Tour de France 2006

[atawa]

Kewl, would have loved to see Merckx in action.

[pg]

Originally posted by Mercator
There isn't any type of doping that can have that much of an influence in that short of a time-span, and certainly not doping causing higher levels of testosterone.

And how come he only tested positive that one day? That would make it seem like he had a testosterone shot or something that day, which would actually do nothing to improve his riding that day. And that while he attacked and was sure to be tested.

That doesn't make any sense to me, unless it has natural causes, or someone else administered it without Floyd's knowledge.

It does seem strange. Maybe some more details will emerge eventually...

[pchang]

Stage Winners are automatically tested. The yellow jersey holder is also automatically tested. Others are randomly tested. They should have tests from Landis 2 days before and from 2 days after. I don't think the levels could change radically over such a short time period without a complete transfusion.

[Mercator]

Originally posted by atawa
Having seen both stages on live tv I was wondering how on earth this guy could ride so much faster then anyone else after such a bad day.

The thing is, testosterone can't account for the difference between those two days. Apart from that, he could easily have had an, um, "hongerklop" the first of those two days and nothing more than recovered the next day.

The main reason why he took so much time back the next day wasn't because he somehow did much better than he ever could, but simply because he recovered the form he had the rest of the Tour. Because he was so far behind, the other favourites didn't bother chasing him until it was too late.

It was one of the many tactical errors that were made by the teams in this Tour.

[Mercator]

Originally posted by pchang
I don't think the levels could change radically over such a short time period without a complete transfusion.

Except we don't even know if they were radical, do we?

Maybe his testosterone level was just below the limit before and after, and just over the limit on that day. I don't know exactly what these tests measure anyway, and what the difference between a positive and negative result is.

I expect the level to fluctuate anyway.

Also, could his bad day (or his good day) have affected those levels?

[MOBIUS]

Seems to me the Yanks can't win anything without cheating these days...

Gatlin admits failing drugs test

[Drake Tungsten]

Still better than the English, who simply can't win anything...

[Thorgal]

Except we don't even know if they were radical, do we?

What was measured was testosterone to epitestosterone ratio, an indicator of blood doping.

Normal person ratio----> 1:1 to 2:1

Maximun allowed by UCI----> 4:1 .

Landis ratio----> 11:1

please...

[germanos]

Originally posted by Thorgal

Landis ratio----> 11:1

source?

[Thorgal]

Car radio.

[Mercator]

I like this article:

http://www.bicycling.co.za/static/exclusives/index.php?id=1265

[Drogue]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
Seems to me the Yanks can't win anything without cheating these days...

Gatlin admits failing drugs test

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Still better than the English, who simply can't win anything...

Wait, winning while using drugs is better than not winning?

[atawa]

Originally posted by germanos


source?

German television, think it was ARD.

The thing is, testosterone can't account for the difference between those two days. Apart from that, he could easily have had an, um, "hongerklop" the first of those two days and nothing more than recovered the next day.

He admitted to drinking 2 beers and 4 whisky after that stage, add to that the massive energydrain from the "hongerklop" (Eng?) + dehydration during the race and I seriously doubt if one can make such a great comeback the next day.

The main reason why he took so much time back the next day wasn't because he somehow did much better than he ever could, but simply because he recovered the form he had the rest of the Tour. Because he was so far behind, the other favourites didn't bother chasing him until it was too late.

It was one of the many tactical errors that were made by the teams in this Tour.

True, the other teams started the chase much to late but even then they didnt gain much time. I expected Sastre to come much closer to Landis on the final ascent after hiding all day though.



If the ARD report is true and on that day Landis had a testosterone to epitestosterone ratio of 11-1 then he must have taken something. Shame realy, he seemed a likable guy and rode a great tour.

[Drake Tungsten]

Wait, winning while using drugs is better than not winning?

Obviously. Winning via cheating of any kind is better than not winning.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Thorgal

What was measured was testosterone to epitestosterone ratio, an indicator of blood doping.

Normal person ratio----> 1:1 to 2:1

Maximun allowed by UCI----> 4:1 .

Landis ratio----> 11:1

please...

Maybe he is a massive cheat but I have questions

1. If they are all such great cheats, wouldn't he know that going almost 3 times higher than the legal limit would be noticed? I thought the theory was that they are all doped all the time and they are so proficient at it.

2. Wouldn't his levels have to be high on other days as well? I thought it would take soe time for soemthing like a testosterone level to go down.

3. What is the immediate benefit of a higher testosterone level ? Or is the idea that he took some kind of super stimulant that showed up in his blood as if it were testosterone