Log in:  

Register

Hall of Shame in Doping | Inaugural Edition

The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Moderators: Irondan, Eshnar, Red Rick, Pricey_sky, Tonton, King Boonen, Valv.Piti

27 May 2018 12:25

User avatar roundabout
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,025
Joined: 07 Jun 2010 11:43

Re: Re:

27 May 2018 17:45

ClassicomanoLuigi wrote:
Koronin wrote:Chris Froome
Floyd Landis
Lance Armstrong
Landis +1

For the individual inductees to the Hall, it depends on the criteria for nomination. I suppose there should be multiple categories, like for many hall-of-fame museums or awards ceremonies...
    Historical: So many of the legends of the Hall really really should be chosen from the classic era, which we tend to overlook completely. Such as Robic, his cheating and nasty personality made him one of the most hated
    Doping Doctors: Ferrari, Cecchini, Saiz, Fuentes, etc.
    Most Ridiculous Excuses: Rumsas, Hamilton, Rasmussen, etc.
    Directeurs Sportifs: Bruyneel, Riis, etc. Many who were both doped riders and dope lords of team management... that's also a category unto itself
    Broadcasters and Media: Kirby...


Ahem. Sorry to interrupt, but did I hear someone bash Carlton Kirby?
I'm starting to think he is the go-to guy for media bashing by default. Phil Liggett is by far the winner in the media category.
No one even comes close.
Ivan Basso is my nomination for the ridiculous excuse award. I'm trying to find footage of a press conference in which I'm almost certain he claimed the epo was for his dog.
User avatar the delgados
Member
 
Posts: 1,234
Joined: 02 May 2009 02:38
Location: Toronto

28 May 2018 02:44

Horner standing up for 80 hours over 3 weeks
Scarponi
Member
 
Posts: 1,508
Joined: 21 Apr 2015 08:56

Re:

28 May 2018 03:02



Tnx, I guess I meant a different Robic :razz:
topt
New Member
 
Posts: 24
Joined: 20 May 2017 15:05

28 May 2018 12:42

I wonder how Riccardo Ricco had not been mentioned yet.
Finn84
Member
 
Posts: 561
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 14:26

Re:

28 May 2018 20:07

Finn84 wrote:I wonder how Riccardo Ricco had not been mentioned yet.


:confused: :confused: :confused:

Ricco is first ballot Hall of Fame
"He looks like an Egyptian mummy but he's riding like a king" - Matthew Keenan describing Alberto Contador
User avatar Pantani Attacks
Member
 
Posts: 825
Joined: 07 Jul 2015 11:39

28 May 2018 22:04

1) Indurain
2) Pantani
3) Lance
Durden93
Member
 
Posts: 440
Joined: 06 Sep 2016 19:16

29 May 2018 09:49

I'd like to nominate every journalist and commentator who has ever tried to convince the world of a doper's cleanliness, especially if they used the "he's not entertaining to watch because you need doping to attack" argument

I don't see that much shame in doping in itself
User avatar Gung Ho Gun
Member
 
Posts: 499
Joined: 15 Jul 2013 14:46

Re:

29 May 2018 20:35

Finn84 wrote:I wonder how Riccardo Ricco had not been mentioned yet.


Me too...

Ricco
Armstrong
Landis
Aka The Ginger One.
User avatar RedheadDane
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,152
Joined: 05 May 2010 13:47
Location: Viking Land! (Aros)

02 Jun 2018 07:14

I wish to add Michael Rasmussen. A KOM specialist few regarded as a genuine Grand Tour contender until suddenly in 2007 he was on his way to winning the TdF until his team pulled him after he won the Aubisque stage 16. Some say he was hard done by. I think he bet the house and lost.
Cookster15
Member
 
Posts: 1,023
Joined: 14 May 2011 19:25

Re: Hall of Shame in Doping | Inaugural Edition

02 Jun 2018 09:53

The nineties Peleton
The noughties Peloton
Todays Peloton
The eighties Peloton
noddy69
Member
 
Posts: 605
Joined: 04 Oct 2011 07:37

02 Jun 2018 11:59

first ballot should be Lance, Ricco and either Floyd or Riis. For me a positive test or an admission is crucial.
Singer01
Member
 
Posts: 972
Joined: 18 Nov 2013 19:04

Re:

02 Jun 2018 12:11

Singer01 wrote:first ballot should be Lance, Ricco and either Floyd or Riis. For me a positive test or an admission is crucial.

It should be split into at least two categories.

First, the clowns that got caught or came clean - Armstrong, Landis, Ricco, Riis, etc.

Second, the unrepentant fraudsters that continue to ride the wave of glory because they never got caught - Indurain, Froome, Jensie, Cancellara, etc.

One could also argue there should be a third category for caught or admitted dopers who still make a living off of cycling by being a part of a pro team or the media - Rasmussen, Vino, Vaughters, etc.

For me, the guys in the second category are the worst until they face the day of reckoning and join the ranks of the clowns in category one.
Last edited by Saint Unix on 02 Jun 2018 14:45, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar Saint Unix
Member
 
Posts: 648
Joined: 14 Feb 2014 11:00
Location: Norway

Re: Re:

02 Jun 2018 14:26

Saint Unix wrote:
Singer01 wrote:first ballot should be Lance, Ricco and either Floyd or Riis. For me a positive test or an admission is crucial.

It should be split into at least two categories.

First, the clowns that got caught or came clean - Armstrong, Landis, Ricco, Riis, etc.

Second, the unrepentant fraudsters that continue to ride the wave of glory because they never got caught - Indurain, Froome, Jensie, etc.

One could also argue there should be a third category for caught or admitted dopers who still make a living off of cycling by being a part of a pro team or the media - Rasmussen, Vino, Vaughters, Cancellara, etc.

For me, the guys in the second category are the worst until they face the day of reckoning and join the ranks of the clowns in category one.


Shouldn't Cancellara be in the second group
"He looks like an Egyptian mummy but he's riding like a king" - Matthew Keenan describing Alberto Contador
User avatar Pantani Attacks
Member
 
Posts: 825
Joined: 07 Jul 2015 11:39

Re: Re:

02 Jun 2018 14:45

Pantani Attacks wrote:Shouldn't Cancellara be in the second group

Absolutely. My bad.

Corrected now.
User avatar Saint Unix
Member
 
Posts: 648
Joined: 14 Feb 2014 11:00
Location: Norway

02 Jun 2018 18:55

My assessment of Lemond: Exceptionally talented cyclist who abused PEDs that were en vogue during the 80s. Did not graduate to the oxygen vector doping as its abuse proliferated the peloton during the early 90s.

My opinion is supported by Lemonds success from the inception of his career. That, coupled with the fact that his decline was due to the increased wattage of his opponents while he maintained a linear performance level.

Is this not the general consensus?
Amazinmets87
Junior Member
 
Posts: 150
Joined: 12 May 2015 04:07

Re:

03 Jun 2018 16:57

Amazinmets87 wrote:My assessment of Lemond: Exceptionally talented cyclist who abused PEDs that were en vogue during the 80s. Did not graduate to the oxygen vector doping as its abuse proliferated the peloton during the early 90s.

My opinion is supported by Lemonds success from the inception of his career. That, coupled with the fact that his decline was due to the increased wattage of his opponents while he maintained a linear performance level.

Is this not the general consensus?


Why wouldn't LeMond have graduated to oxygen vector doping had he willingly taken PEDs in during the 80s? If he was a prolific doper he surly would have known about EPO and its magnificent benefits as it emerged in the peloton. Are you suggesting he quit doping cold turkey or simply refused to use the more powerful substances available in the 90s? Why? Because of the hunting accident?
LegendRider
Newly Registered Member
 
Posts: 8
Joined: 06 Aug 2009 13:08

Re:

03 Jun 2018 17:38

Amazinmets87 wrote:My assessment of Lemond: Exceptionally talented cyclist who abused PEDs that were en vogue during the 80s. Did not graduate to the oxygen vector doping as its abuse proliferated the peloton during the early 90s.

My opinion is supported by Lemonds success from the inception of his career. That, coupled with the fact that his decline was due to the increased wattage of his opponents while he maintained a linear performance level.

Is this not the general consensus?


I agree.
ppanther92
Member
 
Posts: 399
Joined: 03 May 2015 10:27

Re: Re:

03 Jun 2018 17:42

LegendRider wrote:
Amazinmets87 wrote:My assessment of Lemond: Exceptionally talented cyclist who abused PEDs that were en vogue during the 80s. Did not graduate to the oxygen vector doping as its abuse proliferated the peloton during the early 90s.

My opinion is supported by Lemonds success from the inception of his career. That, coupled with the fact that his decline was due to the increased wattage of his opponents while he maintained a linear performance level.

Is this not the general consensus?


Why wouldn't LeMond have graduated to oxygen vector doping had he willingly taken PEDs in during the 80s? If he was a prolific doper he surly would have known about EPO and its magnificent benefits as it emerged in the peloton. Are you suggesting he quit doping cold turkey or simply refused to use the more powerful substances available in the 90s? Why? Because of the hunting accident?


I don't know, but what is your explanation of the unusual career progress that coincidates with the introduction of blood manipulation in the peloton? Maybe he was scared of doing something that thickens your blood. You know, EPO was a research chemical until 1989 and in the early 90s you had this stories of young guys dying (true or not) and guys setting the alarm for the middle of the night.
ppanther92
Member
 
Posts: 399
Joined: 03 May 2015 10:27

Re: Re:

03 Jun 2018 19:45

LegendRider wrote:
Amazinmets87 wrote:My assessment of Lemond: Exceptionally talented cyclist who abused PEDs that were en vogue during the 80s. Did not graduate to the oxygen vector doping as its abuse proliferated the peloton during the early 90s.

My opinion is supported by Lemonds success from the inception of his career. That, coupled with the fact that his decline was due to the increased wattage of his opponents while he maintained a linear performance level.

Is this not the general consensus?


Why wouldn't LeMond have graduated to oxygen vector doping had he willingly taken PEDs in during the 80s? If he was a prolific doper he surly would have known about EPO and its magnificent benefits as it emerged in the peloton. Are you suggesting he quit doping cold turkey or simply refused to use the more powerful substances available in the 90s? Why? Because of the hunting accident?

My evidence is his performance. There was no discernable increase in Lemonds wattage between 1990 and 92, yet he was asphyxiated by supercharged rivals. If he used EPO why didn't his average wattage increase? Poor responder isn't a plausible explanation in an environment which permitted unfettered EPO abuse.

Further evidence is Fignon's response to the introduction of EPO. A fellow rider in his early-mid 30s, already boasting an impressive palmares chose to simply climb off his bike rather than manipulate his blood to remain competitive. It seems perfectly reasonable to assume Lemond had a similar viewpoint.

Anyway, speaking of career arcs and oxygen vector doping, stunning that Rominger is older than Lemond. I have no doubt Lemond could have remained a Tour contender into the mid-90s under the tutelage of a Ferrari or Conconi.
Amazinmets87
Junior Member
 
Posts: 150
Joined: 12 May 2015 04:07

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests

Back to top