- Jul 4, 2009
- 9,666
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
...an assumption with absolutely no basis in fact...
Cheers
edit.......and forgot to add that one should understand that particular response is function of a decidedly LeMondian framing of the debate ( has more than a Rovian touch to it now that I think of it )....so the set of non-believers can easily include those who don't believe in the Armstrong miracle either....really bad form to resort to a simple either/or...
frenchfry said:I voted LA, reflex action and I really just wanted to see what the results were so had to vote first. I don't think I can be counted in the clinic 12.Glenn_Wilson said:Well it is obvious that the dirty dozen here have a few sock-puppet accounts to get that LA vote up to 22 now. I think we can all agree on that.blutto said:Glenn_Wilson said:Still trying to figure out how Spawn of e and blutto voted more than once.djpbaltimore said:
....that is just foolish conspiracy talk that will be passed on to the proper authorities and some blood thirsty lawyers that I have just retained ( and repent now because if you don't may gawd have mercy on your soul, err, wallet, because these guys are monsters )...
...you should open you eyes and see this for what it really is, an upwelling of genuine heartfelt feelings held captive up to this point by evil and vile forces trying their utmost to bottle up the truth...just sayin' eh...
Cheers
On the other hand, it would appear that LA only has 16 interns left, I bet he is nostalgic for the good old days when he could round up hundreds of them plus all those fanboys/girls to support his cause and make him feel so powerful and important.
...an assumption with absolutely no basis in fact...
Cheers
edit.......and forgot to add that one should understand that particular response is function of a decidedly LeMondian framing of the debate ( has more than a Rovian touch to it now that I think of it )....so the set of non-believers can easily include those who don't believe in the Armstrong miracle either....really bad form to resort to a simple either/or...
- May 14, 2010
- 5,303
- 4
- 0
Re: Re:
You can see the results before voting. Just click the link that says "view results" before clicking the vote button. You can also change your vote, as several people here have already done (just in case you want to side with the "16 interns" )
frenchfry said:
You can see the results before voting. Just click the link that says "view results" before clicking the vote button. You can also change your vote, as several people here have already done (just in case you want to side with the "16 interns"
)Re:
There is a consensus, it just happens to be one you disagree with. You've previously stated you think LeMond was among the earliest adopters, so presumably you think that EPO use started in 1986 (I can only imagine the other scenario involves it being introduced in 1987, and then forgotten about or put on ice until LeMond came along a full two years later and proselytised its wonders to a newly interested peloton.) Yet LeMond would never have won that year's Tour without the Badger's (eventual) co-operation; surely an EPO-fuelled rider - especially one who was a good enough responder to win 2 more tours on it - would have crushed Hinault; if Hinault himself was on EPO, then everything we know about the EPO era is a lie, and it was fairly widespread among the heads of state in '86 (Zimmerman, for instance, lost that Tour down to psychological, not physical, weakness). Moreover, the internal dynamics of the La Vie Claire team militate very strongly against the possibilities of LeMond being on EPO but not Hinault: for what it's worth (which is, I admit, not much at all) Köchli was reputed as a maverick who resisted the use of drugs. There's no way that riders could have a program individually in the very earliest days of EPO.
And also, while we're enjoying all this whining about the censorship of the poll by mods, can one of them please censor de VLAEMINCK's name to actually be right?
sniper said:
There is a consensus, it just happens to be one you disagree with. You've previously stated you think LeMond was among the earliest adopters, so presumably you think that EPO use started in 1986 (I can only imagine the other scenario involves it being introduced in 1987, and then forgotten about or put on ice until LeMond came along a full two years later and proselytised its wonders to a newly interested peloton.) Yet LeMond would never have won that year's Tour without the Badger's (eventual) co-operation; surely an EPO-fuelled rider - especially one who was a good enough responder to win 2 more tours on it - would have crushed Hinault; if Hinault himself was on EPO, then everything we know about the EPO era is a lie, and it was fairly widespread among the heads of state in '86 (Zimmerman, for instance, lost that Tour down to psychological, not physical, weakness). Moreover, the internal dynamics of the La Vie Claire team militate very strongly against the possibilities of LeMond being on EPO but not Hinault: for what it's worth (which is, I admit, not much at all) Köchli was reputed as a maverick who resisted the use of drugs. There's no way that riders could have a program individually in the very earliest days of EPO.
And also, while we're enjoying all this whining about the censorship of the poll by mods, can one of them please censor de VLAEMINCK's name to actually be right?
- Sep 17, 2012
- 1,153
- 503
- 12,080
Re: Re:
This poll was tied at 15 each last time I looked. 11 votes for LA and 1 for GL since. Dodgy much.
De, not de.
This poll was tied at 15 each last time I looked. 11 votes for LA and 1 for GL since. Dodgy much.
Cannibal72 said:
De, not de.
Re: Re:
Yeah, but then when you clicked on the pic it took you to the website I was created to get the links.
If you have a pic on your desktop or something, can you insert it instead of having to do that? How does the 'Img' tab at the top of this editor work?
Irondan said:
Yeah, but then when you clicked on the pic it took you to the website I was created to get the links.
If you have a pic on your desktop or something, can you insert it instead of having to do that? How does the 'Img' tab at the top of this editor work?
Re: Re:
I accept my inevitable breaking of Muphry's Law with good grace (although I understand there's a degree of inconsistency between Flanders and the Netherlands).
Vino's Mum said:
I accept my inevitable breaking of Muphry's Law with good grace (although I understand there's a degree of inconsistency between Flanders and the Netherlands).
Re: Re:
Reflexive emotional voting is the cause of most political ills in the US for example, we want the votes in this poll to be well thought out. I am sure upon reflection that FF will change his vote to GL.
Maxiton said:frenchfry said:
You can see the results before voting. Just click the link that says "view results" before clicking the vote button. You can also change your vote, as several people here have already done (just in case you want to side with the "16 interns"
Reflexive emotional voting is the cause of most political ills in the US for example, we want the votes in this poll to be well thought out. I am sure upon reflection that FF will change his vote to GL.
Re: Re:
Much more importantly, it's responsible for the unspeakable results of the Eurovision Song Contest.
Spawn of e said:Maxiton said:frenchfry said:
You can see the results before voting. Just click the link that says "view results" before clicking the vote button. You can also change your vote, as several people here have already done (just in case you want to side with the "16 interns"
Reflexive emotional voting is the cause of most political ills in the US for example, we want the votes in this poll to be well thought out. I am sure upon reflection that FF will change his vote to GL.
Much more importantly, it's responsible for the unspeakable results of the Eurovision Song Contest.
- Dec 7, 2010
- 8,770
- 3
- 0
Re:
Somewhere LeModeration is sitting drunk off his back side trying to figure out how he can drunk dial some "friends" to come here and look at this Poll then vote for LA.
Either that or he is drunk dialing bike shop owners and brow beating them into selling more LeMon cycles.
Metabolol said:
Somewhere LeModeration is sitting drunk off his back side trying to figure out how he can drunk dial some "friends" to come here and look at this Poll then vote for LA.
Either that or he is drunk dialing bike shop owners and brow beating them into selling more LeMon cycles.
Re:
Highlighted point is the problem. You often see people call out dopers and berate them as fodder for the pack and only winning if they dope. The issue with the sport is that without doping you wont win, so assume everyone is. With that in mind there is no clear way of saying how pantani would have matched up against a clean peleton because there isn't one to match him against and we dont know how he would perfom clean. With drugs in the sport we will just never know the true levels of any cyclist.
DFA123 said:If we're talking about legacy and influence on public opinion, then I think Pantani has to be in with a serious shout. The guy was a massive doper throughout his career, achieved ridiculous things that only a doper could do - and is still regarded with extreme affection (including by me, I'm somewhat ashamed to admit
There are statues dedicated to him on half the climbs in Italy, and he continues to have a near mythical status as the most recent rider to do the Giro & TdF double. If he hadn't doped, he'd be a mid-pack rider no-one had heard of.
I can't think of any top riders whose reputation came out of the EPO era as well as his. Even Big-Mig has his critics; Pantani seems untouchable.
Highlighted point is the problem. You often see people call out dopers and berate them as fodder for the pack and only winning if they dope. The issue with the sport is that without doping you wont win, so assume everyone is. With that in mind there is no clear way of saying how pantani would have matched up against a clean peleton because there isn't one to match him against and we dont know how he would perfom clean. With drugs in the sport we will just never know the true levels of any cyclist.
- Nov 7, 2010
- 8,820
- 246
- 17,880
Re: Re:
I agree with what you are saying, but it's not really relevant to the point I was making. As you say, pretty much all winners, particularly in that era, were doping. But the reputation of most of them does seem to have been somewhat tarnished retrospectively.
Yet, Pantani's hasn't for some reason. His reputation and status are as high and mythical as ever, yet he was as much of a cheat as Lance, Ricco, Riis etc... In terms of his doped performances building a legacy and courting favourable public opinion, Pantani is in a league of his own.
Without the dope he would have been a mid-pack rider, and pretty much unknown, finising behind all the other doped riders winning everything. Some clean riders in the 90s who struggled to even make a living as a pro because of all the cheats ahead of them, would have got a one line obituary in the local paper when they died. Pantani got statues, races named in his honour, documentaries etc... Quite a legacy; all of which was built on massive doping.
noddy69 said:DFA123 said:If we're talking about legacy and influence on public opinion, then I think Pantani has to be in with a serious shout. The guy was a massive doper throughout his career, achieved ridiculous things that only a doper could do - and is still regarded with extreme affection (including by me, I'm somewhat ashamed to admit
There are statues dedicated to him on half the climbs in Italy, and he continues to have a near mythical status as the most recent rider to do the Giro & TdF double. If he hadn't doped, he'd be a mid-pack rider no-one had heard of.
I can't think of any top riders whose reputation came out of the EPO era as well as his. Even Big-Mig has his critics; Pantani seems untouchable.
Highlighted point is the problem. You often see people call out dopers and berate them as fodder for the pack and only winning if they dope. The issue with the sport is that without doping you wont win, so assume everyone is. With that in mind there is no clear way of saying how pantani would have matched up against a clean peleton because there isn't one to match him against and we dont know how he would perfom clean. With drugs in the sport we will just never know the true levels of any cyclist.
I agree with what you are saying, but it's not really relevant to the point I was making. As you say, pretty much all winners, particularly in that era, were doping. But the reputation of most of them does seem to have been somewhat tarnished retrospectively.
Yet, Pantani's hasn't for some reason. His reputation and status are as high and mythical as ever, yet he was as much of a cheat as Lance, Ricco, Riis etc... In terms of his doped performances building a legacy and courting favourable public opinion, Pantani is in a league of his own.
Without the dope he would have been a mid-pack rider, and pretty much unknown, finising behind all the other doped riders winning everything. Some clean riders in the 90s who struggled to even make a living as a pro because of all the cheats ahead of them, would have got a one line obituary in the local paper when they died. Pantani got statues, races named in his honour, documentaries etc... Quite a legacy; all of which was built on massive doping.
Re: Re:
Right again that those who didnt dope and attempted a career are robbed and should be the heroes of the era getting the press coverage and plaudits today. Unfortunate that money and a blind press and a useless governing body rob the public of real coverage. I cant take away the fact that we look for one or two villains when all the people cheating are villains and trying to find the dirtiest is at most a poll on who each person doesnt like the most and pretty narrow minded.
Yeah agreed that public opinion and it seems some in the clinic hold him in high regard, however a league of his own is more due to his unfortunate death and those circumstances rather than through a living act.I would argue that Merx/Indurain etc are still held in high regard with their reputations largely intact without any remorse. My opinion would be many believe its due to others doping that he began and as such lament a lost talent. Pantani is essence is seen as a casualty of a bad era and one who brought smiles to many. If he were alive I dont think the same would be said.DFA123 said:noddy69 said:DFA123 said:If we're talking about legacy and influence on public opinion, then I think Pantani has to be in with a serious shout. The guy was a massive doper throughout his career, achieved ridiculous things that only a doper could do - and is still regarded with extreme affection (including by me, I'm somewhat ashamed to admit
There are statues dedicated to him on half the climbs in Italy, and he continues to have a near mythical status as the most recent rider to do the Giro & TdF double. If he hadn't doped, he'd be a mid-pack rider no-one had heard of.
I can't think of any top riders whose reputation came out of the EPO era as well as his. Even Big-Mig has his critics; Pantani seems untouchable.
Highlighted point is the problem. You often see people call out dopers and berate them as fodder for the pack and only winning if they dope. The issue with the sport is that without doping you wont win, so assume everyone is. With that in mind there is no clear way of saying how pantani would have matched up against a clean peleton because there isn't one to match him against and we dont know how he would perfom clean. With drugs in the sport we will just never know the true levels of any cyclist.
I agree with what you are saying, but it's not really relevant to the point I was making. As you say, pretty much all winners, particularly in that era, were doping. But the reputation of most of them does seem to have been somewhat tarnished retrospectively.
Yet, Pantani's hasn't for some reason. His reputation and status are as high and mythical as ever, yet he was as much of a cheat as Lance, Ricco, Riis etc... In terms of his doped performances building a legacy and courting favourable public opinion, Pantani is in a league of his own.
Without the dope he would have been a mid-pack rider, and pretty much unknown, finising behind all the other doped riders winning everything. Some clean riders in the 90s who struggled to even make a living as a pro because of all the cheats ahead of them, would have got a one line obituary in the local paper when they died. Pantani got statues, races named in his honour, documentaries etc... Quite a legacy; all of which was built on massive doping.
Right again that those who didnt dope and attempted a career are robbed and should be the heroes of the era getting the press coverage and plaudits today. Unfortunate that money and a blind press and a useless governing body rob the public of real coverage. I cant take away the fact that we look for one or two villains when all the people cheating are villains and trying to find the dirtiest is at most a poll on who each person doesnt like the most and pretty narrow minded.
- Jul 4, 2009
- 9,666
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
...keyboard please...
Cheers
Glenn_Wilson said:Metabolol said:
Somewhere LeModeration is sitting drunk off his back side trying to figure out how he can drunk dial some "friends" to come here and look at this Poll then vote for LA.
Either that or he is drunk dialing bike shop owners and brow beating them into selling more LeMon cycles.
...keyboard please...
Cheers
blutto said:
Pre-EPO you could win clean, that's obvious. At least there's no evidence you could not. In the early years of EPO it still was possible, when the said substance had not generalised in the peloton yet.
That's why in 1991, Edwig Van Hooydonck could still win his 2nd Tour of Flanders and Frans Maassen could win an Amstel Gold. In 1993 they both had to contend with top10's in Classics. In 1995, Van Hooydonck could win his last Brabantian Arrow ahead of two Eastern riders but on the classics he worked no chance. There's not one pivotal year with respect to the introduction of EPO. 1991 was worse than 1990, 1992 was worse than 1991, 1993 was worse than 1992, 1994 was worse than 1993, and so forth and so on until 1996. Van Hooydonck and Maassen had to stopped their careers at age barely 29 and 30 resp. in 1995/6. So did riders such as Sammie Moreels, Jim Van de Laer, Peter De Clercq, Eddy Bouwmans, etc. Palmares in that era make no sense. They have no value at all. The above mentioned riders should have been among the champions of that era, not those that are currently referred to as such. Belgian cycling suffered a lot from the advent of EPO, we were lagging miles behind. The Belgians who wished to perform went to Italy or Spain...
With regards to past era, it's hard to guess who was racing clean because since no positive tests does not mean no dope, we can never have proof that a given rider was racing clean. Yet I had learned that a champion like Franco Bitossi could never resorted to amphetamines because due to his bouts of PVC - Crazy Heart - it could have killed him. As far as I know Bitossi has never tested positive. Bitossi has a tremendously huge palmares, bigger than any currently active rider.
Besides, there are plenty of elements to suggest that many riders who did test positive could also race clean on other occasions. Willy Voet claimed that Eric Caritoux was racing clean when he won the Tour of Spain. But Caritoux still doped later in his career ...
- May 26, 2010
- 28,143
- 5
- 0
Don't know why people are picking Armstrong over Merckx. Armstrong doped for the TdF. Merckx doped for everything and then introduced people to doping, his son included!
While Armstrong is a despicable person, i would place Merckx's doping over everyone else's.
While Armstrong is a despicable person, i would place Merckx's doping over everyone else's.
- Oct 10, 2015
- 3,115
- 1,652
- 16,680
- Aug 31, 2012
- 7,550
- 3
- 0
Answering this in terms of ill-gotten gains it's clearly Lance Armstrong who managed to leverage his doping into staggering wealth and status
Other than 'have they cheated' which exhibits almost no variation amongst elite athletes, other variables we could look at are fraught with problems.
Other than 'have they cheated' which exhibits almost no variation amongst elite athletes, other variables we could look at are fraught with problems.
Re: Re:
And it's a fair point.
Benotti's point i think is that Lance's doping program was aimed at dominating the TdF, whereas Merckx' program was aimed at dominating the whole calendar.StryderHells said:
And it's a fair point.
- Mar 13, 2009
- 2,932
- 55
- 11,580
Re: 49
Not that I care, but the weather here has been crappy forever (can someone out there confirm that the sun still exists) so I have been spending FAR too much time vegetating in front of the computer and contributing to useless threads like this one. I really should get a life.ebandit said:
- Mar 13, 2009
- 2,932
- 55
- 11,580
Re: Re:
Or maybe it was a reflexive emotional vote because of much previous reflection.Spawn of e said:Maxiton said:frenchfry said:
You can see the results before voting. Just click the link that says "view results" before clicking the vote button. You can also change your vote, as several people here have already done (just in case you want to side with the "16 interns"
Reflexive emotional voting is the cause of most political ills in the US for example, we want the votes in this poll to be well thought out. I am sure upon reflection that FF will change his vote to GL.
- Feb 20, 2010
- 33,064
- 15,272
- 28,180
Re: Re:
Merckx did introduce people to doping including his son. But Armstrong also highly pressured people into it, including by some pretty foul means if Zabriskie's testimony is anything to go by.sniper said:
Re: Re:
which reminds me: a guy who'd get my vote anytime is D. Millar. He too is known to have pressurized teammates into doping prior to his ban. And not farfetched to assume that post-suspension he continued helping fellow brits gear up. Geraint Thomas (SD 2006) and Brad Wiggins (Garmin 2008/9) say hi.Libertine Seguros said:
Echoes said:
What is clean, though? I can believe Caritoux wasn't on a team-wide systematic doping program, but I still suspect that he would have been using the traditional palliative measures, which are often in grey areas of legality. It's also not a given that riders knew what they were taking, especially given the wide and variegated spectrum between 'vitamins' and 'pot belge' - and that's not even considering stuff like EPO and HGH. There's not a binary division between 'clean' and 'dirty cheat'.
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 36K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 41K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram