Shorter stages in the grand tours?
- Thread starter mitosis
- Start date
as i understand them, drugs like EPO improve aerobic power (speed), not endurance (ability to burn fat as fuel, capacity for glycogen storage, etc)
there are legal drugs that are claimed to do the latter - caffeine, glutamine, etc, but i beleive improvement of endurance aspects is much further down the wish list of what a pro would want a drug to do.
there are legal drugs that are claimed to do the latter - caffeine, glutamine, etc, but i beleive improvement of endurance aspects is much further down the wish list of what a pro would want a drug to do.
I voted 'agree'.
But eradicate---no.
It would be a step in the right direction in terms of reduced work load.
The lower the training load, the less exhausting is the strain on the body, immune systems etc...
Look at what's happening in Triathlons now. Many top athletes are keeping caught for EPO and Nandrolone.
They train in huge volumes and they dope to recover and compete to win. Hardly a surprise to me.
With cycling, we have tactics, team and individual that allow for sitting in, blocking, waiting, countering---and give more recovery/rest than does triathltlon which is a long steadier state grind.
I think shorter events would require fewer drugs for success.
But eradicate---no.
It would be a step in the right direction in terms of reduced work load.
The lower the training load, the less exhausting is the strain on the body, immune systems etc...
Look at what's happening in Triathlons now. Many top athletes are keeping caught for EPO and Nandrolone.
They train in huge volumes and they dope to recover and compete to win. Hardly a surprise to me.
With cycling, we have tactics, team and individual that allow for sitting in, blocking, waiting, countering---and give more recovery/rest than does triathltlon which is a long steadier state grind.
I think shorter events would require fewer drugs for success.
They reduced the length of grand tour stages after the 1960's.
From 1900-1930's, the boys were cycling stages of 400kms+, at an average speed of 15mph for the entire tour.
Then they reduced the stage lengths to between 200-350kms and in the 1970/80's further reduced distances to barely over 200kms.
The drug problem in the 1900-1930's was there (just read some of the old books and you'll soon get the picture).
The drug problem actually got worse as the stage distances reduced after the 1930's.
I don't think that stage distances and doping are coupled together.
I mean they're all clean now (yeah, right), but they're going faster over the same distances, than their EPO fuelled colleagues in the 1990's !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
From 1900-1930's, the boys were cycling stages of 400kms+, at an average speed of 15mph for the entire tour.
Then they reduced the stage lengths to between 200-350kms and in the 1970/80's further reduced distances to barely over 200kms.
The drug problem in the 1900-1930's was there (just read some of the old books and you'll soon get the picture).
The drug problem actually got worse as the stage distances reduced after the 1930's.
I don't think that stage distances and doping are coupled together.
I mean they're all clean now (yeah, right), but they're going faster over the same distances, than their EPO fuelled colleagues in the 1990's !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The empirical evidence certainly doesn't suggest shorter stages mean less drugs. As Lim pointed out, in the early 1900s, stages might be 400km long (and start at midnight, and be on terrible roads, and with bikes that had only flip-flop rear gearing, and no support cars, and they had to carry all their gear, and they couldn't even drop anything!) and have only gotten shorter. Less doping? No way.
Sprint runners like Carl Lewis and Michael Johnson dope. Dope doesn't care how far you have to go. It's still dope, just maybe a different kind.
Sprint runners like Carl Lewis and Michael Johnson dope. Dope doesn't care how far you have to go. It's still dope, just maybe a different kind.
Absolutely true.
The doping emphasis would shift from endurance-driven to much more of a 'pursuiter speed intensity', speed over endurance.
Track endurance Points Race, Madison and pursuiters would have the advantage with a shorter races schedule.
And we all know how 'clean' the Australian Olympic Cycling Center is/was after last summer's Horse Growth Hormones scandal and poor Mark French's suspension.
Then the Junior World Sprinter going positive just weeks later.
Doping and the silly denials are in for a long haul.
The doping emphasis would shift from endurance-driven to much more of a 'pursuiter speed intensity', speed over endurance.
Track endurance Points Race, Madison and pursuiters would have the advantage with a shorter races schedule.
And we all know how 'clean' the Australian Olympic Cycling Center is/was after last summer's Horse Growth Hormones scandal and poor Mark French's suspension.
Then the Junior World Sprinter going positive just weeks later.
Doping and the silly denials are in for a long haul.
tcklyde said:
Similar threads
