dirtiest cheater in cycling history?

[Tonton]

@ Glenn: Pedro wasn't active, I'm not blaming him, what I'm saying is that he may have been influenced by readind threads, and posted something stupid: included names like Coppi, forgot Riis or Pantani. What I'm saying is that the anti-LeMond and anti-Merckx people highjacked the thread.

@ Benotti69: when I mentioned that sniper never read a LeMond biography, that's because he admitted it, and recognized that he didn't know the rhetoric about LeMond explaining his lack of performance by what amounts to lead poisoning. Which doesn't look good for LeMond as it relates to his anti-doping stance. I think that he knew what was going on, his reaction after the Luxembourg ITT was telling, but he chose not to rock the boat. So making him part of the solution vs.part of the problem is far-fetched.

However,, when I see guys new to cycling, who don't do their research, go after LeMond about doping, it smells like Armstrong fans trying to get back at the snitch. And when I rub their face in the crap that they post, with Gandhi and the Pope, showing how stupid arguments can foster suspicion, deafening silence...

They even question Mottet and Delion. With nothing to back it up. When many more knowledgeable people including riders say they didn't dope. And the argument goes: why trust a former rider? Damn if you do, damn if you don't. The "who killed FJK" theories fly. Like the rednecks' search for BigFoot shows on American TV.

@ Glenn: the uneducated are free to vote for your buddy Trump or attack LeMond: it doesn't mean they're right .

I have posted many comments denouncing LeMond's character. '82 RRWC being one of them. But doping? No. The snipers of the world must know something that Lance and his croonies were never able to expose .

About character: show me one big champion who doesn't have a big ahole personality, ego...that's what makes them a champion. They may sound good on TV, but deep inside they are axe-murderers. Do you think that the guy who won LBL '80 did it with a positive mind? Hell no. When I got into the gymnasium after Blois-Chaville (now Paris-Tours), Raas and Gerrie in the shower, I'll never forget the look in Hinault's eyes when I asked for an autograph...a killer.

I'm on the record expressing disgust and telling about after my Junior 1 season, I came back and some guys had changed: much bigger, stronger. I was never a champion or champion material. I never won a race. I'm not bitter. So @ blutto, I know how it's like. But I'm not gonna go out there screaming that I was cheated of a great career. But I know that with enough talent, in the mid-to-late 80's, you could still win. I was there, I raced, you didn't.

Internet experts, computer gurus, or real members, if you come anywhere near Richmond, VA, I have this for you...


Let's ride together...

Cycling is Great and Eddy is Its Prophet - Period.

 

[Maxiton]

About character: show me one big champion who doesn't have a big ahole personality, ego...that's what makes them a champion. They may sound good on TV, but deep inside they are axe-murderers. Do you think that the guy who won LBL '80 did it with a positive mind? Hell no. When I got into the gymnasium after Blois-Chaville (now Paris-Tours), Raas and Gerrie in the shower, I'll never forget the look in Hinault's eyes when I asked for an autograph...a killer.

You write some ripping prose. I appreciate your passion and experience. With regard to winning pre-EPO, though, as I think Cannibal72 said up thread, "clean" and "doped" is not really a binary thing. And there is definitely a distinction to be made between one-day races and grand tours, no matter what era we're in.

Internet experts, computer gurus, or real members, if you come anywhere near Richmond, VA, I have this for you...


Let's ride together...

I think you have more killer in you than you're willing to admit. Clearly. But if I ever do get to Richmond, I'd be happy to ride with you.

Cycling is Great and Eddy is Its Prophet - Period.

Agreed. And when the Year of the Monkey is over I may take this for my signature, if you don't mind.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Re: Re:

Pantani

Or Evans, Froome, Wiggans, NIBALI/etc(notice ALL of those names are conspicuously absent from said "poll" too).

Some of you, seriously. I can only have 10 options, so I just chose the dirtiest and/or most scumbags unlikable riders. The worse of the worse.

Not one of those riders (or all of them combined) benefit or were as dirty as some "legends" in this thread. Personally, I think that not only was I born an extremely good looking dude, humble guy, but also I'm a genius.

The options should still as they are. But maybe you guys are right...

Some guys weren't as dirty as others, some of them payed more than others, some of them only focussed on some races and gave everything back. I should take Lance out of the pool and leave the rest.

*Holy hell, guys. I never thought so many of you shared the same opinions. It was pretty obvious. Thanks for your support.

Of course, because Roger De Vlaeminck is such a legendarily dirty cheat.

Oh, and switching the poll options is an eight-year-old's trick. Pleased with yourself?

Ahahahah. That is rich, you sir do not have the intellect that god gave turnips.

 

[Elagabalus]

Re: Re:

Pantani

Or Evans, Froome, Wiggans, NIBALI/etc(notice ALL of those names are conspicuously absent from said "poll" too).

Some of you, seriously. I can only have 10 options, so I just chose the dirtiest and/or most scumbags unlikable riders. The worse of the worse.

Not one of those riders (or all of them combined) benefit or were as dirty as some "legends" in this thread. Personally, I think that not only was I born an extremely good looking dude, humble guy, but also I'm a genius.

The options should still as they are. But maybe you guys are right...

Some guys weren't as dirty as others, some of them payed more than others, some of them only focussed on some races and gave everything back. I should take Lance out of the pool and leave the rest.

*Holy hell, guys. I never thought so many of you shared the same opinions. It was pretty obvious. Thanks for your support.

Of course, because Roger De Vlaeminck is such a legendarily dirty cheat.

Oh, and switching the poll options is an eight-year-old's trick. Pleased with yourself?

Ahahahah. That is rich, you sir do not have the intellect that god gave turnips.

Welcome back, Hugh!!!

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

Pantani

Or Evans, Froome, Wiggans, NIBALI/etc(notice ALL of those names are conspicuously absent from said "poll" too).

Some of you, seriously. I can only have 10 options, so I just chose the dirtiest and/or most scumbags unlikable riders. The worse of the worse.

Not one of those riders (or all of them combined) benefit or were as dirty as some "legends" in this thread. Personally, I think that not only was I born an extremely good looking dude, humble guy, but also I'm a genius.

The options should still as they are. But maybe you guys are right...

Some guys weren't as dirty as others, some of them payed more than others, some of them only focussed on some races and gave everything back. I should take Lance out of the pool and leave the rest.

*Holy hell, guys. I never thought so many of you shared the same opinions. It was pretty obvious. Thanks for your support.

Of course, because Roger De Vlaeminck is such a legendarily dirty cheat.

Oh, and switching the poll options is an eight-year-old's trick. Pleased with yourself?

Ahahahah. That is rich, you sir do not have the intellect that god gave turnips.

Let's keep this impersonal please.

Cheers

 

[frenchfry]

Why is Froome not on the list? My vote goes for him and all his Sky colleagues.

Because this tread was started by the anti-Lemond after the Lemond thread was blocked...so that's where they troll now. It's not about doping: it's about throwing feces at GL, and to a lesser extend Merckx. Desperate people do desperate things. Integrity? None. Trolls.

The idea that Merckx was any more a doper than his colleagues is without any basis that I can find, and the OP's argument for Merckx being "dirtiest player" is nonsensical. (Though apparently two or three people agree with him.)

I agree that vroom-vroom Froome and his whole team belong on this list, though. Vying with LA, in fact, and if they are using motors they probably deserve to win - the infamy award, that is.

I take all the votes for LeMond, or most of them, as protest votes by people who resent the fact that you can't sustain a discussion of LeMond here without a core group of his fans jumping in to derail it or disrupt it or get it shut down.

And Anquetil with no votes, didn't he lead strikes against doping controls, and dodge a doping control after one of his hour record rides?

Well, in the end each of us has to account, or not, for his vote, but I will say this about Anquetil: he was no hypocrite. In fact, I think he found hypocrisy particularly offensive, and sincerely believed doping necessary in order to compete in grand tours. He saw the doping controls as a cynical ploy on the part of administrators who knew better, and recognized that it was the riders who would end up getting the short end of the stick.

In the debate about doping and how to fight it, whenever the subject of shortening grand tours is mooted there is a hue and cry among fans - many of whom are the the most outspoken against doping. Overlooked is the fact that grand tours and doping walk through history hand in hand, from the very beginning. Cutting the length of stages by about two-thirds would go a long way towards eliminating doping, assuming other things are done at the same time.

If stage lengths are reduced, they become full out sprints - and sprinters dope just as much. Even EPO is used by 100m specialists. Maybe the distances should be reduced, but for other reasons than doping.

 

[Cannibal72]

I have posted many comments denouncing LeMond's character. '82 RRWC being one of them. But doping? No. The snipers of the world must know something that Lance and his croonies were never able to expose .

About character: show me one big champion who doesn't have a big ahole personality, ego...that's what makes them a champion. They may sound good on TV, but deep inside they are axe-murderers. Do you think that the guy who won LBL '80 did it with a positive mind? Hell no. When I got into the gymnasium after Blois-Chaville (now Paris-Tours), Raas and Gerrie in the shower, I'll never forget the look in Hinault's eyes when I asked for an autograph...a killer.

Cycling is Great and Eddy is Its Prophet - Period.

Great post, and the quote is - obviously - right. On the subject of LeMond's (certainly questionable) character, though, I'd add in that he had an troubled childhood including sexual abuse from a family member. I'm not going to psychoanalyse him over the internet, but I think that that kind of thing can only have an effect on your later development.

 

[sniper]

when I mentioned that sniper never read a LeMond biography, that's because he admitted it
...
when I see guys new to cycling, who don't do their research, go after LeMond about doping, it smells like Armstrong fans trying to get back at the snitch
...
The snipers of the world...

Did you even read my biography? I strongly feel you didn't.
Do your research before going after me and as Irondan says, try to keep it impersonal.

... I was there, I raced, you didn't.

You sound bitter. Did you even read blutto's biography?

 

[pedromiguelmartins]

I'm sorry but I have to disagree that salbutamol Merckx is cycling's prophet. I think that modern's cycling profet is/was Lance.

Really strong character and spectacular performances, made cycling worthwhile to millions and introduced other millions to the sport. Polemic guy.
He took cycling from a pit and gave it a love story and glory days.

Who can forget the "look"? It was media hype, but damn it was cool and badass. And when all of Discovery Channel had a bad day, and he had to fight off against Basso/Maio/Beloki/Telekom etc. by himself, and would still defend/win? Or when Beloki fought the tarmac and lost, broke himself, and Lance kept going so fast between those fields?

And then, to end with beauty, he payed more than everybody else, took more punishment than everybody else. No one cared about taking Pantani's wins, or other guys... But Lance needed to go, just like jesus.

Around the world 95% of cycling fans don't even know who da *** Froome, Riis, Vino, Ricco, Bruyneel and Lemond are, but everyone knew Lance. A great warrior. Killer.

Clearly he would wipe the floor with 99% of clinic members. He is the prophet through and trough.

 

[Spawn of e]

This is low grade wonderlance stuff.

 

[Echoes]

Charly Mottet admitted to doping use in 1989 according to www.cyclisme-dopage.com. I don't know which substance but he did.

Gilles Delion seems to have been a real Mr Clean. He's no saint either. He's currently a commercial advisor for Bouygues, one of the most despicable multinational companies, exploiting cheap labour in Africa. But still he was - it seems - an honest riders who was constantly poked fun at in the peloton.

But the biggest victim of the advent of EPO was Edwig Van Hooydonck. It's getting pretty boring to see those Clinic Posters ignoring him. As though you only care for doping if the sacrosanct Tour of France gets tainted while the weirdest of all performances occurred on the classics and it's on the classics that you could hope to see some of the best clean riders. I don't care if it's possible or not to win Bore de France clean since all that matters is the classics.

So now I'd like tohe sceptics to prove me that Edwig Van Hooydonck doped. Don't reverse roles. The burden of proof is on your side, not on mine. Then you can do the same with Frans Maassen, Jim Van de Laer, Sammie Moreels, Luc Roosen or Peter De Clercq. Or for an older generation: Roger De Vlaeminck and whistleblower Franco Bitossi?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Who the heck keeps editing this poll? Is this a joke?

 

[sniper]

Charly Mottet admitted to doping use in 1989 according to http://www.cyclisme-dopage.com. I don't know which substance but he did.

ouch, seems tonton didn't read his biography.

Echoes:
...
So now I'd like tohe sceptics to prove me that Edwig Van Hooydonck doped. Don't reverse roles. The burden of proof is on your side, not on mine. Then you can do the same with Frans Maassen, Jim Van de Laer, Sammie Moreels, Luc Roosen or Peter De Clercq. Or for an older generation: Roger De Vlaeminck and whistleblower Franco Bitossi?

you are reversing roles.
why wold anybody want to prove he doped?

In fact, I very strongly feel Van H. (and Delion) may have been clean. And I know a few other riders whom I personally think were clean in the 80s. Tonton for instance, or Esafosfina.
All of them are interesting cases to discuss. And there used to be a good thread on clean riders.
But the point is: their cases have little to no bearing on the question of whether Lemond or Hampsten doped or not. We can't, technically, proof that any of them was clean, and so using their cases as proof that Lemond or Hampsten were clean is a circular argument by nature.

 

[GJB123]

Re:

Who the heck keeps editing this poll? Is this a joke?

The only one who can do that and keeps doing that (besides the mods) is the OP.

 

[pedromiguelmartins]

Re: Re:

Who the heck keeps editing this poll? Is this a joke?

The only one who van do that and keeps doing that (besides the mods) is the OP.

I have no memory of doing that. I just removed Lance and added other names so the poll was fair.

 

[GJB123]

Re: Re:

Who the heck keeps editing this poll? Is this a joke?

The only one who van do that and keeps doing that (besides the mods) is the OP.

I have no memory of doing that. I just removed Lance and added other names so the poll was fair.

Oh it was pure coincidental that all Lance votes ended up with LeMond? Why didn't you say so? My apologies then.

 

[Maxiton]

Re: Re:

Who the heck keeps editing this poll? Is this a joke?

The only one who van do that and keeps doing that (besides the mods) is the OP.

I have no memory of doing that. I just removed Lance and added other names so the poll was fair.

Oh it was pure coincidental that all Lance votes ended up with LeMond? Why didn't you say so? My apologies then.

"I have no memory of doing that." Perhaps he is rehearsing for his career in national politics.

 

[Maxiton]

The idea that Merckx was any more a doper than his colleagues is without any basis that I can find, and the OP's argument for Merckx being "dirtiest player" is nonsensical. (Though apparently two or three people agree with him.)

I agree that vroom-vroom Froome and his whole team belong on this list, though. Vying with LA, in fact, and if they are using motors they probably deserve to win - the infamy award, that is.

I take all the votes for LeMond, or most of them, as protest votes by people who resent the fact that you can't sustain a discussion of LeMond here without a core group of his fans jumping in to derail it or disrupt it or get it shut down.

And Anquetil with no votes, didn't he lead strikes against doping controls, and dodge a doping control after one of his hour record rides?

Well, in the end each of us has to account, or not, for his vote, but I will say this about Anquetil: he was no hypocrite. In fact, I think he found hypocrisy particularly offensive, and sincerely believed doping necessary in order to compete in grand tours. He saw the doping controls as a cynical ploy on the part of administrators who knew better, and recognized that it was the riders who would end up getting the short end of the stick.

In the debate about doping and how to fight it, whenever the subject of shortening grand tours is mooted there is a hue and cry among fans - many of whom are the the most outspoken against doping. Overlooked is the fact that grand tours and doping walk through history hand in hand, from the very beginning. Cutting the length of stages by about two-thirds would go a long way towards eliminating doping, assuming other things are done at the same time.

If stage lengths are reduced, they become full out sprints - and sprinters dope just as much. Even EPO is used by 100m specialists. Maybe the distances should be reduced, but for other reasons than doping.

Shortened stages may lead to faster riding, no doubt, but there's no reason to believe that stages run over the same topography as now, but at lesser distances, would change the character of the race overmuch, beyond making it more physiologically feasible. It would also have the add-on effect of making the stages more televisable. People are far more likely to watch if stages last for anywhere from, say, 90 minutes to two or three hours. Time for grand tour racing to get with the 21st century.

 

[pedromiguelmartins]

Re: Re:

Who the heck keeps editing this poll? Is this a joke?

The only one who van do that and keeps doing that (besides the mods) is the OP.

I have no memory of doing that. I just removed Lance and added other names so the poll was fair.

Oh it was pure coincidental that all Lance votes ended up with LeMond? Why didn't you say so? My apologies then.

"I have no memory of doing that." Perhaps he is rehearsing for his career in national politics.

You have my word.

 

[sniper]

I'm cracking up
Well done pedro.
It's been a while since i've seen some entertaining trolling.

 

[blackcat]

About character: show me one big champion who doesn't have a big ahole personality, ego...that's what makes them a champion. They may sound good on TV, but deep inside they are axe-murderers.

perception management

who pays the bills?

Nike

Armstrong was not worth 100million cos Wiesel Tailwind and USPS gave him that taxable salary.

The sponsors would not have been flocking to him if Lance could not atleast maintain the slightest facade engaging the public as the 'good guy' and cancer victim.

Same with hollywood.

 

[MacRoadie]

Re:

I'm sorry but I have to disagree that salbutamol Merckx is cycling's prophet. I think that modern's cycling profet is/was Lance.

Really strong character and spectacular performances, made cycling worthwhile to millions and introduced other millions to the sport. Polemic guy.
He took cycling from a pit and gave it a love story and glory days.

Who can forget the "look"? It was media hype, but damn it was cool and badass. And when all of Discovery Channel had a bad day, and he had to fight off against Basso/Maio/Beloki/Telekom etc. by himself, and would still defend/win? Or when Beloki fought the tarmac and lost, broke himself, and Lance kept going so fast between those fields?

And then, to end with beauty, he payed more than everybody else, took more punishment than everybody else. No one cared about taking Pantani's wins, or other guys... But Lance needed to go, just like jesus.

Around the world 95% of cycling fans don't even know who da **** Froome, Riis, Vino, Ricco, Bruyneel and Lemond are, but everyone knew Lance. A great warrior. Killer.

Clearly he would wipe the floor with 99% of clinic members. He is the prophet through and trough.

I just threw up in my mouth....

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

Who the heck keeps editing this poll? Is this a joke?

The only one who van do that and keeps doing that (besides the mods) is the OP.

I have no memory of doing that. I just removed Lance and added other names so the poll was fair.

Oh it was pure coincidental that all Lance votes ended up with LeMond? Why didn't you say so? My apologies then.

"I have no memory of doing that." Perhaps he is rehearsing for his career in national politics.

None of the mods have altered this poll except at the very beginning when Lemond was removed and then replaced an hour or so later. The rest of the replacements have been done by the OP, draw your own conclusions.

With that being said, the poll has been removed.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...
None of the mods have altered this poll except at the very beginning when Lemond was removed and then replaced an hour or so later. The rest of the replacements have been done by the OP, draw your own conclusions.

With that being said, the poll has been removed.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=26142
(the lemond-is-clean camp can rejoice, he wasn't mentioned once in that thread )

 

[sniper]

two good tweets, quoted for truth
https://twitter.com/140CharTerror/status/717387257863385088
https://twitter.com/Digger_forum/status/717391989147308033