dirtiest cheater in cycling history?

[Maxiton]

Considering everything, it has to be Eddy Merckx. Right?

So, not only was cycling an unsophisticated endurance-only sport (so, the best rider of that era would always had the best palmares compared with modern riders), Eddy was ahead of the curve by having huge amounts of money/paying his own teammates based on their performance and so on and so on.

If to that we consider how he is viewed as the best ever and his palmares is always cited as the real deal, creating delusional expectations to much better athletes (the normal cyclist of today), to the fact that he was busted but bans never impacted his career and how he never admitted to doping and still condemns riders that are caught and looks down on others that have "lesser" victories...

It has to be him. Right? He has to be the dirtiest player in the Game.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Great work erecting this poll.

Why take Lemond off? What is all these fan boys afraid of? No one would have voted for him if you are correct in the assertion and assumption that he never ever never ever never never cheated with anything to do in his cycling pro days.

 

[Irondan]

Good point.

I didn't put much thought into Indurain. To be continued....

 

[blutto]

Re:

Great work erecting this poll.

Why take Lemond off? What is all these fan boys afraid of? No one would have voted for him if you are correct in the assertion and assumption that he never ever never ever never never cheated with anything to do in his cycling pro days.

...well....because...eh...

Cheers

 

[harryh]

Re:

I think this thread illustrates what's wrong with the focus of so many of today's doping critics. It's not about anti-doping, it's about scandals and tabloid-style sensationalism. "The All-Time Dirtiest Doper!", "Big Name X tests Positive!", "I would really love to see Y caught!". "Check out the top 10 dopers of the past 10 year, number 6 really surprised me!".

It's the cycling variant of Hollywood Paparazzi Tabloidism; the secret desire for celebrity cyclists scandals.

Good post. And most pathetic (or rotten) are the paparazzi's who live in Twitter and try 24/7 convince themselves and their *** followers that they are on a crusade against doping (and hypocrisy)

 

[Stingray34]

Re:

Good point.

I didn't put much thought into Indurain. To be continued....

Indurain and the entire Banesto team were spotted at Ferrara University working with Dr Conconi. The team bus was parked outside the good doctor's lab. He was also mentioned in the reports by Sandro Donati, along with Carrera's Roche and Chiappucci.

 

[Taxus4a]

Pascal Hervé.

 

[Taxus4a]

Re: Re:

Good point.

I didn't put much thought into Indurain. To be continued....

Indurain and the entire Banesto team were spotted at Ferrara University working with Dr Conconi. The team bus was parked outside the good doctor's lab. He was also mentioned in the reports by Sandro Donati, along with Carrera's Roche and Chiappucci.

Indurain wanst a big cheater, he was in an era where people doped, he was with the best doctors, but he has a very impresive chest and hearth.

The most or well doped is not the mist cheater, there are people that are not very afected by doping, it is not a big advantage for them. For other people a little doping get them much better.

Today maybe Indurain wouldnt climb so well, wuoudnt recover so well, wouldnt last so well, but he would be a very good trialist for sure and he will fight for important races.

Of course respect people as Lemond or Hamstein maybe he is a big cheater, but respect other people of his era he is a victim.

Just if Bugno was clean, I dont know,he is a big cheater... Chiapucci for sure wanst clean. Of coure Zulle or Rominger were doped.

 

[Stingray34]

Re: Re:

Good point.

I didn't put much thought into Indurain. To be continued....

Indurain and the entire Banesto team were spotted at Ferrara University working with Dr Conconi. The team bus was parked outside the good doctor's lab. He was also mentioned in the reports by Sandro Donati, along with Carrera's Roche and Chiappucci.

Indurain wanst a big cheater, he was in an era where people doped, he was with the best doctors, but he has a very impresive chest and hearth.

The most or well doped is not the mist cheater, there are people that are not very afected by doping, it is not a big advantage for them. For other people a little doping get them much better.

Today maybe Indurain wouldnt climb so well, wuoudnt recover so well, wouldnt last so well, but he would be a very good trialist for sure and he will fight for important races.

Of course respect people as Lemond or Hamstein maybe he is a big cheater, but respect other people of his era he is a victim.

Just if Bugno was clean, I dont know,he is a big cheater... Chiapucci for sure wanst clean. Of coure Zulle or Rominger were doped.

I'm not saying Indurain was the biggest cheater. I added that info to the question why Indurain is included in the poll if he was never sanctioned.

 

[Irondan]

Re:

If you take out Lemond, why leave Indurain in?

You're right, I shouldn't have taken Lemond out. I made a mistake.

He's back in the poll now.

 

[pedromiguelmartins]

So the message here is pretty clear. I created a thread with a pool that was quickly changed and sanctioned to please the biased agendas of some people that are now trying to save face, and I just got a board warning issue because of this thread.

The clinic is rotten, from the top. I won't post in the clinic again. Everything became obvious after the first post.

 

[Irondan]

Re:

So the message here is pretty clear. I created a thread with a pool that was quickly changed and sanctioned to please the biased agendas of some people that are now trying to save face, and I just got a board warning issue because of this thread.

The clinic is rotten, from the top. I won't post in the clinic again. Everything became obvious after the first post.

The warning you got had nothing to do with any of what you just said.

The warning was for you're outburst and choice of language.

 

[GJB123]

That is the sort of mentality that can justify people voting Lance.

Everything considered he is no worse than Ulrich and Co. He was just better at it, and got punished more than everybody else, with results being stripped based on assumption. That never happened to any other rider.

Why the use of last names for all but Armstrong who gets a mention by first name? You truly believe he got his results scrapped based on assumptions. Are you for real? Did you read the USADA reasoned decision?

Furthermore, why isn't Riis in there? Why isn't the entire Gewiss team in there? Where is Pantani, Ricco, Ullrich, etc.? Yet you say that you entered LeMond for no particular reason (other than your apparent dislike of him). Perhaps you should have put a little bit more thought into the initial list before you start cursing at people who question your motives?

And for the record you include LeMond all you like, I don't mind but don't go crying to mummy if your motives are questioned for doing so.

 

[Gung Ho Gun]

Re: Re:

That is the sort of mentality that can justify people voting Lance.

Everything considered he is no worse than Ulrich and Co. He was just better at it, and got punished more than everybody else, with results being stripped based on assumption. That never happened to any other rider.

I think you mean "if we only look at him doping with EPO" instead of "everything considered"

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re: Re:

Anyway, I'm a bit at a loss as to why Lemond is tabuisized...again.

We know you are, sniper. We know you are...

John Swanson

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Again, what about Indurain?
There isn't more or less evidence against Indurain than against Lemond, is there?
Or is this about being anglophone after all?

Anyway, I'm a bit at a loss as to why Lemond is tabuisized...again.

At least Indurain got caught once. [/quote]
you mean the salbutamol 'thing' that he wasn't sanctioned for because it wasn't on the UCI banned list?
Fair enough. So the guy had asthma. Which top rider doesnt?
Lemond instead had one kidney and anemia. Big deal.
Accidentally, Lemond was also rumored by a two-generation peloton to have brought EPO into the game which, accidentally, perfectly fits his self-proclaimed kidneypatient+anemia profile, but all that shall remain an insignificant footnote if it's up to you.

But fair enough, let's stick to facts, like we do with Indurain all the time .
Here you got one: Lemond's father in law was/is an immunologist and former army surgeon. He traveled with Lemond to various races including the Tour de France. Lemond's wife was/is a nurse who had learned how to inject whilst working for her father's immunologist medical practice as a youngster. Ow, and, purely coincidentally, Lemond was the first procyclist to insist on having his family (in-law) travel with him at GTs.

Other fact: Eddy B., who 'discovered' Lemond in 1977, is known to have brought youngsters to Poland to teach them how to transfuse blood. Now, as it happens, in 1978 Lemond

came to Europe for the first time. Two months with a friend, Kent Gordis, and the Gordis family: France, Switzerland, Belgium and Poland.
http://www.podiumcafe.com/2011/6/20/2232890/LeMond

Why o why would he travel to Poland in 1978? Sightseeing?

Back to Indurain. Salbutamol you said?
Just teasing of course, I mean I know there's more on Indurain, but the point here is that there is quite a bit on Lemond too. So it's ironic to see three or four (or five, you included) posters come into this thread to rant about the unfairness of Lemond being in this list. Meanwhile who's sticking up for poor 'Mig-hell'?

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

If you take out Lemond, why leave Indurain in?

You're right, I shouldn't have taken Lemond out. I made a mistake.

He's back in the poll now.

Regardless of whether it really was a mistake (it was certainly justifiable to take out Lemond (and Indurain)), that's classy moderation. Respect.

I think this thread illustrates what's wrong with the focus of so many of today's doping critics. It's not about anti-doping, it's about scandals and tabloid-style sensationalism. "The All-Time Dirtiest Doper!", "Big Name X tests Positive!", "I would really love to see Y caught!". "Check out the top 10 dopers of the past 10 year, number 6 really surprised me!".

It's the cycling variant of Hollywood Paparazzi Tabloidism; the secret desire for celebrity cyclists scandals.

good post, have to agree.

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

If you take out Lemond, why leave Indurain in?

You're right, I shouldn't have taken Lemond out. I made a mistake.

He's back in the poll now.

Regardless of whether it really was a mistake (it was certainly justifiable to take out Lemond (and Indurain)), that's classy moderation. Respect.

I think this thread illustrates what's wrong with the focus of so many of today's doping critics. It's not about anti-doping, it's about scandals and tabloid-style sensationalism. "The All-Time Dirtiest Doper!", "Big Name X tests Positive!", "I would really love to see Y caught!". "Check out the top 10 dopers of the past 10 year, number 6 really surprised me!".

It's the cycling variant of Hollywood Paparazzi Tabloidism; the secret desire for celebrity cyclists scandals.

good post, have to agree.

I put him back in because if I took out Lemond, and then took out Indurain where do I stop taking out riders, at Lance?

In the end we (mods) thought it was best to just leave the thread as is to let the debate rage on.

 

[blutto]

Re:

Great work erecting this poll.

Why take Lemond off? What is all these fan boys afraid of? No one would have voted for him if you are correct in the assertion and assumption that he never ever never ever never never cheated with anything to do in his cycling pro days.

....oh the horror....a clean clear case of the dreaded LeModeration syndrome ( btw this word hot off the presses/new today/just released into the wild...custom made by skilled wordsmiths at the world famous Bubbles Word Factory....their motto "we make up stuff to help you navigate thru an increasingly complex world full of weirdosity, eh"...)....

Cheers

 

[Spawn of e]

Ok who are the two clowns that voted for GL right after he's put back on?

Was it the tri-bars or the iron shots that did it for you?

 

[GJB123]

Re: Re:

..
Again, what about Indurain?
There isn't more or less evidence against Indurain than against Lemond, is there?
Or is this about being anglophone after all?

Anyway, I'm a bit at a loss as to why Lemond is tabuisized...again.

At least Indurain got caught once.

you mean the salbutamol 'thing' that he wasn't sanctioned for because it wasn't on the UCI banned list?
Fair enough. So the guy had asthma. Which top rider doesnt?
Lemond instead had one kidney and anemia. Big deal.
Accidentally, Lemond was also rumored by a two-generation peloton to have brought EPO into the game which, accidentally, perfectly fits his self-proclaimed kidneypatient+anemia profile, but all that shall remain an insignificant footnote if it's up to you.

But fair enough, let's stick to facts, like we do with Indurain all the time .
Here you got one: Lemond's father in law was/is an immunologist and former army surgeon. He traveled with Lemond to various races including the Tour de France. Lemond's wife was/is a nurse who had learned how to inject whilst working for her father's immunologist medical practice as a youngster. Ow, and, purely coincidentally, Lemond was the first procyclist to insist on having his family (in-law) travel with him at GTs.

Other fact: Eddy B., who 'discovered' Lemond in 1977, is known to have brought youngsters to Poland to teach them how to transfuse blood. Now, as it happens, in 1978 Lemond

came to Europe for the first time. Two months with a friend, Kent Gordis, and the Gordis family: France, Switzerland, Belgium and Poland.
http://www.podiumcafe.com/2011/6/20/2232890/LeMond

Why o why would he travel to Poland in 1978? Sightseeing?

Back to Indurain. Salbutamol you said?
Just teasing of course, I mean I know there's more on Indurain, but the point here is that there is quite a bit on Lemond too. So it's ironic to see three or four (or five, you included) posters come into this thread to rant about the unfairness of Lemond being in this list. Meanwhile who's sticking up for poor 'Mig-hell'?

By all means, let's rehash all your tired old arguments.

 

[sniper]

rehash? tired old arguments?
it's the first time i posted that.
trolling much?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Miguelón, basically, was a cheat, but he often gets, if not a free pass, less of a grilling than many because of the kind of character he was. He didn't lord it over the péloton, compared to a Blaireau or Armstrong he was always a gentleman and didn't throw his weight around, and when it all got to a level that was too much for him and he couldn't go with it anymore, he quit and backed away. He preferred to give an implicit admission of doping to a radio interviewer rather than give an outright bald-faced lie. So while in the pure terms of "how much cheating they did" Indurain might be high up, the fact that we've added in the modifier "dirtiest" rather changes things. Indurain cheated by doping, in comparison Lance and his crew pulled every trick in the book including writing some new ones, completely razing the ground around him and taking advantage of every shortcut available. He destroyed careers and livelihoods based on petty grudges, performing decades-long public character assassinations; he brazenly cheated all the way to the top and did so openly, knowing his media position was strong enough that he could crush anybody who stood up to him. He paid off the authorities, paid people to falsify stories around his mythical superhero cult of personality, defrauded people and made millions doing it. He did so whilst mocking his opposition, many of whom were using as many advantages as they could get away with themselves. He rallied fellow riders to circle the wagons and ostracize naysayers and hound them from the sport.

And he only got brought down because when a friend who'd been caught, who'd tried to fight it, who'd used the Lance playbook without success, whose career, life and marriage had fallen apart, when that friend came to him begging cap in hand for a leg up to put his life back in order, Lance metaphorically spat in his face.

That's not just cheating, but being really dirty about it. Miguelón sometimes gets a freer ride than he ought to, but in a thread like this, he just doesn't compare.

 

[MacRoadie]

Re:

rehash? tired old arguments?
it's the first time i posted that.
trolling much?

In this thread maybe....

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

rehash? tired old arguments?
it's the first time i posted that.
trolling much?

In this thread maybe....

Seems whenever something new is said about Lemond in relation to possible doping, people like gjb123 and macroadie are allowed to discard and/or ridicule it with the strawman that it's "rehasing old arguments".

Mods, can we perhaps ask gjb123 and macroadie to back up their claim that it's "rehashing old arguments" by providing links to posts where I (or any other clinic member) have said those things before?
Particularly the stuff about Lemond going to Poland in 1978, and his father in law being an immunologist and former surgeon who traveled with Lemond to various races including the TdF.

We all know they won't be able to provide the links, but let's ask them just for fun.