However it ends, USADA vs Lance Armstrong could hurt cycling. Once more, the sport’s dirty washing is spilling out of the basket – and it has to.
It makes and is going to make ugly reading, but do you know what? One day soon, sport as a whole will have a lot to thank cycling for.
Pro road racing has a long and well-publicised doping problem, but after years of prevarication and some wilful, misplaced and even cynical suspension of disbelief, cycling has the most stringent drugs testing programme in sport.
It’s only happened over the last five to seven years but it’s there now. It’s getting harder to cheat in cycling, but the same level and sophistication of testing hasn’t been adopted in all sports.
Look at London 2012, there was rigorous testing there and athletes and weightlifters got caught. Cycling didn’t score a single positive test. Other athletes were caught in the run up to the games as well.
Ok, I hear you say, but there’s all this anecdotal stuff about cheating the dope tests, and presumably we’re going to hear stuff from USADA about how it’s done, or at least was done.
Worse still, there are undetectable doping products and procedures out there, I wrote about some of them in a Roar piece earlier this year. Drugs tests taken now are being stored, but taking an undetectable is still a gamble some might take.
And some athletes will take drugs because they are hard wired to win. If not doping means turning their back on their potential, many will dope. They won’t want to, very few come into sport wanting to dope. They’ll be thoroughly decent people in every other facet of their life, but they will dope.
Are you depressed yet? Well don’t be.
The big thing for me that has changed in cycling in recent years is that top racers don’t need to dope anymore.
Many of the training, nutrition and legal manipulations that modern coaches and sports scientists prescribe mimic the effects of doping. And it’s easier to say no when you are already getting a legal high.
Take altitude training.
The concentration of natural EPO increases during the first 24 hours spent above 1500 metres and peaks at two weeks. EPO increases the production of red blood cells which take a further week or two to fully mature. These stay in the body for their natural life, so around 28 days.
A one month stay at altitude gives a responder (some people don’t respond to altitude) a six percent increase in red bloods cells for one month, which translates into a six percent boost in sea level performance.
It’s so potent that it would be dangerous to take synthetic EPO at the same time.
But some experts think that the blood boost is almost an aside to altitude. Living at altitude increases the number of blood capillaries in the lungs and muscles, so more oxygen gets picked up and delivered to a cyclist’s legs, and it’s an adaptation that stays. Even synthetic EPO, the most potent cycling drug, can’t do that.
Altitude also shifts the testosterone-cortisol balance in the body so it produces more testosterone, which is an anabolic or muscle building hormone, and reduces cortisol, a catabolic or muscle burning hormone. Cyclists have used artificial testosterone creams and patches to do that in the past.
Of course these adaptations don’t come free, altitude training has drawbacks and they have to be dealt with and factored into any training programme, but you can see why Bradley Wiggins and the Sky Pro Cycling Tour team spent so long on Mount Teide in Tenerife during their build up to this year’s Tour de France. And why Cadel Evans spends time in a hotel on top of the Stelvio Pass in Italy when he’s in Grand Tour training mode.
And there’s more. There are sea-level ways of training that boost hormone levels naturally, copying the effects of taking hormone-based drugs.
For example, increased growth hormone levels are experienced after 30 minute sessions at an athlete’s anaerobic threshold. And long but less intense endurance rides stimulate natural testosterone production.
Training in a way that achieves glycogen depletion promotes the production of an immune system product called IL6, which works like a wonder drug. It activates metabolic genes, promotes the breakdown of fats for fuel and inhibits insulin resistance.
Coaches really understand how a cyclist’s body reacts to different sessions now. They get feedback from power devices, heart rate monitors, heart analysis tools and blood and urine tests, so they know where their rider is at any time on the form and fitness curve.
Also there are sleep and nutrition manipulations that trick the body into producing an environment that promotes fitness, plus breakthroughs in nutrition have developed more bio-available sports foods.
I could go on, there’s enough of this stuff to fill a book.
For me though it’s important. If you look at the history of cycling it’s pretty unfeasible to think that one generation will suddenly turn its back en masse on doping, but if you give that generation the support to make doping unnecessary, then you can eradicate it.
Keep the faith, cycling is emerging from the doping tunnel and the future looks good.
Chris Sidwells
Guest
Hi Nigel, I take your point but there's a difference between being born and living at altitude and using altitude as a training protocol. Best training practice involves sleeping at 2000 metres but doing most of your bike training at much lower altitude, which is not always possible in Columbia. Wiggins and Sky did it by descending Teide and training around it's base. Evans did his intense work in Valtelinna below Stelvio and on the lower climbs around it. Some hypoxic training is done because that has ceratin benefits too, but not much. Nutritional needs of living at altitude have to be adressed too. The increased red blood cell effect only ladt a month anyway, so the 80s Colombians woudl have lost the effect when doing a European season. In fact no one had the opportunity to use altitude properly in those days because nobody could afford to be away from racing for the periods neccessary. Wiggins' season this year bears no relation to what Hererra or Parra's looked like. Wiggins raced five times? Winning four. Between his races he was able to recover at home then go back to altitude, come down again, take it easy for a week and go fo it. And you are right, team work is importnat, but all Sky's Tour team trained togther and did teh altitude stuff and they were by far the strongest in the Tour.
Maria Szczerba
Guest
Hello Chris, Thankyou very much for all of that information. and to Phil and team also.
Nigel Andrews
Guest
With regard to Altitude and specifically time spent at Altitude....When the Colombians came over in the early 80s, we thought they would walk the tour...Herrera..Parra etc, but in my view they did very little other than Herrera in Polka Dot. Historically the Tours finest were not even born at Altitude...Merckx...Pantani...Armstrong..Hinault..Van Impe...Millar....I am not sure where I am going with this but This year has Proved its a team effort that wins and not just the blood count !
SkinnyKid
Guest
like
Jimbo
Guest
Yeah well obviously that is the other problem, the fact that the UCI seems at best completely unwilling to do anything about the doping problems of cycling. Once the Bruyneel case goes to arbitration and more of the evidence comes to light, it will be interesting to see what role the UCI played in turning a blind eye to doping violations.
Gleeso
Guest
I would say the majority of the peloton is cheating in some manner. No one is outspoken enough about those that are caught - when surely you would be irrate when beaten out of a result by a cheat. This makes me think they all have something to hide. When handed the 2010 yellow jersey Andy Schleck had sympathy for Contador (from whom it was stripped). This sympathy only makes sense 6 months later when we find out Andys brother (and obviously very close training partner...) cheated.
Bobo
Guest
Call me cynical, but while the UCI still refuses to re-test the samples from the 2008 Giro (CERA), and 2009 Tour (AICAR, OFF-score tests), it is apparent that there is no appetite for change within those who run the sport. There were no prosections for blood passsport violations last year, and three people who violated the passport in 2010 were not sanctioned, according the the UCI's own statements, confirmed by Ashenden. I wonder who... So for those people to talk about the doping era as being in the past, I have a bridge to sell you. The crazy thing is, cycling is still doing more in the fight against doping than athletics, tennis, and every football code. Sometimes, life just ain't fair.
sittingbison
Guest
Nice article Chris, couldn't agree more. For all the LA stuff I have been rabbiting on about recently, I actually see this as a catharsis for cycling, the moment they can truly move on from the excesses of the EPO era. I desperately hope they take the opportunity.
sittingbison
Guest
yup, there are several factors, reticulocytes etc., new cells and old, off score. But Landis described what was happening to fool the biopassport, they were basically microdosing with the transfusions, and then using EPO to reinvigorate the hematocrit levels. A juggling act. BUt this takes a fully finded medical team, not a blood bag stuck in a vein while on the side of the road. The other problem was a failure to prosecute until 99.99% certainty. And the possibility that a corrupt organisation could use the biopassport to warn certain individuals or teams they were close to prosecution and back off a bit thus letting others win ie nobble the race or warn favoured riders they are close and back off a bit ie cover up. What REALLY needs to happen is testing and biopassport interpretation taken completely out of the hands of officiating authorities, in this case UCI.
Jimbo
Guest
I think the most important development has been the biological passport. Obviously blood doping is impossible to pick up on a regular drug screen, and I think it will remain that way well into the future (maybe someone with a greater understanding of physiology than myself can enlighten me as to whether there are differences between red blood cells that have been out of the body for a period of time and those which have not). However, the blood passport can alert testers to subject athletes with suspicious values to greater scrutiny, and of course sanction those with physiologically impossible values.
Jay
Guest
Agree. I think a lot of the commentary on this is a bit skewed. I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and realise cycling is NOT in a doping crisis. It WAS in a doping crisis 7-10 (and more) years ago, but not now. Cycling has cleaned up immensely. Just because the issue of Armstrong has reached it's nadir there seems to be a misconception that cycling is in a CURRENT state of chaos. It would be more accurate and less hysterical to state that some issues during the "dark" days are coming to a head now. I think there is a difference.
WoobliesFan
Guest
The sport is always bigger than the person. One thing that astounds me is the level of gullibility within people in the face of logic and facts. The entire Armstrong drug story, when understood even beyond 15 minutes of mere reading, leads a rational person to have serious doubt with his innocence. I don’t know how anyone can see different. You know, they say Aliens exist. They say they have not yet made contact for they are waiting for human intellect to rise to above a certain level in order to comprehend the reality and notion of their existence. Based on what I’ve seen and read in the week since Lance got done, I think those aliens will be waiting quite a while yet.
L
Guest
The reason cyclists didn't get caught is because they are more professional about how they dope. Most of the athletics and weightlifting positive results came from the boonies, so to speak.