A thread on Indurain's doping

[issoisso]

Indurain won a stage of the tour de L'avenir in his first year of professional (20 years). Next year with 21 he got the yellow jersey during four stages in the Vuelta (the youngest rider ever) + 2 stages in Tour de L'Avenir. With 22 years he won the tour de L'avenir and 2 stages + Vuelta a Murcia. With 23 he won Vuelta a Murcia, Vuelta a Galicia and Semana Catalana, plus Vuelta a los Valles Mineros (including 3 stages, and they rode in mountainous areas).

Maybe you don't know/consider all those tours, but I can tell you that in that time they were very meaningful victories, and those expected from a Spanish future star. Budgets and tradition in that time led young riders to follow such a (local) calendar.

To even further emphasize your point, you forgot his first major victory at 23, the Volta a Catalunya

 

[hrotha]

Let's not forget that Indurain rode for Reynolds (Movistar). They always liked to take it easy and protect their young stars to often ridiculous extents.

 

[Parrulo]

I'm no Armstrong fan, but that's a real stretch. Armstrong was not focusing on grand tours early in his career but had a lot more success than did Indruain in major races. He won the world championships in his second year as a pro - 2 years after converting from triathlons. He also won a stage at the Tour that year, won virtually every major race in the US (including the Tour du Pont, which had an international field), and came in 3rd in the Tour of Sweden. In his second year, he was 2nd in Liège–Bastogne–Liège and 2nd in San Sebastián. In 96 he won du Pont, won Flèche Wallonne, was 2nd in Liège–Bastogne–Liège and 2nd in Paris–Nice. Other than the L'Avenir, there's not much on Indurain's palmares until around 1989. He never even did better than 4th in the Spanish championships. In 1988 his palmares is really thin then in 1989 he starts winning a lot of major races.

so armstrong showed great hilly classics potential and all of sudden was a tour winner. well i guess gilbert will destroy the field this year.

:facepalm:

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I'm no Armstrong fan, but that's a real stretch. Armstrong was not focusing on grand tours early in his career but had a lot more success than did Indruain in major races. He won the world championships in his second year as a pro - 2 years after converting from triathlons. He also won a stage at the Tour that year, won virtually every major race in the US (including the Tour du Pont, which had an international field), and came in 3rd in the Tour of Sweden. In his second year, he was 2nd in Liège–Bastogne–Liège and 2nd in San Sebastián. In 96 he won du Pont, won Flèche Wallonne, was 2nd in Liège–Bastogne–Liège and 2nd in Paris–Nice. Other than the L'Avenir, there's not much on Indurain's palmares until around 1989. He never even did better than 4th in the Spanish championships. In 1988 his palmares is really thin then in 1989 he starts winning a lot of major races.

Hmm, why is it that Armstrong did "not focus on Grand Tours early in his career"?
Because as the rest of your list shows Armstrong was a very good rider at short or specific events.

Indurain was the opposite, so as he was not a classic contender obviously his name draws a blank in those results - but he certainly wasn't anonymous in his first years as a Pro and as his results came in stage races it showed his capability.

1984 - (Became Pro 4th Sept):
Deux étapes du Tour de l'Avenir

1985 -
The Tour de l'Avenir
2ème de la Ruta del Sol

-

1986 (6)
Tour de Murcie
Tour de l'Avenir
Deux étapes du Tour de l'Avenir
Une étape du Tour de Murcie
Leiza
5ème de la Ruta del Sol

-

1987 (12)
Grand Prix de Navarre
Memorial Santi André
Subida a Txitxarro
Vallées Minières
Trois étapes des Vallées Minières
Deux étapes de la Semaine Catalane
Une étape du Tour de Murcie
Une étape du Tour de Gallice
Une étape de Subida a Txitxarro
2ème du Grand Prix Llodio
2ème du GP Ayuntamiento de Bilbao
3ème de la Semaine Catalane
5ème de la Vuelta a Rioja

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Hmm, why is it that Armstrong did "not focus on Grand Tours early in his career"?
Because as the rest of your list shows Armstrong was a very good rider at short or specific events.

Indurain was the opposite, so as he was not a classic contender obviously his name draws a blank in those results - but he certainly wasn't anonymous in his first years as a Pro and as his results came in stage races it showed his capability.

You are right that those are results which show talent, but they aren't results that point towards Indurain's later career dominance of Grand Tours.

They sort of remind me of the palmares of someone like Dan Martin in his first three and a half years as a pro (ie now), the main difference being that Indurain had a larger quantity of wins while Martin has better ones. Neither of them showed anything much of note in Grand Tours to that point.

Martin is clearly very talented, but if he goes on to win seven Grand Tours people will raise their eyebrows.

 

[issoisso]

You are right that those are results which show talent, but they aren't results that point towards Indurain's later career dominance of Grand Tours. They sort of remind me of the palmares of someone like Dan Martin in his first three and a half years as a pro (ie now), the main difference being that Indurain had a larger quantity of wins while Martin has better ones.

Martin is clearly very talented, but if he goes on to win seven Grand Tours people will raise their eyebrows.

By the time Induráin was Martin's current age, he had won Paris-Nice, the Critérium International, the Volta a Catalunya and the Tour de France's queen stage.

 

[VeloCity]

the main difference being that Indurain had a larger quantity of wins while Martin has better ones.

Better ones? Martin's won the Tres Valli Varesine, the Route du Sud, and the Tour of Poland. At the same age, Indurain had won Paris-Nice twice, Criterium, Catalunya, Murcia, l'Avenir, Galicia, Settamana, and a stage of the Tour. There's no comparison between the two.

 

[mastersracer]

Hmm, why is it that Armstrong did "not focus on Grand Tours early in his career"?
Because as the rest of your list shows Armstrong was a very good rider at short or specific events.

Indurain was the opposite, so as he was not a classic contender obviously his name draws a blank in those results - but he certainly wasn't anonymous in his first years as a Pro and as his results came in stage races it showed his capability.
...

It is simply false that Indurain's palmares shows grand tour prowess during the first four years of his career. Of the 5 Tour winners before Indurain, Delgado did the worst in his first Tour, placing 15th. Roche placed 13th, Lemond placed 3rd, Fignon won (at age 22), and Hinault won (and also won the Vuelta the same year). Indurain was DNF, DNF, 97, and 47.

Almost all the races Indurain made the podium in during the first 4 years of his career were secondary races at best. The clearest evidence of this is the fact that Indurain did not even rank in the top 100 riders in the old UCI world ranking system used during the 80s in the first 2 years of his career. He barely makes the top 100 riders in his 3rd year with a ranking of 99. In his 4th year he's ranked 80th in the world.

 

[JRTinMA]

<snip>

Shocking news, the doctor is involved in derailing an Indurain thread with LA chatter. SSDD

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Shocking news, the doctor is involved in derailing an Indurain thread with LA chatter. SSDD

Shocking news- JRTinMA never said anything about 'masteracers' post about Armstrong, that I was responding to or the post by Velocity that masterracer was responding to.

 

[Polish]

I just caved in and ordered the "Indurain 5 pack DVD" from WCP.

It was on sale.

I'll watch it and chime in with my theories.

I'm going to pick up the set too - replace my old WCP VHS tapes

Those are Great Tours!
The last Steel Bikes winning TdF stages and Overall are in those races somewhere. Beautiful Bikes, Beautiful Races.

 

[JRTinMA]

Shocking news- JRTinMA never said anything about 'masteracers' post about Armstrong, that I was responding to or the post by Velocity that masterracer was responding to.

I did say "involved", and you were involved. I didn't say 100% responsible for ruining an otherwise great thread.

 

[Exroadman24902]

Huh. Any of these sound familiar? "a non-climber till the age of 27"; "Indurain was 5 years a non climber"; "Miguel Indurain-crap climber".
And look how many riders won hilly 1-week stage races early in their careers who then went on to become great GT riders. So what exactly is your point? That riders who win 1-week hilly stage races never go on to become great GC riders? Obviously they do.

At the Tour Indurain steadily improved year after year and steadily moved up the GC standings until he eventually won. Sorry. I know you don't like it, but it's true.

Reading comprehension is not one of your strong points, is it? I've said that I believe Indurain was doping in just about every single post I've made in this thread.

But there is still a big difference between the two: Indurain showed plenty of signs that he could become a great GC rider well before his first GT/Tour win and progressed and improved each year. Armstrong was the exact opposite - a good but not great TT'er who showed very little climbing ability but then boom, 4th at the Vuelta and winning the Tour - and the TT's and climbing stages - several months later. No progression whatsoever, just one year a middle-of-the-pack'er and the next a dominant Tour winner.

I was only talking about consistency over 21 days..consistency over 3 week grand tours is what Lemond reckoned would be shown early in a riders career, not half way through it and on that basis he more or less defamed Indurain a few years ago on this point..said his progress could only be down to EPO. I agree. But you and I differ as you still think he would have been a great GT rider anyway. Thanks for keeping the Indurain thread high on the board

 

[Iker_Baqueiro]

You realize that I'm laughing so hard about your Lance agitprop action.

You are exposed and have zero credibility. Actions like these are an indication that Livewrong is indeed in dire straits.

God I can feel the desperation in your post... just keep trying o falsify history... it won't help as it has been refuted. And your persistence just exposes you for what you are...

You don't even try to deny it anymore.

Livewrong fool begone

+100. Franklin, you nailed this livewrong troll

 

[red_flanders]

I just caved in and ordered the "Indurain 5 pack DVD" from WCP.

It was on sale.

I'll watch it and chime in with my theories.

Assume you have, but if not, just watch the five preceding Tours then the 1990 edition. You will see about 4-5 guys who will surprise everyone.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

By the time Induráin was Martin's current age, he had won Paris-Nice, the Critérium International, the Volta a Catalunya and the Tour de France's queen stage.

Better ones? Martin's won the Tres Valli Varesine, the Route du Sud, and the Tour of Poland. At the same age, Indurain had won Paris-Nice twice, Criterium, Catalunya, Murcia, l'Avenir, Galicia, Settamana, and a stage of the Tour. There's no comparison between the two.

It's like a mini-epidemic of reading comprehension problems. As the post you lads were responding to actually stated, after three and a half years as a pro, Indurain had more wins than Martin, but less good ones. Indurain, of course, started out as a pro about a year and a half younger than Martin.

The list of Indurain's wins after three and a half years is in Dr Maserati's post. It's a very good palmares for a young pro. It is not an amazing palmares and it does not point towards a winner of 7 Grand Tours.

 

[issoisso]

It's like a mini-epidemic of reading comprehension problems. As the post you lads were responding to actually stated, after three and a half years as a pro, Indurain had more wins than Martin, but less good ones.

Except it doesn't say that at all. It doesn't even imply it.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Except it doesn't say that at all. It doesn't even imply it.

They sort of remind me of the palmares of someone like Dan Martin in his first three and a half years as a pro (ie now), the main difference being that Indurain had a larger quantity of wins while Martin has better ones. Neither of them showed anything much of note in Grand Tours to that point.

he certainly wasn't anonymous in his first years as a Pro and as his results came in stage races it showed his capability.
1984 - (Became Pro 4th Sept):
[...]
1985 -
[...]
1986
[...]
1987
[...]

It seems that the reading comprehension difficulties may be chronic.

 

[issoisso]

So you go back and edit the post to make yourself retroactively "right" and expect me not to notice? You're dumber than you look

 

[mastersracer]

Don’t derail the main 2 points:

1. In his first 2 wins Indurain produced about 5 watts/kg on final climbs at the Tour. At this point he is in his 7th year as a pro. Four years later he has found an additional 1.34w/kg to produce over 500 watts on final climbs at the Tour. It’s pretty obvious in retrospect that this jump in power – and the need to produce at least 6.2 watts/kg to contend at the Tour – coincided with rampant EPO use. By the late 90s, 80% of Tour samples tested positive for EPO (during development of an EPO test).

2. Indurain’s rise was slow. In his 4th year as a pro, he ranks only 80th in the world. Perhaps his rise was merely a slow, deliberate progression. If so, it signals a shift from previous Tour winners (Hinault, FIgnon, Lemond, Roche, Delgado), who all had early Tour success. Since Indurain had been working with Conconi at least for 3 years by his first Tour win, it is entirely plausible that his first Tour successes involved systematic doping and explained the jump from being an unexceptional racer to the number one ranked rider in the world. Whether or not the first Tour win was, it’s pretty obvious to anyone without a particular agenda that his domination of the Tour during the 90s was the result of a systematic doping program.

 

[ChrisE]

Don’t derail the main 2 points:

1. In his first 2 wins Indurain produced about 5 watts/kg on final climbs at the Tour. At this point he is in his 7th year as a pro. Four years later he has found an additional 1.34w/kg to produce over 500 watts on final climbs at the Tour. It’s pretty obvious in retrospect that this jump in power – and the need to produce at least 6.2 watts/kg to contend at the Tour – coincided with rampant EPO use. By the late 90s, 80% of Tour samples tested positive for EPO (during development of an EPO test).
....

I am curious about the 80% number because I have never heard it. Not that I doubt it, but is there a link for that?

If you are referring to the famous graph that has been flying around forums for awhile showing progression of power output on the last mountain of tour stages by the leader, that was discussed in depth a couple of years ago on here. In fact, I think at the time I used it, as you have now, to prove that probability that Indurain might have been clean his first couple of tours.

I think alot is left to be desired about the quality of that graph and I backed off later in that thread. I don't feel like digging but there are variables there that are unique to the situation, like racing tactics. When did Indurain really start getting pushed by a rival he feared? That may not be a coincidence.

 

[Polish]

Assume you have, but if not, just watch the five preceding Tours then the 1990 edition. You will see about 4-5 guys who will surprise everyone.

A large part of that "suprise" did NOT come from EPO.
For many, the "suprise" came from lack of knowledge/coverage.
And EPO was only icing on the Suprise Cake.

But to hear many people today, Big Mig/Bugno/Claudio/Marco/Alex/Tony were all donkeys.
BS. Clinic BS. Thoroughbreds and one Patron.
Spectacular Tours!
And in an imaginary clean tour (never has happened btw), those same riders
would have risen to the top anyway.
That is how awesome works.

Anyway, did YOU watch the preceding five tours?
Where can we find them?
They are very hard to find in English at least.

The 89 and 90 TdF WCP videos became available months after the Tour.
Back in those days, many of us watched the tour on VHS in September.

Phil's narrations were wonderful.
He was a huge Greg fanboy.
Mentioned Greg as much as he mentioned Lance later on
But that was ok - the tapes were aimed at English speakers.
Big Mig was awesome in those years too, as a domestique.
Top 20 and Top 10 on final GC.
Phil mentioned him just a little
Spanish TV & Videos mentioned Big Mig a lot more I would think.

87 and 88 videos, when Big Mig progressed from Top100 to Top50 as a workhorse domestique,
are not even covered by WCP as far as I know.
No Greg, no video.

There are WCP videos from 85 & 86 of course.
Big focus on Greg.
Big Mig is a neo-pro in there somewhere.

The Spanish coverage of those races would be fun to watch.
Big Mig was much less of a "suprise" to those viewers than the viewers who watched Phil and WCP.
Doubt Spanish Fanboys were "suprised".

Don't get me wrong, Phil did GREAT coverage.
Just not so much on the Spanish riders that "suprised" the uninformed....

The "other 4 or 5 guys" you mention recieved more attention at home too.
Less of a suprise if you were paying attention.

 

[petethedrummer]

If coming 97th is an indicator of grand tour potential then I predict Lilian Jegou to win the tour this year and 2012, 2013, 2014 & 2015. He will fight it out with a couple of the DNFs from 2006 and 2005.

 

[Polish]

If coming 97th is an indicator of grand tour potential then I predict Lilian Jegou to win the tour this year and 2012, 2013, 2014 & 2015. He will fight it out with a couple of the DNFs from 2006 and 2005.

I predict there are people dumb enough to think Lilian could win 5 TdF's if only he would dope.
Go for it Lilian. You could do it. Dope Dope Dope.

Of course Lilian could NOT win One Two Three Four Five Six Seven TdF's.
No matter how much dope he did.
No one would be dumb enough to believe that lol.
Sorry Lilian.
But being as talented as Big Mig aint too shabby

 

[ergmonkey]

If coming 97th is an indicator of grand tour potential then I predict Lilian Jegou to win the tour this year and 2012, 2013, 2014 & 2015. He will fight it out with a couple of the DNFs from 2006 and 2005.

I'll bet he fought really hard for that 97th place...you know, not being a team leader and not targeting any sort of gc place. No way he could have placed 96th that year. Never. Proof: donkey.