How can there be clean riders in the top 20, 30 places?

Easy Natural Tallent..

S

If we look at a couple estimates of the ability of a TdF level pro rider,
from 'without some 'help' most riders would have to quit after stage 10' to
'you can't ameliorate a donkey', it still leaves one with the unsettling
thought that oxygen enhancing compounds can improve ability by up to
20-30%.

This means to me that anyone who is riding and finishing in the top 30
riders (a cutoff picked by a one hour gap in the final GC), who -is- clean
has phenomenal ability...no, super-phenomenal ability!

One might speculate that if any one of the top 10 riders is riding clean,
then that person just defies all known physiological parameters, except
maybe for Lance.

If, indeed, Lance is as exceptional as they say he is (larger heart, larger
aorta, lower lactate, high pain threshold, incredible attention to detail,
all the best equipment, etc.) then I could believe that with an exceptional
team, he could have ridden the last 6 tours clean, and even beaten the
dopers. It would still be hard to fathom him beating a very good top-30 pro
rider who dopes by several minutes. But it's not impossible to believe.

The margins of victory for all seven tours haven't been that big, one
minute to about six minutes. But as you go down below the top 30 riders you
get to the point where the gap is one hour in the final overall
classification.

I could believe that anyone with an overall gap in the final GC of one hour
was riding clean, but not easily believe it, because as a cumulative gap
over 20 stages, that is still amazing.

Even when you get down to 100th place - still not too shabby in a pro GC
event - the gap is only 2:53 (173 minutes). That's an average of 8:30
behind on each of 20 stages. Eight minutes out of a 4-6 hour ride is a 2-3
percentage difference if my math isn't fault. A far cry from 10, to 20, to
30% that EPO may give.

So the question remains, how can you have clean riders above the top 30?

If there are, then they are -really- being cheated, because those clean
riders could literally ride away from the group everyday on every stage if
no one doped; if that 10-20-30% advantage was removed.

Having said that - the belief that in a totally clean peloton Lance and DSC
would still win has merit (though by a final time of 2-3 hours longer.)

-jet

wrote:
Easy Natural Tallent..

S

Let's see you do it, smartass.

(2006 stage win? 2007 top 20?)

On 25 Aug 2005 13:31:03 -0700, wrote:

Easy Natural Tallent..

S

Haha, wiseass answers from a pro are acceptable. Worthy we not, are. ;-)

-jet

"Jet" wrote in message
...
On 25 Aug 2005 13:31:03 -0700, wrote:

Easy Natural Tallent..

S

Haha, wiseass answers from a pro are acceptable. Worthy we not, are. ;-)

Especially one who just showed very high natural talent.

In article .com,
wrote:

Easy Natural Tallent..

S


Hey, nice ride in Germany last week.

--
tanx,
Howard

Butter is love.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Jet wrote:
If we look at a couple estimates of the ability of a TdF level pro rider,
from 'without some 'help' most riders would have to quit after stage 10' to
'you can't ameliorate a donkey', it still leaves one with the unsettling
thought that oxygen enhancing compounds can improve ability by up to
20-30%.

Where did you come up with the 20-30% number? The Brian Lafferty
Book of Facts?

The original phrase JF Bernard was alluding with his donkey comment
is "[Drugs] can't turn a donkey into a racehorse." The effect of
realistic drug programs (i.e. not 60%; ones that don't get you
caught) is probably less than 10% on HCT (for example) and on
performance. The difference between top riders is much less than
10%, so drugs can still have a big effect. But you can't jump from
that to "the top 20 must be dirty." They might be, but we don't know.

ok, a rider in the top 30 is making at least 200k + a year,
he is looking at a 8-16 year career and needs to make enough
money to last the rest of his life, support a family, etc.
Somewhere along the line, probably at 19 or
20, when he was on a serious amatuer team, doing amatuer
worlds, and considering his future, he faced the
decision: do drugs or not do drugs.
but yes, if some crazy talented dude came along
and got a career on talent alone, he could become
the next merckx if he used dope.
Having said that, the most talented riders aren't
gonna "waste" their talent by finishing 123rd
because they are clean and racing with a crit of
42 (or with thin unpacked blood or without oxygen vector
drugs or whatever you want to call it)
Talented riders = Doped riders.
the team directors, doctors, sponsors, and
the free market economy make it so.
I don't think dope can give you even %5 at
the pro level. The top riders are stars because
they are genetic mutants with insane recovery,
not because of dope.
%5 is huge at the pro level.