Dan Martin - "Now I know you can win clean"

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

very,very few were doing epo in 1992 and we can't know how well it did work. most of guys you named likely started only in 1993. carrera for example.
without a doubt, in 1992 lemond could achieve these kind of results.

you have to find another comparison because this one can't be made.

Jens, are you telling me Claudio Cappuccino was really a great talent?

Lolz.

I'm also of the view that clean riders can/could beat a doped up rider in a 1 day race. But when it comes to a clean rider and doped rider in a stage race the clean rider should not come close to the doped rider.

Sir chief inspector DAvid Walsh seems to be of the opposite opinion to that BYOP.

And, for the sudden LeMond lovers; best to compare powerdata with Fignon 1983/1984, or LeMond 1985/1986, Hinault before that is also interesting of course.

Fignon was the best of them by the way, grinta.

For Jens:
Miguel Indurain 6.13 45 40 Plagne Aime 1297 17.8 1954 Tour de France 1995

Laurent Fignon 5.28 52 41 Plagne Aime 1297 17.8 1954 Tour de France 1984

Besides LeMond on Luz Ardiden I have never seen so much power on wheels, yet their w/k are like amateurs these days, thoughtforfood...

PS: both climbs of la Plage are on youtybe, go watch and think of what is humanly possible.

 

[BYOP88]

Jens, are you telling me Claudio Cappuccino was really a great talent?

Lolz.

Sir chief inspector DAvid Walsh seems to be of the opposite opinion to that BYOP.

And, for the sudden LeMond lovers; best to compare powerdata with Fignon 1983/1984, or LeMond 1985/1986, Hinault before that is also interesting of course.

Fignon was the best of them by the way, grinta.

For Jens:
Miguel Indurain 6.13 45 40 Plagne Aime 1297 17.8 1954 Tour de France 1995

Laurent Fignon 5.28 52 41 Plagne Aime 1297 17.8 1954 Tour de France 1984

Besides LeMond on Luz Ardiden I have never seen so much power on wheels, yet their w/k are like amateurs these days, thoughtforfood...

PS: both climbs of la Plage are on youtybe, go watch and think of what is humanly possible.

With those numbers Fignon would be lucky to make the time cut these days

 

[roundabout]

Tour de Suisse 1990

5. Etappe Bergzeitfahren Solothurn - Balmberg (12 km)
1. Erik Breukink (Ho) 26:59,20 (ø 26.680 km/h).
2. Daniel Steiger (Sz) 0:00,20.
3. Gianluca Pierobon (It) 0:02,30.

Tour de Suisse 1993

6. Etappe Bergzeitfahren Solothurn - Balmberg (12 km)
1. Zenon Jaskula (Pol) 24:31,83 (ø 28,351 km/h).
2. Pawel Tonkow (Russ) 0:15,50.
3. Davide Rebellin (It) 1:30,38

The times did start really going down in 1993. 1992 Tour was a peculiar route though. FGL, do you happen know what was the best Alpe time that year?

Edit: the excellent climbing records blog says that it was over 43 minutes. The best time up to that point was a 40:27 the year before on an easy stage.

 

[Netserk]

lol @ Rebellin podium in the same month I was born and still riding today

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Not sure if you're ignoring me, pmcg76, but I asked this on a previous page:

I realise it's my own laziness to ask, but can you find another example other than LeMond?

Comparisons of supposed clean riders to someone of his ilk as proof that a race can be won clean, seem a little lacking in substance. Primarily:

* the rider in question is no LeMond.
* those races (I believe) were conducted pre-EPO.

There was no answer, and you provided another example below that I spent some time looking into this morning:

I know I keep referencing LeMond but he seems to be the one guy who most people believe was clean. In the infamous 1992 Luxembourg Tour TT, LeMond finished 5th, now he was spanked by Indurain but he also beat guys who many believe were on EPO at the time, for example Roche, Breukink, Chiappucci, Alcala.

You could argue some were not noted TT riders e.g Chiappucci, but Roche for example was a fantastic TT rider long before the advent of EPO. Breukink was also a good TT rider, what about Jeff Bernard??

If people are prepared to believe that totally clean LeMond was beating guys on EPO in TTs, no tactics, no team-mates, no hiding from the wind, no limit to EPO usage and then turn around and say it is impossible for a current clean rider to beat dopers in a one day race, then frankly you are being totally hypocritical.

I am struggling, immensely, with the logic of "Greg LeMond (level rider) beat some alleged dopers in a TT back in 1992 after a week of Tour de France stages of up to 300km" therefore "A current clean rider (level independent) can beat other doping riders in a one day classic".

It's difficult to analyse your example because results are thin for these years, but the following stood out:

1. Breukink looks more like a prologue rider, and (probably) performed worse the longer the TT went. He won the 33km TT one year, but 1992 in particular was a bad year for Erik, especially in TTs (according to wiki and I can't see his results for TTs anywhere, he was bombing - happy to be corrected)
2. The year before (1991) Breukink and his entire team (PDM) had to withdraw from the Tour due to "food poisoning", which later was revealed to be Intralipid, according to wiki. Once bitten twice shy?
3. Roche allegedly peaked in 1987, so by 1992 he's 5 years past his alleged peak and 1 year away from retiring, his body wracked with back pain due to a bad knee njiury.
4. Your argument "Greg beat Stephen Roche" is true, but the deficit, after 1:23:35 is a mere 6 seconds to Roche, @ 1:23:41. This is a margin of 0.12% I looked for comparable results (long / 50+ km TT after a week of Tour racing) to compare Roche to LeMond but could not find any. Roche's margin to LeMond would be telling from 1990, for instance.
(5. Jeff Barnard? No idea who you're talking about vis a vis TdF results)


Finally, I think your argument is flawed, because of the guaranteed improvements made in one area of rider preparation from 1990 to 2010: doping sophistication. In 1998, riders had no idea what their Hct was (eg: O"Grady), back in 1990...

Conconi - the father of EPO prepatore - had only just started his experiments on elite athletes with EPO - but probably not until 1992 / 1993, and it would have taken some time to finesse its use. In particular, it was injected subcutaneously and stuck around for a long time (hence O'Grady's stage 14 suspicious result???) vs what Ferrari had his riders doing from 1999 onwards (IV). Further, the Italians would have been the primary recipients of Conconi's EPO skills, given he was the Italian OC drug dude working for national pride, etc, etc.

Yes, Lance had a lot more than Ferrari going for him, in terms of UCI "support", but Ferrari's results for me point to a massive leap in doping sophistication.

I have no issue whatsoever saying LeMond could beat dopers (note: not all of them) in 1992's TT but Dan Martin needed to dope to win L-B-L in 2013. And do not feel hypocritical at all. If LeMond-level talent, believably clean, won L-B-L in 2013, I could believe it, and would agree that it would be hypocritical to say it was not possible.

LeMond was an outlier in terms of talent. Dan Martin is no LeMond. Doping back then was a haphazard, sledge hammer approach. Doping now is a finessed, artistic and scientific endeavour with leaps in protocol and testing.


ETA: er yeah what everyone else said. Heh oops.

 

[red_flanders]

If people are prepared to believe that totally clean LeMond was beating guys on EPO in TTs, no tactics, no team-mates, no hiding from the wind, no limit to EPO usage and then turn around and say it is impossible for a current clean rider to beat dopers in a one day race, then frankly you are being totally hypocritical.

Given the example I think you extrapolate too far.

What we have here is one particular guy (Lemond, a once-in-a-generation talent) beating some guys who may have been on EPO on that particular day, in one stage of one race.

To carry that to say "because Lemond did it on that day against those guys, we must believe that others can do it"...well...that's a bit of a logical leap I can't at all agree with.

It's not to totally dismiss your point, but if someone doesn't agree with what you present, to call them "totally hypocritical" is IMO pretty far off base.

 

[Berzin]

very,very few were doing epo in 1992 and we can't know how well it did work. most of guys you named likely started only in 1993. carrera for example.
without a doubt, in 1992 lemond could achieve these kind of results.

you have to find another comparison because this one can't be made.

This is where "conjecture-as-fact" get you in trouble.

EPO abuse became rampant and had a noticeable adverse effect on the continental racing results beginning in 1990.

Early on, the Italians were by far the biggest beneficiaries early, as were Spain's Banesto team with Indurain. It didn't start with Gewiss in 1994 at Fleche Wallone.

It would be interesting to research who was or were the doctors who first began administering the drug to team riders and how they came across it. I can only assume it was the Unholy Trinity of Conconi/Ferrari/Chechini.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

The times did start really going down in 1993. 1992 Tour was a peculiar route though. FGL, do you happen know what was the best Alpe time that year?

Edit: the excellent climbing records blog says that it was over 43 minutes. The best time up to that point was a 40:27 the year before on an easy stage.

I have Hampsten on around 44 minutes on Alpe d'Huez. Was that the day after that ridiculous Cappuccino act [me and my girlfriend at that time were watchin in awe at that time, how stupid were we....] on the way to Sestriere or not? Guess Claudio missed a few coffees on that day.

The 1992 route was indeed particular, very strange, like they knew that after the TT in Letzeburg the Tour would be over

 

[Benotti69]

This is where "conjecture-as-fact" get you in trouble,

EPO abuse became rampant and had a noticeable adverse effect on the continental racing results beginning in 1990.

Early on, the Italians were by far the biggest beneficiaries early, as were Spain's Banesto team with Indurain. It didn't start with Gewiss in 1994 at Fleche Wallone.

It would be interesting to research who was or were the doctors who first began administering the drug to team riders and how they came across it. I can only assume it was the Unholy Trinity of Conconi/Ferrari/Chechini.

It may have been rampant, but not many would've known how to utilise it to its maximum performance enhancement till mid 90s.

 

[roundabout]

I have Hampsten on around 44 minutes on Alpe d'Huez. Was that the day after that ridiculous Cappuccino act [me and my girlfriend at that time were watchin in awe at that time, how stupid were we....] on the way to Sestriere or not? Guess Claudio missed a few coffees on that day.

The 1992 route was indeed particular, very strange, like they knew that after the TT in Letzeburg the Tour would be over

Yeah, it was on the next day.

Would say that 43 minutes is a pretty good time after attacking on the first climb of the hardest GT mountain stage ever which took 8 hours the previous day.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Yeah, it was on the next day.

Would say that 43 minutes is a pretty good time after attacking on the first climb of the hardest GT mountain stage ever which took 8 hours the previous day.

I agree. Very true. 1992 was an interesting year, especially at the Vuelta, in 1993 indeed thunderbirds were a go. The cats were out of the bag.

Just look at the results of 'little man with big head' Charly Mottet, astonishing. PRo cycling owes him a few results, like a Giro win.

He is one of the reasons why I am so cynical about cyling by the way.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Martin's L-B-L progression is interesting:

2008-2013: 118, 97, 58, DNF, 5, 1

For me, if LeMond's doper beating TTs were to be a valid comparison for Dan, he would have had to do better than groupetto for his first attempt, or worse than mid-field for his second.

 

[roundabout]

he may or may not have had allergies that hindered him during his early attempts.

once he got those under control it's all systems go

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

he may or may not have had allergies that hindered him during his early attempts.

once he got those under control it's all systems go

Tony Rominger had that too, nice fella too, fine looking wife tooooooo.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Martin's L-B-L progression is interesting:

2008-2013: 118, 97, 58, DNF, 5, 1

For me, if LeMond's doper beating TTs were to be a valid comparison for Dan, he would have had to do better than groupetto for his first attempt, or worse than mid-field for his second.

Serious question - why would you expect that? Particularly in a major one day race?

The standard has always been that new Pro's have to show themselves long before they are made a protected rider for such a big race.

Here is an interview with Martin from the end of his first year. It was all about putting in a full season to get used to the demands of being a Pro.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

very,very few were doing epo in 1992 and we can't know how well it did work. most of guys you named likely started only in 1993. carrera for example.

If Chiappucci won on Sestriere in 92 without being EPO assisted I would be very impressed.

 

[The Hitch]

Martin's L-B-L progression is interesting:

2008-2013: 118, 97, 58, DNF, 5, 1

For me, if LeMond's doper beating TTs were to be a valid comparison for Dan, he would have had to do better than groupetto for his first attempt, or worse than mid-field for his second.

Liege Bastogne Liege is not a grand tour where one focuses ones entire season around having some form for it, or one doesn't bother taking part. In a 1 day race, any pro can turn up with any form and have the fall back of pulling out at any point. Paris Roubaix would be an exception since its the only race of its kind, but races with gradients in them are a dime a dozen.

Also its not the be all end all of hilly races, where everyone peaks for it. In fact many of the riders who could be favourites dont bother or dont turn up. Martin was showing elsewhere at the time that he had the talent.

 

[lean mean &green]

Serious question - why would you expect that? Particularly in a major one day race?

The standard has always been that new Pro's have to show themselves long before they are made a protected rider for such a big race.

Here is an interview with Martin from the end of his first year. It was all about putting in a full season to get used to the demands of being a Pro.

I didn't quite get it at first but I think he's saying a talent as big as Lemond would never struggle at the back that much even if it was just his first 2-3 seasons as a pro. While ambiguously worded I actually think he has a point.

I think we can retire the DM vs GL analogy, it's been shot full of holes already.

 

[lean mean &green]

Since it's been moderated out, I'll say again that LBL is an extremely long and difficult race. I don't believe in miracles and have serious doubts it can be won clean.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I didn't quite get it at first but I think he's saying a talent as big as Lemond would never struggle at the back that much even if it was just his first 2-3 seasons as a pro. While ambiguously worded I actually think he has a point.

Yes, this. Apologies for the ambiguity. LeMond's palmares - in particular his first Tour, speak for themselves.

I think we can retire the DM vs GL analogy, it's been shot full of holes already.

Agree again. As a tool for analysis, I think comparing races / stages / riders / climbs and recognising patterns is valuable. In this instance, it's an apples and oranges comparison.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

10 2013 Il Lombardia 4
9 2013 Liège - Bastogne - Liège 1
8 2012 Il Lombardia 16
7 2012 Liège-Bastogne-Liège 5
6 2011 Il Lombardia 2
5 2010 Giro di Lombardia DNF
4 2010 Liège-Bastogne-Liège 58
3 2009 Giro di Lombardia 8
2 2009 Liège-Bastogne-Liège 99
1 2008 Liège-Bastogne-Liège 118

His Lombardy results seem pretty consistent to me. When coupled they make it look pretty reasonable he was a candidate for winning one or the other. Perhaps the only surprise is that it was not Lombardy first.

Add in the fact that he would have been 22 (?) in 2008 it is not surprising it might take a year or two to make the step up.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

10 2013 Il Lombardia 4
9 2013 Liège - Bastogne - Liège 1
8 2012 Il Lombardia 16
7 2012 Liège-Bastogne-Liège 5
6 2011 Il Lombardia 2
5 2010 Giro di Lombardia DNF
4 2010 Liège-Bastogne-Liège 58
3 2009 Giro di Lombardia 8
2 2009 Liège-Bastogne-Liège 99
1 2008 Liège-Bastogne-Liège 118

His Lombardy results seem pretty consistent to me. When coupled they make it look pretty reasonable he was a candidate for winning one or the other. Perhaps the only surprise is that it was not Lombardy first.

Add in the fact that he would have been 22 (?) in 2008 it is not surprising it might take a year or two to make the step up.

Same for Fleche Wallone

 

[pmcg76]

I would just like to say something about LeMond here that the man himself has said, the post shooting LeMond was not on the same level as the pre-shooting level LeMond. He admitted to never being as strong as before his accident.

Also everyone raves about LeMond but if he had been born 10 years later, we might never have heard of him. If people believe doping is the dominant factor over recent years, how is it possible to ascertain how good a clean rider is currently. Maybe people should look at LeMonds results in 91-94(the beginning of the EPO era to make a more fair comparison if they believe doping is currently the norm) I have no problem with people saying LeMond is a bigger talent than Martin but the gap may not be as big as everyone imagine's.

Dear Wiggo, I am not really sure what you are looking for. A Dan Martin type rider from the LeMond era who rode clean, is that it? I could maybe put forward a Mottet, Bauer or Hampsten and none of those really competed in L-B-L but outside of that there are very riders who had a reputation as being clean. Your knowledge of that period seem's limited, especially if you don't know who Jeff Bernard is so not sure why you would have such reverence for LeMond. Also Conconi was working with Indurain/Bugno from before 92, Ferrari/Cecchini were already working with Italian teams in the same period.

People have put forward all sort's of plausible excuses for the riders LeMond rode against, might not have been on EPO, scared of being caught, age, poor form!!! Why would those caveats apply to riders in 1992 but not 2013. I could just as easliy say Valverde, Scarponi were scared so have scaled back or might have even stopped(also both plus Purito were 33), Gilbert was not on his previous top form etc, etc. So everyone who competed for L-B-L in 2013 were all on top-form, doped to the max, not slightly too old and all super prepared for that race.

What I gleam from the responses is that LeMond at 31 years of age could beat guys on EPO becasue he was just a super-duper talent even though a few days later he was riding in the gruppetto in the mountains and he wasn't as good as pre accident.

The debate as it stands is that there was only one rider who could beat riders on EPO and that was LeMond.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

The debate as it stands is that there was only one rider who could beat riders on EPO and that was LeMond.

LeMond could only beat some riders on EPO. Not all of them.

Dan Martin beat every single rider who used EPO or a BB for the race, as well as all the riders who used test, HgH, coritsone, etc for their preparation. All of them.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I didn't quite get it at first but I think he's saying a talent as big as Lemond would never struggle at the back that much even if it was just his first 2-3 seasons as a pro. While ambiguously worded I actually think he has a point.

I think we can retire the DM vs GL analogy, it's been shot full of holes already.

Ok - I was not really talking about the LeMond comparison part, more that Martins L-B-L result is what one usually expects for a new Pro.
They are almost always thrown in the deep end and have to work for others - and if a rider is a potential talent at an event (as DM was in 08) they are mainly there to learn.

As an aside - LeMond crashed out of LBL in 1982 and finished 78th in 1983.
As you state - the comparisons are not really productive either way.