In reply to rmt:
> Yes, true. But unfortunately not everyone will respond in the same way to training, nor will everyone respond in the same way to carbo-loading, and not everyone will respond in the same way to being at altitude. Does that mean that all athletes should never be allowed to train, they should all be forced to eat the same diet, and all races should be held at sea level in case some can cope better with altitude than others? Oh, and what about those athletes that are better sponsored and can afford to ride rounder wheels because they've spent more time wind tunnel testing.
> Of course I'm being a dick, but I'm illustrating that if looked at subjectively the concept of cheating really doesn't work. EPO is naturally occurring - some people have less of it than others so less blood cells and will never be endurance athletes. Tough. Somebody has, correctly in my view, decided that injecting EPO isn't legal, so if you do it's cheating. However, there's an argument that it shouldn't be. The rules are there to determine what is and what isn't cheating.
Indeed, my haemotocrit is constistently above 50%, which would give me a natural advantage. I guess I disapprove of the technological feedback that turns known unknowns (whats my haemotocrit) into known knowns. If no one knew except using the basic feedback of objective training improvement on the bike, without recourse to invasive physiological measurements, then I'd become much more interested in cycling, because it would become a sport.