Re: Re:
GJB123 said:
...
Read the book, seriously it's worth the read. It is actually a very pleasant read so it shouldn't inconvenience you too much.
cheers, will see if i can get hold of a searchable pdf.
From my recollection he doesn't state that nobody was doing EPO, but the way in which he sets the scene it is what he is strongly suggesting.
ok, much as i thought. Again, i'm personally quite convinced Hampsten was doing EPO with Testa in 1992 (see Hampsten thread for underpinning), and I'd be massively surprised if at least several other motorola riders weren't on EPO as well before 95. It was all over the place, Johnson & Johnson even did a TV commercial advertising EPO for athletic purposes (i think in 1991 or maybe 93?).
Questions:
Does Hampsten mention Weisel at all? If so, in what context?
Does Hampsten mention Lemond? If so, in what context?
Think about this:
If we are to believe Floyd, the peloton in which Floyd and Hamilton rode, was under the impression Lemond had used EPO. If FLoyd knew the rumor, so did Hamilton.
So if Hamilton doesn't mention that in his book, why not?
One possible reason is that he doesn't want to talk about it. Why doesn't he want to talk about it? Perhaps because many powerful people are invested in keeping it a secret.
Me personally I wouldn't be surprised if Armstrong dabbled a bit in EPO before then
Didn't he win something in 1993?

Yes, he dabbled in EPO alright.
but the pint is that if the Weisel-Amgen-etc connection was so strong
who said it was "so strong". Not me. All I know about Montgomery-Amgen and EPO is what is written in those articles, and that Lemond invested in Montgomery around the time that EPO came into the peloton.
I'm not saying that that proves anything. It's something that arouses curiosity, yes. Not more, not less.
why wasn't the entire team on EPO way before that.
who says they weren't? Sure, the teamwide, open regulation of the epo-program began in 95, i'm willing to accept that. We don't know anything else, i'm afraid. Every single rider may have been on epo before that. (Well, Swart probably wasn't, but he wasn't on motorola before 1994)
I think it was you who used that argument to connect the dots with regard to LeMond and how he could have gotten hold of EPO
you thought wrong.
and it looks like the dots you tried to connect weren't actually there or at the very least not very strong, glaring dots waited to be connected.
i didn't try to connect any dots. The dots that are there connect themselves, or they don't.
Even if Weisel turns out to be a red herring, it doesn't mean Lemond was clean.
For the record, I'm not invested in proving Lemond doped, and much less so in proving
how he doped.
Yes, i think he doped, but the *how* is anybody's guess.
And yes, I think he doped, but i'm not under any illusion that that can be proven. It cannot.
Can it be discussed though? I hope so.
If i'm invested in anything, it's in having an open discussion, without mudthrowing.