A thread on Indurain's doping

[indurain666]

One of the funniest races on tape is the 1993 WC in Columbia. All those wonderful Columbian climbers getting shelled off the back on climbs by the likes of Indurain, Olano and Chiapucci. Liggett's commentary is amusing too. Could anyone really be so clueless?

Could anyone be so clueless? Yes, you!

The name of the country is Colombia, not Columbia. and the year was 1995, not 1993. It was not Chiappucci (note the proper spelling), it was Pantani, a climber FYI. The race circuit did not include any long steep sustained climbs where climbers would have excelled, most world championships do not actually. Your ignorance is outrageous!!

Back to topic: like any 90s rider, Indurain did use juice.

 

[teamcinzano]

He was 27 when he won his first tour, right in the wheelhouse of when GT riders started excelling prior to that time. His physical attributes are insane and well documented.

It's true that the average age of a first-time Tour de France winner was 27 both prior to WWII and after, right up through Indurain's first victory. But, if we look a the multiple-tour winners starting with Bobet, it's 24 yrs old.

Bobet: 28
Anquetil: 23
Merckx: 24
Thévenet: 29
Hinault: 23
Fignon: 22
Lemond: 25

In modern period, the great Tour riders before blood vector doping showed their chops very early. Anquetil won his first tour. So did Merckx in 1969. So did Hinault in 1978. So did Fignon in 1983. Of course, Lemond had to wait for his third tour to win and we all know that story.

Point being that in the modern era, it was expected that a multiple tour winner would show themselves early, not make the sort of steady progression we had with Indurain, who withdrew from his first three tours, then finished low in the rankings until 1989 when he finally cracked the top 20.

 

[ChrisE]

It's true that the average age of a first-time Tour de France winner was 27 both prior to WWII and after, right up through Indurain's first victory. But, if we look a the multiple-tour winners starting with Bobet, it's 24 yrs old.

Bobet: 28
Anquetil: 23
Merckx: 24
Thévenet: 29
Hinault: 23
Fignon: 22
Lemond: 25

In modern period, the great Tour riders before blood vector doping showed their chops very early. Anquetil won his first tour. So did Merckx in 1969. So did Hinault in 1978. So did Fignon in 1983. Of course, Lemond had to wait for his third tour to win and we all know that story.

Point being that in the modern era, it was expected that a multiple tour winner would show themselves early, not make the sort of steady progression we had with Indurain, who withdrew from his first three tours, then finished low in the rankings until 1989 when he finally cracked the top 20.

Interesting. Thanks.

We must remember that Indurain was at the service of Delgado, though.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

I didn't realize this was a thread about Bernard Hinault.

Personally, I don't know enough about (Dr.?) Francois Bellocq for Hinault's patronage of him to mean much to me. Nor do I really care too much since I don't have an established position regarding Hinault and PEDs.

IIRC, Lemond was also a Bellocq client. He was very upset when asked about the good doctor's sudden death while he (Lemond) was racing the Giro.

Bellocq's now quaint doping theory was to bring ones testosterone level up to the line of going over the legal limit.

 

[WildspokeJoe]

Interesting. Thanks.

We must remember that Indurain was at the service of Delgado, though.

It could also be said that LeMond was in the service of Hinault in 85 (sort of)

Which could have made him a tour winner at the age of 24.

BTW - Indurain - Doper of the highest order.

 

[hrotha]

The thing is, Indurain began winning GTs by the time EPO was introduced, but only got better as EPO became widespread. He could have been a contender in 1990 already, and if he was using EPO then he would have had to be among the very first to do so (which is entirely possible, given his links with Conconi). Personally, given his physiolgocial abilities, his progression between 1991 and 1996 and his wattage numbers, I'd be inclined to think he wasn't a particularly early EPO user, but rather that he got into it by 1992 or 1993, perhaps (but unlikely) as late as 1994 (when his best climbing performances began).

 

[Cimacoppi49]

Could anyone be so clueless? Yes, you!

The name of the country is Colombia, not Columbia. and the year was 1995, not 1993. It was not Chiappucci (note the proper spelling), it was Pantani, a climber FYI. The race circuit did not include any long steep sustained climbs where climbers would have excelled, most world championships do not actually. Your ignorance is outrageous!!

Back to topic: like any 90s rider, Indurain did use juice.

My sincere thanks for helping me in my cluelessness. I'll have to look at the dvd, but my recollection, perhaps clueless or just fading, is that Claudio rode that race (yes, in 1995) with the Italian team. I could be mistaken.

However, the point is that two of the largest bodies in the race came first and second, at altitude on a far from flat course. I don't recall any sharp, uneven climbs as one would find in the Pyrenees. Still, it was not a sprinters course and the Colombians were expected to do very well. I guess they either didn't have EPO or didn't think they needed it given their living and training at altitude. Would Olano have won without EPO. I doubt it. Now, flame away for there being no proof that Olano or Indurain used EPO. In the meantime, excuse me. I have to sprinkle fairy dust to attract the wee ones for the party tonight.

 

[Berzin]

1993 world championships in Culumbia...clumunbian riders getting shelled out the back...

My favorite is how one specific performance "proves" when exactly the EPO era started.

This is all need to read to gauge the level of cycling knowledge put forth this thread. I've never read such hogwash in my life.

Some of you give too much credence to Lemond and his theories. Some Tour winners began winning at a young age and others progressed slowly. Not all athletes are the same.

The ones who took a more methodical approach may or may have doped, but we will never know the true extent. Jan Ullrich won at an early age and he too is mired in doping controversy. What does that say about him?

You guys need to stop with the conjecture and trying to figure out what you'll never know for certain, especially when some of you can't even get basic cycling facts straight.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

1993 world championships in Culumbia...clumunbian riders getting shelled out the back...

My favorite is how one specific performance "proves" when exactly the EPO era started.

This is all need to read to gauge the level of cycling knowledge put forth this thread. I've never read such hogwash in my life.

Some of you give too much credence to Lemond and his theories. Some Tour winners began winning at a young age and others progressed slowly. Not all athletes are the same.

The ones who took a more methodical approach may or may have doped, but we will never know the true extent. Jan Ullrich won at an early age and he too is mired in doping controversy. What does that say about him?

You guys need to stop with the conjecture and trying to figure out what you'll never know for certain, especially when some of you can't even get basic cycling facts straight.

I don't recall anyone stating that one specific result proves the point. It's a cumulative viewpoint that is forced on us by the nature of the beast. As to Jan, he was a product of the E. German system. Maybe he was the only cyclist in that program who was clean and just waiting to be corrupted in the West.

BTW, reasoned conjecture is fun and at times rather interesting. Today's conjecture is often tomorrows factual truth.

 

[pmcg76]

There is a lot of questions about Indurains improvement for obvious reasons I think, he was always an excellent TTer and did have some impressive results in what is regarded as the pre-EPO era, Paris-Nice & Crit Intl as mentioned.
However he was working with Conconi so who knows how early he was on EPO.

He definitely could have podiumed at the Tour in 90 bur for Delgado and I could believe his 91 win was achieved without EPO but from 92 on I am not so sure. That TT in 92 which Fignon described as extra-terrestial maybe marked the change in preparation.

I am laughing so much at Chris E in this thread, kinda defending Indurain due to having results pre EPO but then in the LeMond thread demanding proof that EPO was more effective than steroids. LOL. Agenda much.

 

[Elagabalus]

... You guys need to stop with the conjecture and trying to figure out what you'll never know for certain ...

You DO realise this is an internet forum, right?

Anyway, getting back to the conjecture. Indurain also won stage 9 of the 1989 TdF and won the polka-dot jersey. He was very slimmed down for that TdF but if you watch him he's still slogging it out on the climb old school style. He doesn't have the same sauntering make-it-look-easy style that he had with his subseqent Tdf wins.

*I think it maybe available on youtube.

 

[ericfalcon]

My sincere thanks for helping me in my cluelessness. I'll have to look at the dvd, but my recollection, perhaps clueless or just fading, is that Claudio rode that race (yes, in 1995) with the Italian team. I could be mistaken.

However, the point is that two of the largest bodies in the race came first and second, at altitude on a far from flat course. I don't recall any sharp, uneven climbs as one would find in the Pyrenees. Still, it was not a sprinters course and the Colombians were expected to do very well. I guess they either didn't have EPO or didn't think they needed it given their living and training at altitude. Would Olano have won without EPO. I doubt it. Now, flame away for there being no proof that Olano or Indurain used EPO. In the meantime, excuse me. I have to sprinkle fairy dust to attract the wee ones for the party tonight.

Claudio rode that day in 1995. I believe he crashed out.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

1993 world championships in Culumbia...clumunbian riders getting shelled out the back...

My favorite is how one specific performance "proves" when exactly the EPO era started.

This is all need to read to gauge the level of cycling knowledge put forth this thread. I've never read such hogwash in my life.

Some of you give too much credence to Lemond and his theories. Some Tour winners began winning at a young age and others progressed slowly. Not all athletes are the same.

The ones who took a more methodical approach may or may have doped, but we will never know the true extent. Jan Ullrich won at an early age and he too is mired in doping controversy. What does that say about him?

You guys need to stop with the conjecture and trying to figure out what you'll never know for certain, especially when some of you can't even get basic cycling facts straight.

To the Blue - well, the person who mentioned the WC in Columbia never said it "proves" when exactly the EPO era started" - so not sure what your point is there.

There was no Tour winner (or even GT winner) during the 80's that didn't show their potential from an early age.

 

[ChrisE]

There is a lot of questions about Indurains improvement for obvious reasons I think, he was always an excellent TTer and did have some impressive results in what is regarded as the pre-EPO era, Paris-Nice & Crit Intl as mentioned.
However he was working with Conconi so who knows how early he was on EPO.

He definitely could have podiumed at the Tour in 90 bur for Delgado and I could believe his 91 win was achieved without EPO but from 92 on I am not so sure. That TT in 92 which Fignon described as extra-terrestial maybe marked the change in preparation.

I am laughing so much at Chris E in this thread, kinda defending Indurain due to having results pre EPO but then in the LeMond thread demanding proof that EPO was more effective than steroids. LOL. Agenda much.

Wrong. If you can provide a link to where I wrote steroids were more effective than EPO then good for you. Take your time looking. You will come back empty handed.

I said steroids were effective. Period. I said somebody on a steroid program without OOC testing had an advantage over a clean rider. I have made no distinctions on what is more effective because no controlled data exists.

If you are gonna slam me then get your facts straight.

 

[D-Queued]

Wrong. If you can provide a link to where I wrote steroids were more effective than EPO then good for you. Take your time looking. You will come back empty handed.

I said steroids were effective. Period. I said somebody on a steroid program without OOC testing had an advantage over a clean rider. I have made no distinctions on what is more effective because no controlled data exists.

If you are gonna slam me then get your facts straight.

Ok, since you asked:

The picture in your avatar is really creepy. That is a fact, and it doesn't make you look straight.

Dave.

 

[ChrisE]

Ok, since you asked:

The picture in your avatar is really creepy. That is a fact, and it doesn't make you look straight.

Dave.

Inre to my avatar, I am showing support for Sally Jenkins. She is on full kool-aid mode. I do admit I am growing tired of it, and I am pondering changing it back to Miss Venezuela that I saw in a Caracas airport in 2004. That incedent scarred me for life.

You know Dave, I just want us all to get along you know. pmcxyz wants to make shyt up from a totally unrelated thread to jam me on the point I am making here. What is possible clean vs a roided up rider and whether or not Indurain was a benefactor of EPO is so much of a pretzel stretch I will go take some Ibutprofen shortly after I log off. I am sure he will be along soon with his fanboys in tow to set me straight.

 

[the vagabond]

Could anyone be so clueless? Yes, you!

The name of the country is Colombia, not Columbia. and the year was 1995, not 1993. It was not Chiappucci (note the proper spelling), it was Pantani, a climber FYI. The race circuit did not include any long steep sustained climbs where climbers would have excelled, most world championships do not actually. Your ignorance is outrageous!!

Back to topic: like any 90s rider, Indurain did use juice.

I was there, and that climb was pretty long and fairly steep - around 400 meters at altitude if I remember correctly, and they went over it 10 or 11 times. There were only 20 finishers, by the way. Olano won on a flat tire but Indurain was the strongest rider and controlled the race. Pantani was 3rd. (That reversed the results of the TT a couple days earlier - I believe Ewe Peschel was 3rd in the TT.) I believe Hampsten was the last finisher in the roads race. Lance had had some results earlier in the year (including the TdeF win) but pulled out at the last minute with some excuse. Nobody really wanted to do that circuit. It was probably the hardest WC in the last 30 years and after the race it was basically decided that they would never use that long of a climb or that high an altitude again.

 

[ultimobici]

Nobody really wanted to do that circuit. It was probably the hardest WC in the last 30 years and after the race it was basically decided that they would never use that long of a climb or that high an altitude again.

They can't have ridden the Chambery circuit from 1989 then?

 

[ChrisE]

They can't have ridden the Chambery circuit from 1989 then?

The greatest bike race I have ever seen.

 

[andy1234]

They can't have ridden the Chambery circuit from 1989 then?

Put Chambery at 3000 metres and the circuits would be very similar.
Duitama worlds wins for toughness overall.

 

[compete_clean]

Bobet: 28
Anquetil: 23
Merckx: 24
Thévenet: 29
Hinault: 23
Fignon: 22
Lemond: 25

And it should be noted that Thevenet had to wait until Merckx was at the end of his run and he could break him. It was distinct climb in the Pyrenees. I'm trying to remember one.

 

[pmcg76]

Inre to my avatar, I am showing support for Sally Jenkins. She is on full kool-aid mode. I do admit I am growing tired of it, and I am pondering changing it back to Miss Venezuela that I saw in a Caracas airport in 2004. That incedent scarred me for life.

You know Dave, I just want us all to get along you know. pmcxyz wants to make shyt up from a totally unrelated thread to jam me on the point I am making here. What is possible clean vs a roided up rider and whether or not Indurain was a benefactor of EPO is so much of a pretzel stretch I will go take some Ibutprofen shortly after I log off. I am sure he will be along soon with his fanboys in tow to set me straight.

Yep, your right

Taken from the LeMond thread, dont know how to cross quote from other threads

Chris E on the subject of EPO being more effective than steroids:

''do you have a link from a controlled experiment from somebody on a detailed roid program vs one on EPO? If not, then it is all conjecture, used to suit your argument about whether or not a clean GL could have beaten these other riders on roids and whatnot in the 80's. It keeps with your narrative, because GL and LA are enemies thus GL can never be questioned about whether he could beat doped riders in the 80's''

So its all conjecture that EPO is more effective than steroids, of course you never said that, right or its out of context fact is you posted it.

I actually agree with you about Indurain, its just funny how you accuse others of believing things to follow a narative when its quite clear that is more in line with what you do here.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

And it should be noted that Thevenet had to wait until Merckx was at the end of his run and he could break him. It was distinct climb in the Pyrenees. I'm trying to remember one.

The year after he won his second Tour (Thevenet) he was so wrecked by steroid abuse that he pretty much fell off his bike in the Giro. I did buy a PX10-LE that year. Good value, but the musette didn't have the right lunch.

 

[Exroadman24902]

The greatest bike race I have ever seen.

it was the the best one day one I've seen too. Kelly first said he chose the wrong gear, then years into retirement said Rooks has broken a pact they made by going for the win himself if it came to a sprint. While I shouldn't inflame the touchy sensitivities of the clinic people ;-), I loved Fignon's moved-as always had to do it for Lemond-counterting the blow the chase group apart and bridge to the leaders. I liked Lemond but Fignon was the rider of 89

 

[Exroadman24902]

to get back to Indurain and drugs..what was the + he had go away?