A Question About Indurain...

Page 11 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Ryo Hazuki said:
pantani and ullrich actually were not the dopers they may have seemed to indurain, but by then you couldn't know anything anymore. I'm sure he saw in 1996 guys like luttenberger (and ullrich) who was 10 years younger and thought I have 5 tourwins, a lot of money, 32 with a family and still in good health, well this is it then. I can happily retire
This and the prospect of going out with Olympic Gold. That's a nice end to a career.
 
Indurain had said several years before that he may retire at 32.

As for his true capabilities, I think it's impossible to know without a proper investigation. He either had real GT talent or he was an EPO pioneer, but while the latter is a stretch for most riders, in the case of Conconi's personal project it is perfectly plausible.

Delgado not getting on EPO is a difficulty, but not necessarily an insurmountable one. As an older rider who had had a successful career on a traditional program, he might not have seen the need or have the will to switch. Apparently Fignon didn't, and it would seem Roche was late in switching.
 
i don't think indurain got his hands on epo before italians,before diablo and bugno. blood transfusions with conconi,most likely yes. but the effect wasn't the same as what a boost he got in 1992 time trial. from there, he started extraterrestrial version.

also perico definitely switched to fuel as soon as he heard of it,1992?1993 at latest. choose the same way as roche and argentin did. huge superstars way before epo but didn't fear of blood medicines.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
there was no cut off point when indurain was racing
yes there was, for some it was death. Plenty of riders getting up in middle of the night to spin..........
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
hrotha said:
Indurain had said several years before that he may retire at 32.

As for his true capabilities, I think it's impossible to know without a proper investigation. He either had real GT talent or he was an EPO pioneer, but while the latter is a stretch for most riders, in the case of Conconi's personal project it is perfectly plausible.

Delgado not getting on EPO is a difficulty, but not necessarily an insurmountable one. As an older rider who had had a successful career on a traditional program, he might not have seen the need or have the will to switch. Apparently Fignon didn't, and it would seem Roche was late in switching.
I am off the opinion that guys like Fignon, Hinault, LeMond and other natural GT contenders did/would not have benefitted greatly from EPO the way others did. EPO was the game changer for those who had no natural ability needed for GTs.
 
jens_attacks said:
i don't think indurain got his hands on epo before italians,before diablo and bugno. blood transfusions with conconi,most likely yes. but the effect wasn't the same as what a boost he got in 1992 time trial. from there, he started extraterrestrial version.

also perico definitely switched to fuel as soon as he heard of it,1992?1993 at latest. choose the same way as roche and argentin did. huge superstars way before epo but didn't fear of blood medicines.
Alright, I shouldn't have said "late switch" when referring to the likes of Roche, more like middle of the pack - no pioneers is what I meant. In my mind it makes sense: the perceived risk of EPO at the time was far greater than that of other PEDs, and there hadn't been EPO users easily trashing everybody yet. Many veteran dopers may have felt it wasn't all that great or worth it at first.

Regardless of when he got on EPO, I'm fairly certain Indurain upped his program for 1992 (extraterrestrial ITTs) and again for 1994-1995 (when he became an increasingly better climber at a time when EPO was almost universal). It's possible that his improvement in the late 80s was a result of timid, experimental use of EPO. Transfusions, I don't see it - not for GTs. Despite all the talk, I've yet to see any convincing evidence for them.
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,137
1
0
Benotti69 said:
yes there was, for some it was death. Plenty of riders getting up in middle of the night to spin..........
don't try to spin this into something else. you know you are wrong here.
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,137
1
0
hrotha said:
Indurain had said several years before that he may retire at 32.

As for his true capabilities, I think it's impossible to know without a proper investigation. He either had real GT talent or he was an EPO pioneer, but while the latter is a stretch for most riders, in the case of Conconi's personal project it is perfectly plausible.

Delgado not getting on EPO is a difficulty, but not necessarily an insurmountable one. As an older rider who had had a successful career on a traditional program, he might not have seen the need or have the will to switch. Apparently Fignon didn't, and it would seem Roche was late in switching.
delgado was a doper in heart and mind. he was a bloodtransfusion pioneer only there was no epo then. I find it hard to believe he wouldn't have wanted to make the jump to epo while his helper did and had to drag him an entire tour.
 
Nov 7, 2013
146
0
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
delgado was a doper in heart and mind. he was a bloodtransfusion pioneer only there was no epo then. I find it hard to believe he wouldn't have wanted to make the jump to epo while his helper did and had to drag him an entire tour.
I doubt that. Delgado had preIty consistent results his whole career. I would believe he used steroids but I doubt any oxygen vector stuff (EPO or blood transfusions). Even in 87 and 88 at the Tour, it was apparent that Roch and Delgado were second bananas and had a shot because of the absence of Fignon, Hinault, and Lemond.
 
perico was a super climber. can't deny that. i think it's zero chance he used epo before 1992.
but 100% he used in 1994 in the vuelta at 34 years of age, 1994 it was already widespread and you wouldn't get on the podium and beat the likes of zulle,rincon(yes colombian wow) or leblanc without jet fuel. the speeds were already devastating. in 1993 you already notice that perico like everyone on the front of the tour, doesn't breath as much as he used to. the guys dropping fignon in 1993 were already on it imo. saints as hampsten,mejia included.
basically, zero chance for perico to have been epo free.

if he was some years younger, fignon would have jumped on the train too no doubt. he says it in his book.
 
Aug 19, 2009
612
0
0
Wallace and Gromit said:
Mig won Paris-Nice in 1989-90, which is notably not the first half of the 1980s.

He didn't win anything of note other than the Tour de l'Avenir in 1986 prior to the Volta a Catalunya in 1988 when he was nearly 24.

By contrast, Hinault had won two Tours, one Vuelta, the Dauphine twice, LBL, Gent Wevelgem, La Fleche Wallon, the Giro Lombardia and 2 GP des Nations by age 24.
It was actually the Tour of the European Economic Community between 1986 and 1990. Unclear if there were age restrictions or not... but doubtful, as Marc Madiot and Laurent Fignon won the 1987 and 1988 editions.

Based on the coverage I've seen on youtube, apart from the event having linkages to the once, and future, Tour de l'Avenir, it looked like a pretty forgettable race.

The podium was Indurain, Patrice Esnault, and Alexi Grewal.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CPfX8OGuFQ
 
hrotha said:
Alright, I shouldn't have said "late switch" when referring to the likes of Roche, more like middle of the pack - no pioneers is what I meant. In my mind it makes sense: the perceived risk of EPO at the time was far greater than that of other PEDs, and there hadn't been EPO users easily trashing everybody yet. Many veteran dopers may have felt it wasn't all that great or worth it at first.

Regardless of when he got on EPO, I'm fairly certain Indurain upped his program for 1992 (extraterrestrial ITTs) and again for 1994-1995 (when he became an increasingly better climber at a time when EPO was almost universal). It's possible that his improvement in the late 80s was a result of timid, experimental use of EPO. Transfusions, I don't see it - not for GTs. Despite all the talk, I've yet to see any convincing evidence for them.
Agree with you completely.

EPO made transfusions easier and less risky (i.e. with your own blood).

Upon the arrival of EPO, you didn't need transfusions, though. Thus, it is hard to believe anyone would have sought them out in the early EPO years.

It was the 50% rule and then the development of an anti-doping test - remember Ferrari's unheeded warning to Lance - that presented new motivation for transfusing. And, transfusing could then benefit from microdosing.

Indurain didn't really need to worry about blood bags at all.

Dave.
 
Ryo Hazuki said:
don't try to spin this into something else. you know you are wrong here.
What is wrong?

-Athlete death from EPO abuse? Probably. Given the fact the number of deaths of under-23 elite cyclists from heart-related issues went up immediately after the introduction of EPO.

-somewhere the story of riders wearing heart rate monitors to bed so they didn't die is documented. I can't be bothered to find it now.
 
Netserk said:
What would stop someone from having a transfusion from a donor in the late 80's?
The risk of dying. The cost. The hassle. The storage and handling challenges. And the need to find a suitable donor and add yet another collaborator to your doping program.

Even just a simple fear of large needles.

After all, blood donors pass out all the time.

Dave.
 
Mar 8, 2010
244
0
0
Indurain was what they called a big engine in his amateur and junior years. In 1984 he was 20 and won easily an ITT at the Tour de l'Avenir in front guys like Bernard and Mottet. But I remember when he was young he was very chubby and thus was not a good climber but was winning a lot of prologues or flat ITTs.
Then I think around 86 or 87 he started loosing weight and climbed a bit better and started to win 1 week stage races.
Imo opinion he started blood doping in 1989. In the 80s athletes were reluctant to do transfusions because there have been some accidents in the past
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
lllludo said:
Indurain was what they called a big engine in his amateur and junior years. In 1984 he was 20 and won easily an ITT at the Tour de l'Avenir in front guys like Bernard and Mottet. But I remember when he was young he was very chubby and thus was not a good climber but was winning a lot of prologues or flat ITTs.
Then I think around 86 or 87 he started loosing weight and climbed a bit better and started to win 1 week stage races.
Imo opinion he started blood doping in 1989. In the 80s athletes were reluctant to do transfusions because there have been some accidents in the past
That Indurain was dropping Robert Millar in the Pyrenees was ridiculous.
 
D-Queued said:
(1)The risk of dying. The cost. The hassle.(2) The storage and handling challenges.(3) And the need to find a suitable donor and add yet another collaborator to your doping program.

(4)Even just a simple fear of large needles.

After all, blood donors pass out all the time.

Dave.
1: I'm talking about the late 80's not the 20's/30's.....

2: No storage needed with a direct transfusion.

3: It should be possible to convince a family member.

4: Given that haven't stop riders later, I doubt it would stop riders back then.
 
Netserk said:
1: I'm talking about the late 80's not the 20's/30's.....

2: No storage needed with a direct transfusion.

3: It should be possible to convince a family member.

4: Given that haven't stop riders later, I doubt it would stop riders back then.
1. So am I. Among many other things (e.g. HIV testing), pathogen elimination is relatively recent, as is inactivation of white blood cells.

2. Storage is required unless a direct transfusion is easily accomplished at no risk of detection and contamination. Storage techniques have improved dramatically in recent years. Moreover, access to storage facilities has been extremely limited - unless you are Dr. Fuentes and have enough business to pay off enough people in the Spanish medical system.

3. Possible to convince a family member, yes. Desirable? Not always. Perfect match? Not always. At zero risk (e.g. Pathogens, etc.)? Certainly not in the late 1980s.

4. What was the motivation to go to the complication of extraction/transfusion so long as EPO was undetectable and there was no 50% limit?

EPO was all you needed, and was far easier to administer.

This is the most important point of all. There wasn't any need.

Dave.
 
i'm talking only until epo arrived. of course when you got epo, no need for transfusions

but until then, there is certain evidence it was an used procedure. since the 70's.
somehow though, i don't see them as very effective all that time
 
jens_attacks said:
i'm talking only until epo arrived. of course when you got epo, no need for transfusions

but until then, there is certain evidence it was an used procedure. since the 70's.
somehow though, i don't see them as very effective all that time
Ok, got it.

This was extensively discussed in another thread.

There are technical and practical reasons why it wasn't utilized that much. Or, why we wouldn't expect it to have been utilized that much in pro cycling.

For single events, like the Olympics, yes. And the 1984 US Olympic Cycling team activity underscores this.

For stage races, not as effective and/or impractical unless you had storage, transportation and handling solutions - much of which didn't really exist or weren't really accessible if they did.

Also, if autologous (safest, most effective), multiple extractions without a recovery aid like EPO make full season racing challenging.

Dave.
 
D-Queued said:
Ok, got it.

This was extensively discussed in another thread.

There are technical and practical reasons why it wasn't utilized that much. Or, why we wouldn't expect it to have been utilized that much in pro cycling.

For single events, like the Olympics, yes. And the 1984 US Olympic Cycling team activity underscores this.

For stage races, not as effective and/or impractical unless you had storage, transportation and handling solutions - much of which didn't really exist or weren't really accessible if they did.

Also, if autologous (safest, most effective), multiple extractions without a recovery aid like EPO make full season racing challenging.

Dave.

absolutely. that's what i thought too
 
hrotha said:
Alright, I shouldn't have said "late switch" when referring to the likes of Roche, more like middle of the pack - no pioneers is what I meant. In my mind it makes sense: the perceived risk of EPO at the time was far greater than that of other PEDs, and there hadn't been EPO users easily trashing everybody yet. Many veteran dopers may have felt it wasn't all that great or worth it at first.

Regardless of when he got on EPO, I'm fairly certain Indurain upped his program for 1992 (extraterrestrial ITTs) and again for 1994-1995 (when he became an increasingly better climber at a time when EPO was almost universal). It's possible that his improvement in the late 80s was a result of timid, experimental use of EPO. Transfusions, I don't see it - not for GTs. Despite all the talk, I've yet to see any convincing evidence for them.
Have you ever read Zoetemelk's discussion of his transfusions in the 1976 TdF?

In 1977 Joop Zoetemelk confessed that, during the previous years' Tour, when he was a member of Raymond Poulidor's Gan-Mercier team, he had undergone transfusions on the advice of his doctor, Henri Fucs. Zoetemelk's 1976 Tour saw him winning a couple of stages in the Alps – including Alpe d'Huez – as well as the stage to the Puy de Dôme and overall he finished second, four minutes something down on the winner, Lucien van Impe.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
red_flanders The Clinic 12
masking_agent The Clinic 77

ASK THE COMMUNITY