Favourite "Dirty" Performance

[pedaling squares]

My favourite was Sastre and Evans battling it out last year. They were clearly doped out of their eye balls.

Luckily we now have the shining knight of the anti-doping crusades back in the peloton.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG4odJP-Zuw&feature=related

 

[Turd Ferguson]

Oscar Sevilla 2001 w/ Kelme. He did good until his back injury at worlds in 2003. Rediscovered his form with T-mobile in 2005? Hmmm.

 

[Bag_O_Wallet]

For those busted or admitted to doping: Barny Riis - Sestriere 96 TdF. Roberto Heras final TT at 05(?) Vuelta as mention above, and Marco Pantani's final week of the 98 Giro.

Of the "Too Good to be True", I'd say Miguel Indurain at the 92 Tour. Specifically the Luxembourg time trial. 3 minutes into everyone in 65k. Perhaps there was a bit more to the story when Laurent Fignon calling Miguel an Extra-Terrestrial after the stage.

 

[bastigon]

Frankie boy! La carnicería!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8MOQuF4_BI

Looks sick..

 

[Izoard]

The 2008 Giro also comes to mind, but a more subtle performance. Winning the GT even though you had not prepared and were on vacation. Man, that is just flat out talent.

 

[David Suro]

Ullrich in the 2006 Giro time trial. He was overweight, out of shape, and had just come off a dismal performance in the Tour of Romandie. He complained of knee and back issues throughout the first stages, then the time trial came.

Ullrich won the stage 11 time trial by about a half a minute over Basso and the rest of the field, even though he was only able to achieve 80th place in that edition's prologue.

Somehow, he found his form in the first week and a half of racing.

He was denied entrance to the TDF that season due to evidence linking him to Fuentes.

 

[VeloFidelis]

OK, let's see if anyone here can get really creative and come up with a result... any result that is clean beyond any shadow of doubt. Go back as far as you want. I contend that there are none.

I do not get too absorbed in all the current controversies over abuse, because I maintain that any Pro smart enough to read a race, is smart enough to prepare for it. And although preparation does, and has meant many things over the decades of cycling history, no one has ever won a major classic or grand tour with out some form of enhancement legal or otherwise.

The hairs continually being split on this site over "cheating" and "clean" are blurred by sentiment, hero worship, nationalism, and vilification, and all share the same subjective bias. Cheating is human nature. However we choose to justify it, or vilify it has no bearing on the fact that it is, and always will be a component of competition, and it is not limited to cycling.

My greatest hope is that the Blood Passport system accomplishes the potential affect of teaching every rider, and team physician how to effectively dope without causing undo scrutuny, which is to say maintain a level that is less than life threatening and on par with their breatheren in the peloton, and doping in sport can become less an issue. That is exactly the way it was before drug testing.

Why should we care if they dope as long as there is parity among the riders (something the Blood Passport might actually be good for). We certainly don't care in other sports like American Football or International Football. Their controls are a joke, and the fans don't care. An NFL players average LIFESPAN is 56 years! (52 for Lineman)

What's the point here?... Most ex Pro cyclist seem to age gracefully with apparently few reprecussions from their involvement in the sport. Unlike a Mohamad Ali, they go on to live a normal life. Why should we be so concerned with their biological safety, and post career quality of life when we are so much less concerned in other sports?

These are grown men who take life threatening risks in every race that they enter, and we the fans call it entertainment and the spirit of competition. If they choose to take other risks to remain competitive then that is also a matter for grown men to decide. They still have to train, they still have to compete, they still need talent and a unique physiology. The best of them are already freaks of nature anyway. Why should we be so concerned about what they do with their natural abilities? They couldn't have gotten there without them. It seems an absurd practice to be ruining the lives and livelihoods of a select and unfortunate few, for something that every pro participates in to a greater or lesser degree.

 

[Bala Verde]

I wonder if riders talk about these extra-ordinary performances, and if so, what their opinion is. When someone blatently 'overdoes' it (in-your-face),

would they be annoyed and angry:

"hey you are showing off too much, they might suspect we are on something, hence, you are jeopardizing our livelihood"?

or would they be complacent and accepting:

"Hey, today's your turn to show off, to destroy the field, I can't keep up today, but another day I'll shine"

And undeniably, THIS was one of the best performances

 

[Epicycle]

OK, let's see if anyone here can get really creative and come up with a result... any result that is clean beyond any shadow of doubt. Go back as far as you want. I contend that there are none.

I do not get too absorbed in all the current controversies over abuse, because I maintain that any Pro smart enough to read a race, is smart enough to prepare for it. And although preparation does, and has meant many things over the decades of cycling history, no one has ever won a major classic or grand tour with out some form of enhancement legal or otherwise.

etc...

But what is your favorite over the top doped performance? That seems to be the spirit of this thread. Everbody's probably watched some race and thought...that guy/team really doped his *** off, but he/they put on a memorable show.

 

[Ninety5rpm]

My vote is for Flandis' 2006 solo ride to recapture the yellow after bonking the previous day.

But one I haven't seen mentioned is Heras in the Tour the year Armstrong said he had to ask him to slow down.

For an opposite example, remember the year Levi lost big minutes in the TT, and "couldn't explain it". Yeah, because the airlines lost his luggage with the bags of blood?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

OK, let's see if anyone here can get really creative and come up with a result... any result that is clean beyond any shadow of doubt. Go back as far as you want. I contend that there are none.

I do not get too absorbed in all the current controversies over abuse, because I maintain that any Pro smart enough to read a race, is smart enough to prepare for it. And although preparation does, and has meant many things over the decades of cycling history, no one has ever won a major classic or grand tour with out some form of enhancement legal or otherwise.

The hairs continually being split on this site over "cheating" and "clean" are blurred by sentiment, hero worship, nationalism, and vilification, and all share the same subjective bias. Cheating is human nature. However we choose to justify it, or vilify it has no bearing on the fact that it is, and always will be a component of competition, and it is not limited to cycling.

My greatest hope is that the Blood Passport system accomplishes the potential affect of teaching every rider, and team physician how to effectively dope without causing undo scrutuny, which is to say maintain a level that is less than life threatening and on par with their breatheren in the peloton, and doping in sport can become less an issue. That is exactly the way it was before drug testing.

Why should we care if they dope as long as there is parity among the riders (something the Blood Passport might actually be good for). We certainly don't care in other sports like American Football or International Football. Their controls are a joke, and the fans don't care. An NFL players average LIFESPAN is 56 years! (52 for Lineman)

What's the point here?... Most ex Pro cyclist seem to age gracefully with apparently few reprecussions from their involvement in the sport. Unlike a Mohamad Ali, they go on to live a normal life. Why should we be so concerned with their biological safety, and post career quality of life when we are so much less concerned in other sports?

These are grown men who take life threatening risks in every race that they enter, and we the fans call it entertainment and the spirit of competition. If they choose to take other risks to remain competitive then that is also a matter for grown men to decide. They still have to train, they still have to compete, they still need talent and a unique physiology. The best of them are already freaks of nature anyway. Why should we be so concerned about what they do with their natural abilities? They couldn't have gotten there without them. It seems an absurd practice to be ruining the lives and livelihoods of a select and unfortunate few, for something that every pro participates in to a greater or lesser degree.

You are correct in saying "cheating" is part of the sporting nature - and indeed of human life.

However there is a massive difference in someone taking a dive in the penalty box, or biting a blood capsule so as your kicker can come on as a sub in Rugby, or holding on to a car then shooting up PED's.

Perhaps you should check out what graceful age Johannes Draaijer or Patrick Car lived to. Or what happened to retired riders like Pantani or Jimenez.
Also we have a former Pro on this forum - who gave details of the consequences of PED's on his family.

Yes -cheating will always be a part of life- but the use of PED's is not just cheating - it forces many to play Russian Roulette.

 

[riobonito92]

Ullrich's final TT in the Tour de Suisse in a horrendous rain storm - the one when he was so awesome someone decided he couldn't be allowed to ride the TdF.

 

[Onlyiftheytestpositive]

was there at superbike "week" 07 racing wondering how on earth a certain someone was off the front 17 days in a row doing 100K crits everyday. Wow thats all I have.

On the bigger stage I have heard Vino mentioned once. Lets just say if Vino tested positive in 07 then he may have been doped up when he rode away from an entire peleton in the closing kilometers of either the 04 or 5 tour final stage. If that's not absolutely incredible and fun to watch then I don't know what is. Has a break ever stuck in the final stage of the tour before during the modern era. Anyone of the front of the field is probably doing between 700 and 1000 watts before the sprinters take over at the end of a stage like that. Good performance though and quite ballsy.

 

[hfer07]

all LA's performances in the TDF

 

[Max Cadence]

What comes to my mind when I think of dirty racing is the 1999 Amstel Gold Race when Armstrong sliced past a parked camera motorcycle and caused the elimination of two competitors. Now that's dirty.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raw7dFiu1Hw

 

[VeloFidelis]

But what is your favorite over the top doped performance? That seems to be the spirit of this thread. Everbody's probably watched some race and thought...that guy/team really doped his *** off, but he/they put on a memorable show.

That would have to be the 1994 La Fleche Wallonne, where Gewiss - Ballan put Argentin, Berzin and Fulan on the podium after riding the entire peloton off their collective wheels. The most blatant example of a systematic doping program I can recall. It was certainly a memorable show.

 

[Hugh Januss]

What comes to my mind when I think of dirty racing is the 1999 Amstel Gold Race when Armstrong sliced past a parked camera motorcycle and caused the elimination of two competitors. Now that's dirty.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raw7dFiu1Hw

I'm no Lance fanboy but it looked to me like he had his head down and only just missed the photog bike himself. I would say that one was on the moto driver.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Vino at Loudenvielle
P.s we need a poll!

 

[DonTickles]

Tyler Hamilton's solo victory in stage 16 of the 2003 TDF with the broken collarbone. I think that's when I really started becoming skeptical about clean cycling in general.

 

[Digger]

Tyler Hamilton's solo victory in stage 16 of the 2003 TDF with the broken collarbone. I think that's when I really started becoming skeptical about clean cycling in general.

Funnily enough, Stephen Roche felt that Tyler in 2003, was really bad publicity for the sport. Because he felt that the circumstances of his collarbone, and subsequent performance, were going to attract alot of doubts about doping. He felt that Tyler should've dropped out.
I say it's funny because Roche doped himself, but I suppose that's the cycling world for you.

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

Some people draw a distinction between cheating during a game of sport - such as the dive in the penalty box - and doing something that will actually make you play the game BETTER, and thus improve the sport. There has been a school of thought for many years that anything that makes sport played better should be allowed. I can see the attraction in that - it's great to see people flying up mountains for instance, we can't deny that - though obviously its a difficult area, i.e how would you go about policing that and stopping people from over doing it. I don't have the answer to that.

I understand why you see the attraction in that, seeing as your mancrush cheated better than anyone to fly up the mountains.

 

[the delgados]

No one made it more obvious than Canadian rider Genevieve Jeanson.
She made a habit of dropping the hammer at the outset and finishing 25 minutes clear of the field.

 

[TRDean]

There's certainly a debate to be had.

No Debate with you...can't debate an insane person...LOL!!!

 

[Cobber]

Some people draw a distinction between cheating during a game of sport - such as the dive in the penalty box - and doing something that will actually make you play the game BETTER, and thus improve the sport. There has been a school of thought for many years that anything that makes sport played better should be allowed. I can see the attraction in that - it's great to see people flying up mountains for instance, we can't deny that - though obviously its a difficult area, i.e how would you go about policing that and stopping people from over doing it. I don't have the answer to that.

Yeah... Italy vs Australia in the last world cup. Still makes me

 

[kiwirider]

There has been a school of thought for many years that anything that makes sport played better should be allowed. I can see the attraction in that - it's great to see people flying up mountains for instance, we can't deny that ...

Actually, some of us can very easily.

I prefer seeing the struggles, the stresses and strains on the riders' faces and the obvious reflections of efforts in their bodies as they work hard to get up a mountain rather than watching a bland, boring, dead-pan "flight up mountains". To me, the human element and the constant struggle to overcome the elements, terrain and other riders within one's own natural (important word!) limitation is what gives the sport the beauty that it had - and to some extent still has.

Part of this is because I'm an amateur photographer and to me pictures that show humanity are some of the best you'll see. In a cycling sense, think of Graham Watson's shots of a pained Sean Yates in his first MSR, Paul Sherwen after P-R, Sean Kelly crying after abandoning the Tour in '88 and Dag-Otto Lauritzen cresting the Tourmalet (I think) on his way to an unlikely stage victory, etc. Far better than an expressionless drug cheat riding 10km/h-20kmh faster than those guys could muster.

The other reason why I think like I do is because I came to cycling from a mountain climbing background. That's a past-time where failure and frailty are all too present - and where you quickly learn that living within your limits often means simply continuing living! Some of the best stories in climbing are of raging failures of expeditions - and the mental fortitude and physicality needed to first back off the mountain and then to later come back for another try. It's a shame that much of modern cycling doesn't have that same ethic (at least, not on a large scale ...) ...