Gustav Larsson's huge inexplicable power increase

13»

Comments

  • fastcat
    fastcat Posts: 23
    You miss my point Chris

    He's entitled to bitterness over competing against dopers. I also sympathise.

    But he's wrong if he thinks that the only reason he ever got beaten is becasue everyone faster than him is doped; or that anyone with a sustainable power higher than the 390watts he quotes for Lemond is doped.
  • chrisw12
    chrisw12 Posts: 1,246
    fair point.

    I just feel really sorry for these guys who race, stay clean, complain about the drugs then get called things. Paul Kimmage being an example (although he doped as well.)

    KK, keep on asking these questions. You may not be right (and you may to others come across as bitter) but at least you're asking the questions.
  • KKspeeder
    KKspeeder Posts: 111
    fastcat wrote:
    I thought so.

    But you didn't answer my question directly.

    I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are honest and not a doper (but correct me if I'm wrong), but you do come across as bitter. I guess, with the talent you must undoubtedly have to race 1st cat, if you feel you've been racing and losing out to people who are dopers, then perhaps I can understand the bitterness that comes across in your postings.

    And, you may be right, maybe you have raced and lost out to dopers, but at the end of the day, you also need to get over it and learn to accept that, despite your talent, there are people more genetically gifted than you. Just because you got beaten, it doesn't mean they are all dopers. It doesn't mean they trained harder or smarter than you either, though they may have done. They are just, in the Darwinist sense of the word, 'fitter' (for the purpose of bike racing) than you.

    Its less a personal issue and more of an issue in general Fastcat. I want to see cycling on an even field. NOt many people are trying to help, its really a vague and unknown issue not understood well by most and understood by very few people.

    But... I do race against some guys that are doping and it pisses me off that they mock to ant-doping movement.

    I dont think I'm wrong---I just come off as brutaly honest. There's no reason all those U-23 riders would be moving to "LiveStrong" unless they were looking to score effective doping in the future.

    I believe perhaps a large chunk of US Pros are clean and most cat 1s or 2s.

    The 390 watt FTP at 150 pounds is a level that will win you PRO races in the US and give you solid career racing. You can even win some smaller stuff in Europe no doubt if you had good AWC power. But keep in mind, this is FREAK level power and even the ProTour riders at this level, are doping to be there.

    Natural talent can overcome 95% of doping. Thats the sad part, all they need is to get rid of blood doping and it would be possible to win the Tour de France clean.
  • fastcat
    fastcat Posts: 23
    KKspeeder wrote:
    I want to see cycling on an even field.
    KKspeeder wrote:
    Thats the sad part, all they need is to get rid of blood doping and it would be possible to win the Tour de France clean.

    Fully agree with these sentiments. I guess I'm a little more optimistic than you about the overall level of doping still going on in the pro-tour, but it's also fair to say this could be wishful thinking on my part. But whether it's still rife or just sporadic, like you, I'd like to it eradicated.

    Ken
  • don key
    don key Posts: 494
    KK worry not , if as I read between the vines, your grapes are not bitter but revealing a remarkably sweet vintage, to be opened one day, when? no knows no one, then all will be well and the wining will cease.
  • Homer J
    Homer J Posts: 920
    There's some real techie stuff here that soars way above my head but if you are into that type of data, this guy compared his to Jens Voigt, it's quite a good read

    http://www.flammerouge.je/content/3_fac ... wer082.htm

Categories