Hampsten vs LeMond - 1991 thru 1994

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

After the 1991 stage 13 of the TdF I believe lol.

With the crash and then sucking wheels that day he lost about 7 and a half minutes on Mig.

 

[Spawn of e]

Re: Re:

After the 1991 stage 13 of the TdF I believe lol.

With the crash and then sucking wheels that day he lost about 7 and a half minutes on Mig.

I don't remember him crashing.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re: Re:

After the 1991 stage 13 of the TdF I believe lol.

With the crash and then sucking wheels that day he lost about 7 and a half minutes on Mig.

I don't remember him crashing.

I'm pretty sure he dumped it somewhere along the way because his handlebar tape was unraveled during the run up to the finish. Maybe not. I will google the stage and watch it on youtube just to relive the great day chia and mig had --mottet also finished ahead of greg that day.

 

[kwikki]

to be fair, ADR (with doctor Vanmol) had four positives in two years, one in 87 and three in 88. But that didn't deter Lemond, did it. And so Vanmol went clean in 1989 when Lemond raced for ADR. When Lemond left, Vanmol went straight back to his old habits of drugging riders.

Of course you are being sarcastic, but putting that aside you seem to be thinking in binary, that because Van Mol provided drugs to some riders on ADR he must therefore have insisted that all of them doped.

You are very wrong.

 

[sniper]

i love this from Hampsten:

“We had a good culture on that team [7-11],” says Hampsten, “and it came from the top down. Mike Neel, our director at the beginning, had previously trained racehorses, and he kind of coaxed us in the same way.
http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/06/news/andy-hampsten-americas-only-giro-champion-looks-back-and-forward_372462#TVxls4Qxmm7BkjlO.99

good culture, race horses. mkay.

I guess context is everything, so a bit more on Mike Neel:

The business was successful, but Neel didn't take well to his new life. He began seeking transcendent moments through illegal drugs, and wound up freebasing cocaine. An overdose landed him in a Reno hospital.

"One day, somebody was saying, 'You got to try this freebase -- you smoke it.' Two months later, I was almost dead. It was a Richard Pryor-type thing," Neel says. "When you retire from a sport, you're seeking the thrill of what you used to have."

His marriage fell apart.
...
His business fell apart.
...
He alienated his family.
"He was a terror to be around at that point,"
...
Tom Ritchey's name is known to anyone who's visited a bike shop during the past 10 years. His Redwood City factory turns out one of the most prominent American-made brands of racing bicycles and components. In the early 1980s, Ritchey had just split up with his partner, Gary Fischer, and enlisted Neel to help him strike out on his own.

Ritchey decided not to heed the warnings that had begun circulating about Neel. He gave Neel a place to live in his house. He gave him a job developing a dealer network for Ritchey bicycles.

Ritchey is remembered for taking Neel in at a moment when the former champion was considered a pariah.

"Ritchey is a Christian in the most real sense of the word," says Maynard Hershon, a journalist who writes about cycling.

"I let the Lord take care of me," Ritchey says. "I don't let a lot of things people say affect me ... that's someone else's issue. A lot of times you do things, and there's a voice in your head that says, 'This is the right thing to do.' It was definitely the right thing to do, and Mike helped me out a lot."

By 1985, Neel was back on his feet, and was hired to coach the 18-and-under division of the 7-Eleven cycling team, America's best. Soon, Neel was promoted to head coach.

http://www.sfweekly.com/sanfrancisco/road-to-redemption/Content?oid=2136430

And sure enough, one of his first deeds as a head coach was to hire Italian doc Testa, former physiologist of clean GT specialists Saronni and Argentin.

 

[thehog]

...
And of course the UCI were doing an awesome job with drug testing during the LeMond reign. So many guys were testing positive and they were testing all the time with sophisticated means

to be fair, ADR (with doctor Vanmol) had four positives in two years, one in 87 and three in 88. But that didn't deter Lemond, did it. And so Vanmol went clean in 1989 when Lemond raced for ADR. When Lemond left, Vanmol went straight back to his old habits of drugging riders.

Agreed, LeMond who left PDM because of the doping had no issues hanging with Eddy Planckaert who was also doping at the time, lol!

 

[sniper]

...
And of course the UCI were doing an awesome job with drug testing during the LeMond reign. So many guys were testing positive and they were testing all the time with sophisticated means

to be fair, ADR (with doctor Vanmol) had four positives in two years, one in 87 and three in 88. But that didn't deter Lemond, did it. And so Vanmol went clean in 1989 when Lemond raced for ADR. When Lemond left, Vanmol went straight back to his old habits of drugging riders.

Agreed, LeMond who left PDM because of the doping had no issues hanging with Eddy Planckaert who was also doping at the time, lol!

ADR team 87/88:
- four positives (excluding Planckaert and Demol!)
- manager: De Cauwer (caught up in a belgian drug ring in 1995)
- top riders: Planckaert (later admitted to using EPO) and Dirk Demol (exposed as USPS doping fixer in USADA report)
- soigneur: Freddy "potbelge" Sergeant...

Good thing Lemond stayed away from that ADR team doc Vanmol, later exposed as EPO facilitator by Donati.

Lemond in 2010 on De Cauwer: "One of the best managers ever. I'd go with him again"

 

[thehog]

...
And of course the UCI were doing an awesome job with drug testing during the LeMond reign. So many guys were testing positive and they were testing all the time with sophisticated means

to be fair, ADR (with doctor Vanmol) had four positives in two years, one in 87 and three in 88. But that didn't deter Lemond, did it. And so Vanmol went clean in 1989 when Lemond raced for ADR. When Lemond left, Vanmol went straight back to his old habits of drugging riders.

Agreed, LeMond who left PDM because of the doping had no issues hanging with Eddy Planckaert who was also doping at the time, lol!

ADR team 87/88:
- four positives (excluding Planckaert and Demol!)
- manager: De Cauwer (caught up in a belgian drug ring in 1995)
- top riders: Planckaert (later admitted to using EPO) and Dirk Demol (exposed as USPS doping fixer in USADA report)
- soigneur: Freddy "potbelge" Sergeant...

Good thing Lemond stayed away from that ADR team doc Vanmol, later exposed as EPO facilitator by Donati.

Lemond in 2010 on De Cauwer: "One of the best managers ever. I'd go with him again"

Sheesh! That's some team, even the Saunier Duvall would be blushing!

So many dopers and facilitators, why is that?

 

[sniper]

Hampsten on antidoping:

Anti-Doping – Then and Now: Hampsten is candid about his views of the doping culture which compromised the sport and peaked after his retirement in 1996, and he has some ideas for what could be done to resolve it in the future. ...

At the same time, he says, “It seems like today’s riders are subjected to a humiliating regime of testing and policing; there has to be a better way.” http://www.theouterline.com/andy-hampsten-looking-back-and-looking-forward/

So now the doping culture 'peaked after Hampsten's retirement in 1996'?
I thought it peaked after Lemond's demise in 1991?

And "humiliating regime of testing and policing"? Wouldnt you want that badly as a clean rider?

 

[sniper]

Allegedly the Giro won by Hampsten in 1988 was one of the toughest ever.
Firstly, the stages had this year been made longer because of complaints in previous years that it had been too easy.

The difficult Gavia and Slelvio stages have been included in the Giro this year due to slumping tv and advertising interests.
http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/latestnews/gavia-1988-andy-hampstens-epic-stage/#.VxPI9kcjWM8

Additionally, the weather in this edition was epically bad, with snow storms, icecold rain, everything.

Maybe those who saw the race can confirm this was indeed one of the toughest Giro's ever?

(Hampsten won the Giro beating doper Erik Breukink by 1:43 seconds.)

 

[Avoriaz]

Re: Re:

And with all due respect, this "I saw it, therefore I know it" argument is getting a bit rusty.
I mean, you saw what, exactly?

I watched the story unfold...I saw the context...events and facts happened in real time...i am not joining

Actually gillan is right.

I'm getting the distinct impression from the threads in which I am participating that some/many posters, but in particular those with the most itchy trigger fingers when it comes to accusations of doping, are relatively new to the sport but also to life. By that, I mean that they are under 30, and so have not even experienced the 1980s let alone the 80s and 90s with the viewpoint of an adult.

Why does this matter? Context...as Gillian says.

You might be able to Google results for races you weren't alive to see, and you might even be able to watch some of the major ones on YouTube. But what you can't do is Google up an understanding of what else was going on or not and it is a very easy mistake to interpret historical events from the perspective of today.

Let me give a more concrete example. I've read people criticising riders for not 'speaking out' about doping at the time. But here's the thing...they did. You can't Google it because it wasn't reported, and it wasn't reported because cycling had nothing of the profile it has today. Not only that but communication technology was limited to print and perhaps a total of 3 television channels. Certainly there was no possibility for public discussion and sharing of information prior to the growth of Internet use, which didn't really happen jntil the turn of the millennium.

It's hard to overstate just how much the world has changed over the last 40 years, but if you didn't actually live it you'll struggle to understand.

I'm not saying this in a patronising way, and I certainly am not trying to discourage the young from having and expressing an opinion.

indeed...remember the '82 dauphine i think where Simon tested positive...punishment? 10 min penalty

would go on to become le Tour's wounded hero the next year...

different world....

Same year. The Dauphine was 83.

Of no relevance, this is why I found it odd when Lemond said something like he never came across dope or dopers until much later on. Doesn't mean I think Lemond doped; I don't think he did. I think plenty of riders didn't dope. And I remember the 80s - from the 83 Tour/Kellogg's City Centre cycling

 

[ohiwa nz]

Re: Re:

After the 1991 stage 13 of the TdF I believe lol.

With the crash and then sucking wheels that day he lost about 7 and a half minutes on Mig.

I don't remember him crashing.

I'm pretty sure he dumped it somewhere along the way because his handlebar tape was unraveled during the run up to the finish. Maybe not. I will google the stage and watch it on youtube just to relive the great day chia and mig had --mottet also finished ahead of greg that day.

Winning mag special edition Aug 1991 has no mention of a crash but quotes: 'blood tests taken after Jaca and Val-Louron proved that I was not healthy at that point in the race. I was carrying a small infection from that all the way to the Morzine stage ... there was no way I could have started the way I did in the first week and then come apart without good reason. There was something wrong and the blood tests proved it.'

Relevance could be argued either way I guess.

 

[pmcg76]

...
And of course the UCI were doing an awesome job with drug testing during the LeMond reign. So many guys were testing positive and they were testing all the time with sophisticated means

to be fair, ADR (with doctor Vanmol) had four positives in two years, one in 87 and three in 88. But that didn't deter Lemond, did it. And so Vanmol went clean in 1989 when Lemond raced for ADR. When Lemond left, Vanmol went straight back to his old habits of drugging riders.

Agreed, LeMond who left PDM because of the doping had no issues hanging with Eddy Planckaert who was also doping at the time, lol!

ADR team 87/88:
- four positives (excluding Planckaert and Demol!)
- manager: De Cauwer (caught up in a belgian drug ring in 1995)
- top riders: Planckaert (later admitted to using EPO) and Dirk Demol (exposed as USPS doping fixer in USADA report)
- soigneur: Freddy "potbelge" Sergeant...

Good thing Lemond stayed away from that ADR team doc Vanmol, later exposed as EPO facilitator by Donati.

Lemond in 2010 on De Cauwer: "One of the best managers ever. I'd go with him again"

This is some of the silliest logic I have seen posted on here.

Why. I can summon forward Christophte Bassons and link him with Bruno Roussel, Dr.Eric Rijckaert, Willy Voet, Virenque etc, etc, hell Bassons even used to go to the Pot Belge parties hosted by Laurent Jalabert and they attended the Bassons fan parties in return. I mean with those links, it is blindingly obvious that Bassons was a doper. Oh yeah, not forgetting the positive dope test.

Or how about Kimmage, in tight with the likes of Claveyrolat, Chappuis at RMO and who did Kimmage sign with when his two year contract was up. Oh yeah, he signed on with all the dopers at RMO again, and then took salvage with Roche at Fagor. Then, who did Kimmage want to meet years later after his career, oh yeah that doper Andre Chappuis. I think I am beginning to seriously doubt that Kimmage only tried amphetamines a few times. No way could he have those connections and not be a major doper.

As I have posted a few times and you have yet to answer. Esafosofina was also at ADR in 89/90 with all those same guys. He won a World Pursuit title in 89. Was he clean?

For the record, Jose De Cauwer was liked because he was a good people-manager. Many pros who rode for his teams(including esafosofina) have spoken in glowing terms about his personal touch and how he was a great motivator. I know in your world a DS is only hired for doping reasons but the reality is very, very different.

 

[thehog]

Giles Deloren? He was clean.

 

[Starstruck]

Re:

Allegedly the Giro won by Hampsten in 1988 was one of the toughest ever.
Firstly, the stages had this year been made longer because of complaints in previous years that it had been too easy.

The difficult Gavia and Slelvio stages have been included in the Giro this year due to slumping tv and advertising interests.
http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/latestnews/gavia-1988-andy-hampstens-epic-stage/#.VxPI9kcjWM8

Additionally, the weather in this edition was epically bad, with snow storms, icecold rain, everything.

Maybe those who saw the race can confirm this was indeed one of the toughest Giro's ever?

(Hampsten won the Giro beating doper Erik Breukink by 1:43 seconds.)

I remember seeing him after the snowy mountain stage that he won. The man was baked. There's never been a "peak doping" moment, or era, in cycling. It's all the dope you can get away with all the time. Everyone does what they have to do just to be in the show and the lucky few compete for prize winner. It's likely some of the biggest dopers are unknown, despite their enthusiasm they just didn't have what it takes to make it to the bigs at all. It's a winner takes all world and if you aren't willing to do what it takes...next.

 

[HelmutRoole]

...
And of course the UCI were doing an awesome job with drug testing during the LeMond reign. So many guys were testing positive and they were testing all the time with sophisticated means

to be fair, ADR (with doctor Vanmol) had four positives in two years, one in 87 and three in 88. But that didn't deter Lemond, did it. And so Vanmol went clean in 1989 when Lemond raced for ADR. When Lemond left, Vanmol went straight back to his old habits of drugging riders.

Agreed, LeMond who left PDM because of the doping had no issues hanging with Eddy Planckaert who was also doping at the time, lol!

ADR team 87/88:
- four positives (excluding Planckaert and Demol!)
- manager: De Cauwer (caught up in a belgian drug ring in 1995)
- top riders: Planckaert (later admitted to using EPO) and Dirk Demol (exposed as USPS doping fixer in USADA report)
- soigneur: Freddy "potbelge" Sergeant...

Good thing Lemond stayed away from that ADR team doc Vanmol, later exposed as EPO facilitator by Donati.

Lemond in 2010 on De Cauwer: "One of the best managers ever. I'd go with him again"

This is some of the silliest logic I have seen posted on here.

Why. I can summon forward Christophte Bassons and link him with Bruno Roussel, Dr.Eric Rijckaert, Willy Voet, Virenque etc, etc, hell Bassons even used to go to the Pot Belge parties hosted by Laurent Jalabert and they attended the Bassons fan parties in return. I mean with those links, it is blindingly obvious that Bassons was a doper. Oh yeah, not forgetting the positive dope test.

Or how about Kimmage, in tight with the likes of Claveyrolat, Chappuis at RMO and who did Kimmage sign with when his two year contract was up. Oh yeah, he signed on with all the dopers at RMO again, and then took salvage with Roche at Fagor. Then, who did Kimmage want to meet years later after his career, oh yeah that doper Andre Chappuis. I think I am beginning to seriously doubt that Kimmage only tried amphetamines a few times. No way could he have those connections and not be a major doper.

As I have posted a few times and you have yet to answer. Esafosofina was also at ADR in 89/90 with all those same guys. He won a World Pursuit title in 89. Was he clean?

For the record, Jose De Cauwer was liked because he was a good people-manager. Many pros who rode for his teams(including esafosofina) have spoken in glowing terms about his personal touch and how he was a great motivator. I know in your world a DS is only hired for doping reasons but the reality is very, very different.

Bassons, Kimmage... how many Tour de Frances did they win?

Please try to stay on topic.

 

[pmcg76]

Wait, guilt by association only applies to Tour winners, hmmm interesting concept

 

[gillan1969]

Re:

Allegedly the Giro won by Hampsten in 1988 was one of the toughest ever.
Firstly, the stages had this year been made longer because of complaints in previous years that it had been too easy.

The difficult Gavia and Slelvio stages have been included in the Giro this year due to slumping tv and advertising interests.
http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/latestnews/gavia-1988-andy-hampstens-epic-stage/#.VxPI9kcjWM8

Additionally, the weather in this edition was epically bad, with snow storms, icecold rain, everything.

Maybe those who saw the race can confirm this was indeed one of the toughest Giro's ever?

(Hampsten won the Giro beating doper Erik Breukink by 1:43 seconds.)

sniper

the gavia stage is (in)famous

forgive me for not taking you too seriously on this..

Pieper borrowed a leather jacket and gloves from a motorbike journo for the descent of the gavia

 

[sniper]

Wait, guilt by association only applies to Tour winners, hmmm interesting concept

nobody says that, i think.

the point is, Kimmage and mottet/bassons/delion are inconsequential to the particular case of Lemond/Hampsten. The latter won GTs, so there is obviously more need and desire to scrutinize them.
Just like Sky is going to be scrutinized more than, say, FDJ.
Or Lance more than, say, Voigt.

and no, this is not about guilt by association.
When I look at that ADR team, or the Eddie B.-Lemond link, or 7-11, or the Hampsten-Max Testa link, I don't think "ah, that proves they doped" (one of your favorite strawmen). No, take a step back: I look at those links and I think: why have these guys not (or hardly) been scrutinized before, even in the Clinic?

And the very fact that there is a subset of cycling fans who are (sometimes explicitly) unwilling to question the two, should also suffice to explain why these two US cycling stars generate more controversy than, say, Sastre, or Saronni, or Gianni Motta, or Evans. For similar reasons, Sky generate more controversy than Tinkoff-Saxo.

By the way, the reason why Hampsten is so important to the Lemond story, is not only because of Testa's claims.
It's more generally because Hampsten doing so well in the GTs and smaller stage races shows us that Lemond wasn't a fluke. He wasn't an isolated incident, a once-in a lifetime miracle some try to portray him as. Rather, it seems that there was something more systematic going on at the time within US sports in general and in US endurance sports more specificaly...and US Cycling in particular. It's comparable to the US running boom in the 70s, ignited by Frank Shorter. You could wonder why Eric Heiden didn't ignite a similar boom for ice skating, but I think the answer is simple: not enough money to be made in that branch of sport.

And sure enough, the rise of Lemond and to a lesser extent Hampsten coincides neatly with the period in which US Cycling was rather explicit about its aim to close the gap with communist east block countries, which is why a Polish guy like Eddie B. was brought in to replace a local guy like Neel.
And sure enough, what happened in 1984 again? Ah, yes, the highest ever Olympic medal haul for the US cycling team. A fluke?

 

[Echoes]

I can't be bothered to read all the 5 pages of this thread but has it been said that LeMond had mitochondrial myopathy which is the ONLY explanation for his decline in his last few years (plus the age factor of course)?

A lot of reputedly clean or non-EPO riders performed better than him in those years when they did not before the shooting accident (Mottet to start with).

Besides, LeMond started to strictly focus on Grand Tours after the shooting accident ...

 

[sniper]

I can't be bothered to read all the 5 pages of this thread but has it been said that LeMond had mitochondrial myopathy which is the ONLY explanation for his decline in his last few years (plus the age factor of course)?

myopathy has been discussed in the main Lemond thread.
it's surely one possible explanation, but why would it be the only explanation?
Interestingly, as was pointed out in the Lemond thread, the myopathy account and Testa's account are not mutually exclusive.

A lot of reputedly clean or non-EPO riders performed better than him in those years when they did not before the shooting accident (Mottet to start with).

It's a clever point. However, like with Lemond/Hampsten, we don't know if these riders were clean, so using them as an argument either way is always going to be circular. Point in case is the guy you mention: Mottet. His wikipedia suffices to find out he wasn't as clean as some posters in the Clinic say he was. More like 'Hesjedal'-clean (doped only once, and it made him go backwards )

That said, a reverse variant of your argument has been put forward, e.g. here:

...
4. we've seen several '80s' riders (not just Lemond) go downhill post-1990, riders of whom we know they doped in the 80s and of whom we know, or can be fairly sure, they got onto the EPO program at some point (the PDM-rs; guys like Planckaert, Demol, Draaijer, etc.);
...

Besides, LeMond started to strictly focus on Grand Tours after the shooting accident ...

The incident damaged his lungs and kidney(s), pretty vital body parts when it comes to the transport of oxygen.
Why would he nonetheless have decided to focus only on GTs?

 

[blutto]

Wait, guilt by association only applies to Tour winners, hmmm interesting concept

nobody says that, i think.

the point is, Kimmage and mottet/bassons/delion are inconsequential to the particular case of Lemond/Hampsten. The latter won GTs, so there is obviously more need and desire to scrutinize them.
Just like Sky is going to be scrutinized more than, say, FDJ.
Or Lance more than, say, Voigt.

and no, this is not about guilt by association.
When I look at that ADR team, or the Eddie B.-Lemond link, or 7-11, or the Hampsten-Max Testa link, I don't think "ah, that proves they doped" (one of your favorite strawmen). No, take a step back: I look at those links and I think: why have these guys not (or hardly) been scrutinized before, even in the Clinic?

And the very fact that there is a subset of cycling fans who are (sometimes explicitly) unwilling to question the two, should also suffice to explain why these two US cycling stars generate more controversy than, say, Sastre, or Saronni, or Gianni Motta, or Evans. For similar reasons, Sky generate more controversy than Tinkoff-Saxo.

By the way, the reason why Hampsten is so important to the Lemond story, is not only because of Testa's claims.
It's more generally because Hampsten doing so well in the GTs and smaller stage races shows us that Lemond wasn't a fluke. He wasn't an isolated incident, a once-in a lifetime miracle some try to portray him as. Rather, it seems that there was something more systematic going on at the time within US sports in general and in US endurance sports more specificaly...and US Cycling in particular. It's comparable to the US running boom in the 70s, ignited by Frank Shorter. You could wonder why Eric Heiden didn't ignite a similar boom for ice skating, but I think the answer is simple: not enough money to be made in that branch of sport.

And sure enough, the rise of Lemond and to a lesser extent Hampsten coincides neatly with the period in which US Cycling was rather explicit about its aim to close the gap with communist east block countries, which is why a Polish guy like Eddie B. was brought in to replace a local guy like Neel.
And sure enough, what happened in 1984 again? Ah, yes, the highest ever Olympic medal haul for the US cycling team. A fluke?

....nahhh...lack of competition....the eastern bloc, traditionally a cycling power was absent due to a boycott...

Cheers

 

[gillan1969]

Wait, guilt by association only applies to Tour winners, hmmm interesting concept

nobody says that, i think.

the point is, Kimmage and mottet/bassons/delion are inconsequential to the particular case of Lemond/Hampsten. The latter won GTs, so there is obviously more need and desire to scrutinize them.
Just like Sky is going to be scrutinized more than, say, FDJ.
Or Lance more than, say, Voigt.

and no, this is not about guilt by association.
When I look at that ADR team, or the Eddie B.-Lemond link, or 7-11, or the Hampsten-Max Testa link, I don't think "ah, that proves they doped" (one of your favorite strawmen). No, take a step back: I look at those links and I think: why have these guys not (or hardly) been scrutinized before, even in the Clinic?

And the very fact that there is a subset of cycling fans who are (sometimes explicitly) unwilling to question the two, should also suffice to explain why these two US cycling stars generate more controversy than, say, Sastre, or Saronni, or Gianni Motta, or Evans. For similar reasons, Sky generate more controversy than Tinkoff-Saxo.

By the way, the reason why Hampsten is so important to the Lemond story, is not only because of Testa's claims.
It's more generally because Hampsten doing so well in the GTs and smaller stage races shows us that Lemond wasn't a fluke. He wasn't an isolated incident, a once-in a lifetime miracle some try to portray him as. Rather, it seems that there was something more systematic going on at the time within US sports in general and in US endurance sports more specificaly...and US Cycling in particular. It's comparable to the US running boom in the 70s, ignited by Frank Shorter. You could wonder why Eric Heiden didn't ignite a similar boom for ice skating, but I think the answer is simple: not enough money to be made in that branch of sport.

And sure enough, the rise of Lemond and to a lesser extent Hampsten coincides neatly with the period in which US Cycling was rather explicit about its aim to close the gap with communist east block countries, which is why a Polish guy like Eddie B. was brought in to replace a local guy like Neel.
And sure enough, what happened in 1984 again? Ah, yes, the highest ever Olympic medal haul for the US cycling team. A fluke?

....nahhh...lack of competition....

Cheers

check Wiki sniper, there was a bit of a boycott that year

and again check Wiki for 'eastern block' and 'cold war'

sorry couldn't resist

 

[sniper]

true story.


Talking about flukes:
Hampsten riding so darn well in Switzerland (2x winner of tour de suisse, one time winner of Romandy)...

In Swart's affidavit (which, admittedly, contains a few dodgy passages where I'm not sure if he's talking 100% truth), he mentions he got his dope in a pharmacy in Switzerland. It would seem (or at least it can be plausibly interpreted from the context) that he visited this Swiss pharmacy on the recommendation of Max Testa. This is the passage:

A. I went about it through procuring it through a pharmacy in Switzerland, and then on the advice of
Max, the doctor, on how to administer it, started the course.
http://wheelmenthebook.com/docs/swart%20depo.pdf

Moreover, the motorola team-based EPO doping program Swart talks about was discussed in Como, Testa's home place in Italy, situated on the border of Switzerland. And Swart's first motorola team-doping experiences relate to the Tour of Switzerland (with Max Testa bringing along his blood centrifuge).
As it happens, Hampsten's second home was in Switzerland.

 

[sniper]

...
check Wiki sniper, there was a bit of a boycott that year
and again check Wiki for 'eastern block' and 'cold war'
sorry couldn't resist

no worries The boycott certainly contributed, but one can only laugh at the suggestions that Eddie's program was a failure (see the Lemond thread for further discussion on both issues).

And so the point to bear in mind, imo, is that the 84 Games and the results obtained there merely cement what we already knew, namely that from the late 70s onwards, cycling in the US was placed high on the national sports agenda.
It wasn't a fluke.