; the onetime 'prisoners of the road' have become virtual human beings."
The riders may have freed themselves from being prisoners of the road, but today they are - to borrow the title of the Philip Gaumont's doping memoir - prisonniers du dopage. In their quest to find the perfect pharm-aceutical solution to the inhumanity of the Tour de France, they have transformed themselves into something not entirely human. According to Redeker, "A huge gulf now exists between the race and the racers, who have become virtual figures, transformed into PlayStation characters while the public, the ones at the folding tables and the tents, drinking pastis and fresh rosé du pays, are still real. The type of man once promoted by the race, the people's man, born of hard toil, hardened to suffering and adept at surpassing himself, has been substituted by Robocop on wheels, someone no fan can relate to or identify with."
http://instantpunditry.blogspirit.com/archive/2005/070 -
I don't criticise classic riders, but part of the problem is where do you draw the line for having "extra wings"? Here they say we don't want robocop on wheels but whatever the sport was 20 or 40 years ago, it might be the reaction, we don't want chemicals or we don't want to see a speed freak or a dope fiend riding. It's not the time to point fingers but there have been sport figures who have been suspended or banned for the use of ephedrine.
Different times and different values.
I hate thinking too, that maybe 20, 30 years from now, maybe we'll have tell all books! :shock:0 -
This isn't the case. The Velonews writer estimates his FTP was 415W but that's just been a guess. So talk of adding 70W in 5 days just is an incorrect assumption. He averaged 529W for the prologue and then 486W for the time trial, which seems about right given the distance and his build. So be careful where you get your numbers from...KKspeeder wrote:Somebody who is a freak will not put on 70 watts in 2 months.... let along 5 days....0 -
Kléber wrote:
This isn't the case. The Velonews writer estimates his FTP was 415W but that's just been a guess. So talk of adding 70W in 5 days just is an incorrect assumption. He averaged 529W for the prologue and then 486W for the time trial, which seems about right given the distance and his build. So be careful where you get your numbers from...KKspeeder wrote:Somebody who is a freak will not put on 70 watts in 2 months.... let along 5 days....
Bro, have you ever ridden on a stationary bike with a power meter, or ANY bike with a powermeter?
He did 529 watts for 4.75 minutes.
Then he did 486 watts for 38 minutes!
Thats a bif difference!! You can basically hold 130% of FTP for 4.5 minutes!
I can hold 115% of FTP for almost 8 minutes! Thats twice the prologue was....0 -
Kléber wrote:
This isn't the case. The Velonews writer estimates his FTP was 415W but that's just been a guess. So talk of adding 70W in 5 days just is an incorrect assumption. He averaged 529W for the prologue and then 486W for the time trial, which seems about right given the distance and his build. So be careful where you get your numbers from...KKspeeder wrote:Somebody who is a freak will not put on 70 watts in 2 months.... let along 5 days....
Bro, have you ever ridden on a stationary bike with a power meter, or ANY bike with a powermeter?
He did 529 watts for 4.75 minutes.
Then he did 486 watts for 38 minutes!
Thats a bif difference!! You can basically hold 130% of FTP for 4.5 minutes!
I can hold 115% of FTP for almost 8 minutes! Thats twice the prologue was....0 -
Kléber wrote:
This isn't the case. The Velonews writer estimates his FTP was 415W but that's just been a guess. So talk of adding 70W in 5 days just is an incorrect assumption. He averaged 529W for the prologue and then 486W for the time trial, which seems about right given the distance and his build. So be careful where you get your numbers from...KKspeeder wrote:Somebody who is a freak will not put on 70 watts in 2 months.... let along 5 days....
Bro, have you ever ridden on a stationary bike with a power meter, or ANY bike with a powermeter?
He did 529 watts for 4.75 minutes.
Then he did 486 watts for 38 minutes!
Thats a bif difference!! You can basically hold 130% of FTP for 4.5 minutes!
I can hold 115% of FTP for almost 8 minutes! Thats twice the prologue was....0 -
I had the SRM back in the 1990s. I'm not saying you're totally wrong, just that if you want to make big accusations, like autologous blood doping, it would be better if you stand on safer ground. The 415W FTP figure just wasn't real, we don't know for sure what the FTP is. You need to see a lot more, like heart rate and other parameters before being more certain.0
