Well. He is open to criticism, just like Lemond. Anybody can now come forward and say he doped and that he saw him doping.
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Escarabajo said:Well. He is open to criticism, just like Lemond. Anybody can now come forward and say he doped and that he saw him doping.
sniper said:Why in the world would anybody have seen Mejia dope?
And in the unexpected case that somebody did see him dope, why in the world would that person come forward and say he doped?
btw, Dutch doctor Castoing who accused Lemond of using EPO got a letter from Lemond's lawyer telling him to withdraw the accusations. Lemond also made sure all press releases relating to that accusation disappeared behind a legal google wall.
Is that what you mean by "open to criticism, just like Lemond"?
That said, it's probably more accurate than "open to criticism, just like Lemond fans"
cheers!ScienceIsCool said:https://www.facebook.com/2Rmag/posts/534227359949423
Here you go sniper. Lemond admits to doping. There was that one time in Columbia that he and Fignon snorted coke.
John Swanson
You didn’t see any of them doing it? Greg: No
So you didn’t see it with Renault? Greg: No.
You didn’t see it? Greg: No
And you didn’t actually see them doing it in Boxmeer in ‘83? Greg: No.
Greg: I think he [Fignon] probably did it [coke] two nights in a row.
What was interesting about it was that he actually won the last stage and had to go to dope control and suddenly it dawns on him that he has a huge problem. And then he realises that he doesn’t have a problem at all because the Columbians are being fuelled on this stuff.
I think he had a lot of people come forward. At least IMHO.Benotti69 said:Escarabajo said:Well. He is open to criticism, just like Lemond. Anybody can now come forward and say he doped and that he saw him doping.
That kind of doesn't work. The biggest @a$$hole in the sport only had a few people come forward and look how that panned out.
I am not sure if I am following you.sniper said:Why in the world would anybody have seen Mejia dope?
And in the unexpected case that somebody did see him dope, why in the world would that person come forward and say he doped?
btw, Dutch doctor Castoing who accused Lemond of using EPO got a letter from Lemond's lawyer telling him to withdraw the accusations. Lemond also made sure all press releases relating to that accusation disappeared behind a legal google wall.
Is that what you mean by "open to criticism, just like Lemond"?
That said, it's probably more accurate than "open to criticism, just like Lemond fans"
sniper said:Not to take anything away from the the rest of your point, and merely as an aside,hrotha said:All sarcasm aside, there's reason to think that the Colombians as a whole were clean(ish) or at least that they didn't benefit as much from doping in the 90s. In the second half of the 80s, the Colombians were a growing force in Europe. Their decline coincides precisely with the spread of EPO in the pro peloton. Now, why would those very talented folks like Lucho Herrera (who retired at 31, thirty-one) suddenly stop being a factor, when they had already paid their dues and adapted to European cycling?
Herrera also gave us a perfect quote to describe the early 90s: "when I saw riders with fat asses climbing like airplanes, that's when I knew." His case is similar to LeMond's.
Lemond couldn't finish races anymore. That obviously had little to do with other riders being on EPO. His body simply couldn't cope anymore.
This is by and large uncontroversial among those who think he doped as well as those who think he didn't.
By conteast Hampste n for instance was still going as stronstrong as evver in 1992. when Lemon d was not finishing anymore. Bauer was also still in contention.
Other thing is that 89 is when we have riders including the tdfs lantern rouge on epo, so its plausible to assume that in 90 a considerable number was on EPO. Lemond won it that year.
And meanwhile we saw riders like Rooks and Planckaert going backwards in the early 90s, despite being on EPO by their own admission.
Just saying there is little reason to link lemonds decline to others using EPO, and herreras case does not look similar to me.
On topic:
Raul Alcala is an interesting case. He was allegedly the only pdm rider who didn't get sick in 91.
Escarabajo said:There you have it fellows. From Mejias mouth even after retirement. His career cut short:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/alvaro-mejia-i-would-have-liked-to-have-raced-in-a-clean-era/
I remember my brother telling me after the RCN classic. He just beat all the greats in the TT. This rider if our next "Herrera" if not better. I never understood what happened to him. Completely gone after a short stint.
Ryo has said it in this forum that he was even better than Herrera. But, you know for the Colombians in those days was kind of tough.
Lance once said about Mejia that he lacked determination. Now we know what he meant by that.
My point would be: all pro-cyclists -- except those who got caught and a handful of exceptions like Paul Kimmage or Charlie Mottet -- will claim they are/were clean. Froome, Wiggins, Contador, Paula Radcliffe, Rafael Nadal, Zlatan Ibrahimovic. You name them. Should we praise them for claiming they're clean, just because it means they're now "open to criticism"?Escarabajo said:...
I am not sure if I am following you.
I meant, don't you think these guys are at least open to criticism or whatever from other cyclists or coaches if they knew something about them. At least some noise.
That's certainly fair enough.escarabajo:
The problem here is that Mejia was not that big to be that important. There are probably other cyclists in his position where they faded away quickly for no big reason at all.
For some reason I like the turn of events in this case. It kind of falls into place.
Fair enough indeed.escarabajo:
this is no proof of not doping anyway. So I give you that. Don't really want to defend with blood something that I don't know. Fair enough.
Agreed. It would be silly to make such a case.red_flanders said:...
If you're trying to make the case that EPO didn't massively change the game, and that it didn't end the careers of many riders, you're doing so with wholly subjective evaluations, unsupported speculation, and directly against the statements of many riders, as well as simple logic.
UCI said:The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) announces that 8 riders were notified of an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) in samples during the Vuelta a Colombia 2017.
The riders Luis Alberto Largo Quintero, Jonathan Felipe Paredes Hernandez, Edward Fabian Diaz Cardenas, Fabio Nelson Montenegro Forero, Luis Camargo Flechas, Fabian Robinson Lopez Rivera and Oscar Soliz Vilca were notified of an AAF of CERA* in blood samples collected on 1 and 2 August 2017.
The rider Juan Carlos Cadena Sastoque was notified of an AAF of 19-noretiocholanolone and 19-norandrosterone** in a urine sample provided on 11 August 2017.
These intelligence-led doping controls were planned and carried out by the Cycling Anti-Doping Foundation (CADF), the independent body mandated by the UCI, in charge of defining and implementing the anti-doping strategy in cycling.
The riders have the opportunity to request and attend the analysis of the B sample.
In accordance with UCI Anti-Doping Rules, the riders have been provisionally suspended until the adjudication of the matter.
At this stage of the procedure, the UCI will not comment any further on any of these cases.
(*) CERA is classified as “Peptide Hormones, Growth Factors, Related Substances and Mimetics” as per the World Anti-Doping Prohibited List 2017.
(**) 19-noretiocholanolone and 19-norandrosterone are classified as “Anabolic Androgenic Steroids” as per the World Anti-Doping Prohibited List 2017.
Bronstein said:Colombians partying like it's 2008:
UCI said:The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) announces that 8 riders were notified of an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) in samples during the Vuelta a Colombia 2017.
The riders Luis Alberto Largo Quintero, Jonathan Felipe Paredes Hernandez, Edward Fabian Diaz Cardenas, Fabio Nelson Montenegro Forero, Luis Camargo Flechas, Fabian Robinson Lopez Rivera and Oscar Soliz Vilca were notified of an AAF of CERA* in blood samples collected on 1 and 2 August 2017.
The rider Juan Carlos Cadena Sastoque was notified of an AAF of 19-noretiocholanolone and 19-norandrosterone** in a urine sample provided on 11 August 2017.
These intelligence-led doping controls were planned and carried out by the Cycling Anti-Doping Foundation (CADF), the independent body mandated by the UCI, in charge of defining and implementing the anti-doping strategy in cycling.
The riders have the opportunity to request and attend the analysis of the B sample.
In accordance with UCI Anti-Doping Rules, the riders have been provisionally suspended until the adjudication of the matter.
At this stage of the procedure, the UCI will not comment any further on any of these cases.
(*) CERA is classified as “Peptide Hormones, Growth Factors, Related Substances and Mimetics” as per the World Anti-Doping Prohibited List 2017.
(**) 19-noretiocholanolone and 19-norandrosterone are classified as “Anabolic Androgenic Steroids” as per the World Anti-Doping Prohibited List 2017.
The organization of proper controls that could catch the more up to date stuff was lacking, so people were taking their chances. Remember Jimmy "Mr 63%" Briceño? A lot of these smaller scenes have the problem that the infrastructure for testing to the same standard as at the top level is too costly for many races, and indeed in places like Colombia many of the races do not have UCI categorization at all. A lot of the most promising young riders will be plucked from the scene before they spend too long there, so much of the national péloton will be comprised of people trying to get spotted to make it out to Europe or North America on a good contract, or people who are never likely to leave the national scene (or have returned to it) and older riders for whom these are their biggest targets. This year's Vuelta winner was Aristobulo Cala, 27 years old and a surprise winner; he's the first rider under 30 to win it since Henao in 2010. Since then, the winners have been Félix Cardenas (at 38 and 39), Óscar Sevilla (at 36, 37 and 38) and Mauricio Ortega (at 35). Of the positives, Largo is 27, Paredes 28, Soliz 32, Montenegro 35 and Camargo 39. These 5 probably do not expect to be riding outside of South American teams, whether they wish to move on or not (and don't get me wrong, many riders don't). The other three are young prospects, admittedly.Nick C. said:Are they just that "careless" at this race or has the change in leadership led to an effort to find positives, or is this part of the "catch the small fish and let the big fish go so we look like we are trying".
Someone talked ...According to the UCI press release, the "intelligence led" doping controls were planned and carried out by the Cycling Anti-Doping Foundation (CADF).
Libertine Seguros said:A lot of the most promising young riders will be plucked from the scene before they spend too long there, so much of the national péloton will be comprised of people trying to get spotted to make it out to Europe or North America on a good contract, or people who are never likely to leave the national scene (or have returned to it) and older riders for whom these are their biggest targets. This year's Vuelta winner was Aristobulo Cala, 27 years old and a surprise winner; he's the first rider under 30 to win it since Henao in 2010. Since then, the winners have been Félix Cardenas (at 38 and 39), Óscar Sevilla (at 36, 37 and 38) and Mauricio Ortega (at 35). Of the positives, Largo is 27, Paredes 28, Soliz 32, Montenegro 35 and Camargo 39. These 5 probably do not expect to be riding outside of South American teams, whether they wish to move on or not (and don't get me wrong, many riders don't). The other three are young prospects, admittedly.
AlexNYC said:roundabout said:AlexNYC said:classicomano said:Jarlinson Pantano has had a nice transformation to GC contender after dissappearing to Colombia for 2 months.
Where he habitually trained with Nairo and Anacona at high altitude. Maybe that has something to do with his improved form...
Did he not train at high altitude before?
The point is that he didn't disappear in Colombia; he was filmed and photographed training with Quintana, basically following the same program that has worked for Nairo the last few years. Also, I think the word 'transformation' is not fair; he did finish in the top 10 last year in Catalunya, not to mention his good TdF.