- Jun 15, 2009
- 8,529
- 1
- 0
131313 said:Originally Posted by NashbarShorts
"Don't know if you followed the sport back then, but this was pretty apparent. Each year there were 2-3 real contenders, and the rest were pretenders.
...
EPO closes that gap. In the prior era, nobody "became" a Tour contender. You either were or you weren't. Fignon won the first Tour he rode in, age 22. As did Hinault, age 23. Lemond, riding support for Fignon, went 3rd in his first Tour, age 23. C'mon. This is anecdotal evidence, but the concept of "emerging into a Tour winner at age 27-30"....that is EPO fairytale stuff."
Why would you want to set in stone things that simply aren't true?
I'd suggest doing a little more reading on Le Tour and it's history. Bobet didn't win his first of three until he was in his late 20's, and his early tours went even worse than Armstrong's. At least Big Tex never broke into tears on the big climbs!
Also, I don't see how EPO "closes the gap". Look at the margin of victory and the time splits among the top 10. Things don't look much different from the early 80's to the peak of the juiced era?
Of course true. Bobet finished 4th in his 2nd Tour. It annoys me every time when posters come up with half-truths just to defend Armstrong. Armstrong was the face of the Epo-Era. 36th and 4 non finishes before turning into a 7-time TdF winner; given interviews without breathing, right after winning mountain top finishes. Not a single bad day in 7 years. etc. etc.