Indurain - Am I assuming correctly?

[RobbieCanuck]

Re:

Ross Tucker showing Indurain improved his average power output on the final climbs of every mountain stage from year to year from about 5,3W/kg in 1991 to about 6,3W/kg in 1995. Given the introduction of EPO around those times, the dots are pretty easy to connect.

Except 1992. I saw Indurain at Alpe d'Huiz in 1992 and he looked pedestrian. And your graph shows a big dip in W/kg that year. Maybe not doping in 1992?

 

[hrotha]

No chance in hell. 1992 saw a massive improvement in ITTs compared to 1991. Either the data for that particular year is faulty, or tactical/technical considerations make the 1992 data hardly comparable to the rest for some reason.

1992 had an unorthodox course with few mountain stages. If only the final climbs were measured, that could be a factor somehow?

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Re:

No chance in hell. 1992 saw a massive improvement in ITTs compared to 1991. Either the data for that particular year is faulty, or tactical/technical considerations make the 1992 data hardly comparable to the rest for some reason.

1992 had an unorthodox course with few mountain stages. If only the final climbs were measured, that could be a factor somehow?

Except Ad'H was not an ITT in 1992. I assume you are talking about the other stages that were ITTs in 1992? Andy Hamsten won Ad'H in 1992. Was he ever considered a doper?

 

[hrotha]

No, I mean his massive improvement in ITTs (which aren't measured for the graph) makes it quite unlikely that he was a worse climber than in 1991 (as it suggests a more refined EPO program), and pretty much impossible that he was clean that year. If the data does indeed suggest his climbing performance was poorer than in 1991, it might be faulty for one reason or another.

 

[Archibald]

Re:

Indurain was a big rider during his TDF winning days but not Cancellara big. I believe the weight then quoted for Big Mig was 78-9 Kg. Cancellara is about 85kg isn't he?. I have no doubt Indurain was using EPO but it's important we don't exaggerate. I think his ITT showed he was putting some incredible watts and his Aero position didn't look the most efficient either. So put those watts with 79Kg and it was no surprise he could drop little climbers up Hautacam in 94 like he did. Easily over 6W/Kg I'd say on EPO. If so that's 480 sustained watts on long MTFs - wow.

81-83kg - 2010 RvV/PR - read that in an article in Northern France comparing him n Boonen. Both noted at that weight. I remember distinctly as they were the same height weight as I was at the time...

So maybe that comment a few years ago that if Sparatcus lost about 5kgs he could win the TdF was based on Big Mig's weight of about 78kgs?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

EPO Mig didnt have to go full *** in 1992 in the climbs because he had put everyone on minutes at the TT in Luxembourg, race dynamics and factors stuff...

This of course after winning the Giro a month earlier...

http://hemeroteca.mundodeportivo.com/preview/1994/09/03/pagina-10/1298038/pdf.html#&mode=fullScreen

And, let me tell you this, when a small team like Caja Rural already were doing EPO in 1989, what do you think a BIG team like Banesto were doing/exploring?

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

No chance in hell. 1992 saw a massive improvement in ITTs compared to 1991. Either the data for that particular year is faulty, or tactical/technical considerations make the 1992 data hardly comparable to the rest for some reason.

1992 had an unorthodox course with few mountain stages. If only the final climbs were measured, that could be a factor somehow?

Except Ad'H was not an ITT in 1992. I assume you are talking about the other stages that were ITTs in 1992? Andy Hamsten won Ad'H in 1992. Was he ever considered a doper?

Be careful with that. That hurts over here. Winning over supposed dopers. Thats one big argument here, if you do that than you are doomed unless your name is LeMond and Hampsten.

That being said, that stage was quite strange. Jan Nevens, Montoya were able to get away with Vona, Hampsten and Boyer. On the other hand, you had Gianni Bugno, Jean-Francois Bernard, Laurent Fignon, Stephen Roche who were dumped on the Croix de Fer. They couldnt even follow the group.


Tour 1992 was one of the strangest trails ever. Just horrible.

 

[Escarabajo]

Miguel was on EPO big time, and I think I kind of proved it :

(comparing datas of the Lac de Vassivière ITTs in 1990 and 1995)

"In 1990, he was on his way to his first Tour de France top ten at general classification (10th). Some were saying he could have had a shot at winning if he had not sacrificed for his leader Pedro Delgado. He was the only one able to follow Greg LeMond to the top of Luz Ardiden, beating him for the stage win. IF THAT ISN’T GOOD DATA I DON’T KNOW WHAT IS ??? So where was Mr Indurain in 1990, let’s see… Mmmmhhh… Well, well, well : he finished 4th of the stage, just ahead of Greg LeMond, 40 seconds behind Breukink which gives him a 1h03’20” time.

Wait. Is that correct ? I see Mr Indurain did some training during the 90’s, didn’t he ? He managed to improve his own performance for a staggering 5 minutes and 46 seconds (9.1%) ! Well done, Mr Indurain, you’re a hell of a rider… and you sure helped cycling ride straight into hell. With his 1990 time, Mig-Hell would have finished 35th in 1995, just behind time trial specialist and clean sport poster boy Marco Pantani. A reference. Kind of."

https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

That being said, Indurain was always a good rider; a phenomenal time trialist, especially. He won the 1989 Paris-Nice and Criterium International (where he did beat none other than Mottet, Fignon, Lemond & Roche fighting for the win).

I believe he had a first taste at EPO in 1991, saw that it worked, became much more aggressive by 1992 (docs were probably more efficient in dosage too).

I don't think he would have won the 1990 TDF if he had not sacrificed for Delgado. He would have done better than Delgado, but he would not have won. I also believe I read somewhere that he had to be convinced to actually believe in himself as a TDF winner. Maybe Echevarri told him that he would become one with EPO ? Can't say.

I think plenty of riders have improved by 10% or more over 5 years. If we go by ur criteria then all of them are dopers especially Froome. IMO 5 yrs is too long a time

LOL. Exactly. You just said it!!

 

[Escarabajo]

Re:

I always wonder when mig started using EPO - Claudio Chiappucci claimed he started using it in 1993, yet he went backwards in the tour results that year (2nd 1992, 6th 1993) - so does mean everyone started the same year? Its also the year mig became much faster. However i struggle to imagine anyone that big winning any grand tours clean, so i wonder what he was on for 1991/1992 - was he already on epo but very conservative?

I agree with the other answers that Indurain, Bugno and Chiapucci were some of the first users.

To the answer of why it catched up to Chiapucci and not Indurain probably has to do with the response that EPO has on bigger bodies. I don't think that Chiapucci was as talented either, so once other riders became EPO abusers his game was over.

 

[whynotme101]

Given his relaively large size, the era he rode in and his dominating wins, would indurain have the highest ever FTP for a po cyclist? Not watt's /kg,just straight watts?

 

[IndianCyclist]

Re:

Given his relaively large size, the era he rode in and his dominating wins, would indurain have the highest ever FTP for a po cyclist? Not watt's /kg,just straight watts?

508-510 watts from hr record & other climbs but heavier cyclists can produce more watts but donot know of any other recorded values.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Re: Re:

No chance in hell. 1992 saw a massive improvement in ITTs compared to 1991. Either the data for that particular year is faulty, or tactical/technical considerations make the 1992 data hardly comparable to the rest for some reason.

1992 had an unorthodox course with few mountain stages. If only the final climbs were measured, that could be a factor somehow?

Except Ad'H was not an ITT in 1992. I assume you are talking about the other stages that were ITTs in 1992? Andy Hamsten won Ad'H in 1992. Was he ever considered a doper?

Be careful with that. That hurts over here. Winning over supposed dopers. Thats one big argument here, if you do that than you are doomed unless your name is LeMond and Hampsten.

That being said, that stage was quite strange. Jan Nevens, Montoya were able to get away with Vona, Hampsten and Boyer. On the other hand, you had Gianni Bugno, Jean-Francois Bernard, Laurent Fignon, Stephen Roche who were dumped on the Croix de Fer. They couldnt even follow the group.


Tour 1992 was one of the strangest trails ever. Just horrible.[/quote]


I am not saying he was a doper. He was one of my favs. The question asks about his reputation.

 

[gillan1969]

Re: Re:

No chance in hell. 1992 saw a massive improvement in ITTs compared to 1991. Either the data for that particular year is faulty, or tactical/technical considerations make the 1992 data hardly comparable to the rest for some reason.

1992 had an unorthodox course with few mountain stages. If only the final climbs were measured, that could be a factor somehow?

Except Ad'H was not an ITT in 1992. I assume you are talking about the other stages that were ITTs in 1992? Andy Hamsten won Ad'H in 1992. Was he ever considered a doper?

Be careful with that. That hurts over here. Winning over supposed dopers. Thats one big argument here, if you do that than you are doomed unless your name is LeMond and Hampsten.

That being said, that stage was quite strange. Jan Nevens, Montoya were able to get away with Vona, Hampsten and Boyer. On the other hand, you had Gianni Bugno, Jean-Francois Bernard, Laurent Fignon, Stephen Roche who were dumped on the Croix de Fer. They couldnt even follow the group.


Tour 1992 was one of the strangest trails ever. Just horrible.[/quote]

Millar said that sestriere was the day the animals came in 2 by 2 I think from memory the autobus came in faster than the quickest stage time predictions in the handbook..chiappucci went all out from the gun just about...Millar also said later on that this Tour was when Greg said that his legs hurt (much to the incredulity and amusement of everyone as his legs never hurt ) But yes remember watching and the Hampsten stage was like a throwback...he was past it at that point...or at least in terms of the indurain/bugno/chiappucci generation epo...he didn't win the stage as GC challenger but a chancer.... Did motorola have the wee Columbian that year Meija? Not sure...Hampsten may have been team leader

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Miguel was on EPO big time, and I think I kind of proved it :

(comparing datas of the Lac de Vassivière ITTs in 1990 and 1995)

"In 1990, he was on his way to his first Tour de France top ten at general classification (10th). Some were saying he could have had a shot at winning if he had not sacrificed for his leader Pedro Delgado. He was the only one able to follow Greg LeMond to the top of Luz Ardiden, beating him for the stage win. IF THAT ISN’T GOOD DATA I DON’T KNOW WHAT IS ??? So where was Mr Indurain in 1990, let’s see… Mmmmhhh… Well, well, well : he finished 4th of the stage, just ahead of Greg LeMond, 40 seconds behind Breukink which gives him a 1h03’20” time.

Wait. Is that correct ? I see Mr Indurain did some training during the 90’s, didn’t he ? He managed to improve his own performance for a staggering 5 minutes and 46 seconds (9.1%) ! Well done, Mr Indurain, you’re a hell of a rider… and you sure helped cycling ride straight into hell. With his 1990 time, Mig-Hell would have finished 35th in 1995, just behind time trial specialist and clean sport poster boy Marco Pantani. A reference. Kind of."

https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

That being said, Indurain was always a good rider; a phenomenal time trialist, especially. He won the 1989 Paris-Nice and Criterium International (where he did beat none other than Mottet, Fignon, Lemond & Roche fighting for the win).

I believe he had a first taste at EPO in 1991, saw that it worked, became much more aggressive by 1992 (docs were probably more efficient in dosage too).

I don't think he would have won the 1990 TDF if he had not sacrificed for Delgado. He would have done better than Delgado, but he would not have won. I also believe I read somewhere that he had to be convinced to actually believe in himself as a TDF winner. Maybe Echevarri told him that he would become one with EPO ? Can't say.

I think plenty of riders have improved by 10% or more over 5 years. If we go by ur criteria then all of them are dopers especially Froome. IMO 5 yrs is too long a time

LOL. Exactly. You just said it!!

You didn't read the full article.

Between 1985 and 1990. No progress in performances at all. Between 1990 and 1995 progress of nearly 10% for the whole peloton. See also the elimination rates. Please explain.

 

[blutto]

Miguel was on EPO big time, and I think I kind of proved it :

(comparing datas of the Lac de Vassivière ITTs in 1990 and 1995)

"In 1990, he was on his way to his first Tour de France top ten at general classification (10th). Some were saying he could have had a shot at winning if he had not sacrificed for his leader Pedro Delgado. He was the only one able to follow Greg LeMond to the top of Luz Ardiden, beating him for the stage win. IF THAT ISN’T GOOD DATA I DON’T KNOW WHAT IS ??? So where was Mr Indurain in 1990, let’s see… Mmmmhhh… Well, well, well : he finished 4th of the stage, just ahead of Greg LeMond, 40 seconds behind Breukink which gives him a 1h03’20” time.

Wait. Is that correct ? I see Mr Indurain did some training during the 90’s, didn’t he ? He managed to improve his own performance for a staggering 5 minutes and 46 seconds (9.1%) ! Well done, Mr Indurain, you’re a hell of a rider… and you sure helped cycling ride straight into hell. With his 1990 time, Mig-Hell would have finished 35th in 1995, just behind time trial specialist and clean sport poster boy Marco Pantani. A reference. Kind of."

https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

That being said, Indurain was always a good rider; a phenomenal time trialist, especially. He won the 1989 Paris-Nice and Criterium International (where he did beat none other than Mottet, Fignon, Lemond & Roche fighting for the win).

I believe he had a first taste at EPO in 1991, saw that it worked, became much more aggressive by 1992 (docs were probably more efficient in dosage too).

I don't think he would have won the 1990 TDF if he had not sacrificed for Delgado. He would have done better than Delgado, but he would not have won. I also believe I read somewhere that he had to be convinced to actually believe in himself as a TDF winner. Maybe Echevarri told him that he would become one with EPO ? Can't say.

I think plenty of riders have improved by 10% or more over 5 years. If we go by ur criteria then all of them are dopers especially Froome. IMO 5 yrs is too long a time

LOL. Exactly. You just said it!!

You didn't read the full article.

Between 1985 and 1990. No progress in performances at all. Between 1990 and 1995 progress of nearly 10% for the whole peloton. See also the elimination rates. Please explain.

....no progress in performance at all, eh....

....and do keep in mind that the chart only looks at speed but the energy requirements to increase speed are not a linear function ( especially as you get closer to 27mph where aerodynamic considerations really start to brick-wall speed ...bike design generally, and in TT especially, really helps push the speed envelope as use of aerodynamic aids can increase speed without much higher energy expenditure...even something as seemingly mundane as kit made of slippery synthetics makes a significant difference... ).... there is also a reasonably direct relationship btwn Tour length/difficulty and average speed to be considered....

....read, this can be kinda complicated...

Cheers

 

[sniper]

Miguel was on EPO big time, and I think I kind of proved it :

(comparing datas of the Lac de Vassivière ITTs in 1990 and 1995)

"In 1990, he was on his way to his first Tour de France top ten at general classification (10th). Some were saying he could have had a shot at winning if he had not sacrificed for his leader Pedro Delgado. He was the only one able to follow Greg LeMond to the top of Luz Ardiden, beating him for the stage win. IF THAT ISN’T GOOD DATA I DON’T KNOW WHAT IS ??? So where was Mr Indurain in 1990, let’s see… Mmmmhhh… Well, well, well : he finished 4th of the stage, just ahead of Greg LeMond, 40 seconds behind Breukink which gives him a 1h03’20” time.

Wait. Is that correct ? I see Mr Indurain did some training during the 90’s, didn’t he ? He managed to improve his own performance for a staggering 5 minutes and 46 seconds (9.1%) ! Well done, Mr Indurain, you’re a hell of a rider… and you sure helped cycling ride straight into hell. With his 1990 time, Mig-Hell would have finished 35th in 1995, just behind time trial specialist and clean sport poster boy Marco Pantani. A reference. Kind of."

https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

That being said, Indurain was always a good rider; a phenomenal time trialist, especially. He won the 1989 Paris-Nice and Criterium International (where he did beat none other than Mottet, Fignon, Lemond & Roche fighting for the win).

I believe he had a first taste at EPO in 1991, saw that it worked, became much more aggressive by 1992 (docs were probably more efficient in dosage too).

I don't think he would have won the 1990 TDF if he had not sacrificed for Delgado. He would have done better than Delgado, but he would not have won. I also believe I read somewhere that he had to be convinced to actually believe in himself as a TDF winner. Maybe Echevarri told him that he would become one with EPO ? Can't say.

I think plenty of riders have improved by 10% or more over 5 years. If we go by ur criteria then all of them are dopers especially Froome. IMO 5 yrs is too long a time

LOL. Exactly. You just said it!!

You didn't read the full article.

Between 1985 and 1990. No progress in performances at all. Between 1990 and 1995 progress of nearly 10% for the whole peloton. See also the elimination rates. Please explain.

this whole exchange is interesting.
as you know, there was a rumor in the peloton in the 90s that Lemond introduced EPO in the peloton. Of course, there are also arguments to suggest that Lemond had nothing to do with EPO.
But the point is: as long as we don't know who was/were the first users of EPO, it seems unfair to speak about Indurain the way you do. And as you know, Lemond wouldn't talk about Indurain like that either.

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Miguel was on EPO big time, and I think I kind of proved it :

(comparing datas of the Lac de Vassivière ITTs in 1990 and 1995)

"In 1990, he was on his way to his first Tour de France top ten at general classification (10th). Some were saying he could have had a shot at winning if he had not sacrificed for his leader Pedro Delgado. He was the only one able to follow Greg LeMond to the top of Luz Ardiden, beating him for the stage win. IF THAT ISN’T GOOD DATA I DON’T KNOW WHAT IS ??? So where was Mr Indurain in 1990, let’s see… Mmmmhhh… Well, well, well : he finished 4th of the stage, just ahead of Greg LeMond, 40 seconds behind Breukink which gives him a 1h03’20” time.

Wait. Is that correct ? I see Mr Indurain did some training during the 90’s, didn’t he ? He managed to improve his own performance for a staggering 5 minutes and 46 seconds (9.1%) ! Well done, Mr Indurain, you’re a hell of a rider… and you sure helped cycling ride straight into hell. With his 1990 time, Mig-Hell would have finished 35th in 1995, just behind time trial specialist and clean sport poster boy Marco Pantani. A reference. Kind of."

https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

That being said, Indurain was always a good rider; a phenomenal time trialist, especially. He won the 1989 Paris-Nice and Criterium International (where he did beat none other than Mottet, Fignon, Lemond & Roche fighting for the win).

I believe he had a first taste at EPO in 1991, saw that it worked, became much more aggressive by 1992 (docs were probably more efficient in dosage too).

I don't think he would have won the 1990 TDF if he had not sacrificed for Delgado. He would have done better than Delgado, but he would not have won. I also believe I read somewhere that he had to be convinced to actually believe in himself as a TDF winner. Maybe Echevarri told him that he would become one with EPO ? Can't say.

I think plenty of riders have improved by 10% or more over 5 years. If we go by ur criteria then all of them are dopers especially Froome. IMO 5 yrs is too long a time

LOL. Exactly. You just said it!!

You didn't read the full article.

Between 1985 and 1990. No progress in performances at all. Between 1990 and 1995 progress of nearly 10% for the whole peloton. See also the elimination rates. Please explain.

....no progress in performance at all, eh....

....and do keep in mind that the chart only looks at speed but the energy requirements to increase speed are not a linear function ( especially as you get closer to 27mph where aerodynamic considerations really start to brick-wall speed ...bike design generally, and in TT especially, really helps push the speed envelope as use of aerodynamic aids can increase speed without much higher energy expenditure...even something as seemingly mundane as kit made of slippery synthetics makes a significant difference... ).... there is also a reasonably direct relationship btwn Tour length/difficulty and average speed to be considered....

....read, this can be kinda complicated...

Cheers

I compare datas from a single course (Vassivière ITT), 5 and 10 years apart (85, 90, 95). Wind factor less relevant because the course is in a circle and most of it happens in in a forest. Sunshine in 85 and 90. Mild rain in 95. No aero bars in 85. Fact : 0.28% increase in performance for the top 10 riders between 85 and 90. 7.62% increase in performance for the top 10 riders between 90 and 95.

Your graphic is very interesting but dealing with something else entirely.

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Miguel was on EPO big time, and I think I kind of proved it :

(comparing datas of the Lac de Vassivière ITTs in 1990 and 1995)

"In 1990, he was on his way to his first Tour de France top ten at general classification (10th). Some were saying he could have had a shot at winning if he had not sacrificed for his leader Pedro Delgado. He was the only one able to follow Greg LeMond to the top of Luz Ardiden, beating him for the stage win. IF THAT ISN’T GOOD DATA I DON’T KNOW WHAT IS ??? So where was Mr Indurain in 1990, let’s see… Mmmmhhh… Well, well, well : he finished 4th of the stage, just ahead of Greg LeMond, 40 seconds behind Breukink which gives him a 1h03’20” time.

Wait. Is that correct ? I see Mr Indurain did some training during the 90’s, didn’t he ? He managed to improve his own performance for a staggering 5 minutes and 46 seconds (9.1%) ! Well done, Mr Indurain, you’re a hell of a rider… and you sure helped cycling ride straight into hell. With his 1990 time, Mig-Hell would have finished 35th in 1995, just behind time trial specialist and clean sport poster boy Marco Pantani. A reference. Kind of."

https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

That being said, Indurain was always a good rider; a phenomenal time trialist, especially. He won the 1989 Paris-Nice and Criterium International (where he did beat none other than Mottet, Fignon, Lemond & Roche fighting for the win).

I believe he had a first taste at EPO in 1991, saw that it worked, became much more aggressive by 1992 (docs were probably more efficient in dosage too).

I don't think he would have won the 1990 TDF if he had not sacrificed for Delgado. He would have done better than Delgado, but he would not have won. I also believe I read somewhere that he had to be convinced to actually believe in himself as a TDF winner. Maybe Echevarri told him that he would become one with EPO ? Can't say.

I think plenty of riders have improved by 10% or more over 5 years. If we go by ur criteria then all of them are dopers especially Froome. IMO 5 yrs is too long a time

LOL. Exactly. You just said it!!

You didn't read the full article.

Between 1985 and 1990. No progress in performances at all. Between 1990 and 1995 progress of nearly 10% for the whole peloton. See also the elimination rates. Please explain.

this whole exchange is interesting.
as you know, there was a rumor in the peloton in the 90s that Lemond introduced EPO in the peloton. Of course, there are also arguments to suggest that Lemond had nothing to do with EPO.
But the point is: as long as we don't know who was/were the first users of EPO, it seems unfair to speak about Indurain the way you do. And as you know, Lemond wouldn't talk about Indurain like that either.

Why bring LeMond into this ? There is another thread about him.

We're discussing Indurain. I brought reasonable facts on the table. I'm free of my opinion on the matter. You're free to disagree.

 

[sniper]

lol, I brought Lemond into this?

Anyway, I think it's perfectly clear why i mentioned him. It's called an argument.

But fair enough, forget Lemond: tell us why Miguel is such a bad guy?

 

[86TDFWinner]

Miguel was on EPO big time, and I think I kind of proved it :

(comparing datas of the Lac de Vassivière ITTs in 1990 and 1995)

"In 1990, he was on his way to his first Tour de France top ten at general classification (10th). Some were saying he could have had a shot at winning if he had not sacrificed for his leader Pedro Delgado. He was the only one able to follow Greg LeMond to the top of Luz Ardiden, beating him for the stage win. IF THAT ISN’T GOOD DATA I DON’T KNOW WHAT IS ??? So where was Mr Indurain in 1990, let’s see… Mmmmhhh… Well, well, well : he finished 4th of the stage, just ahead of Greg LeMond, 40 seconds behind Breukink which gives him a 1h03’20” time.

Wait. Is that correct ? I see Mr Indurain did some training during the 90’s, didn’t he ? He managed to improve his own performance for a staggering 5 minutes and 46 seconds (9.1%) ! Well done, Mr Indurain, you’re a hell of a rider… and you sure helped cycling ride straight into hell. With his 1990 time, Mig-Hell would have finished 35th in 1995, just behind time trial specialist and clean sport poster boy Marco Pantani. A reference. Kind of."

https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

That being said, Indurain was always a good rider; a phenomenal time trialist, especially. He won the 1989 Paris-Nice and Criterium International (where he did beat none other than Mottet, Fignon, Lemond & Roche fighting for the win).

I believe he had a first taste at EPO in 1991, saw that it worked, became much more aggressive by 1992 (docs were probably more efficient in dosage too).

I don't think he would have won the 1990 TDF if he had not sacrificed for Delgado. He would have done better than Delgado, but he would not have won. I also believe I read somewhere that he had to be convinced to actually believe in himself as a TDF winner. Maybe Echevarri told him that he would become one with EPO ? Can't say.

I think plenty of riders have improved by 10% or more over 5 years. If we go by ur criteria then all of them are dopers especially Froome. IMO 5 yrs is too long a time

LOL. Exactly. You just said it!!

You didn't read the full article.

Between 1985 and 1990. No progress in performances at all. Between 1990 and 1995 progress of nearly 10% for the whole peloton. See also the elimination rates. Please explain.

....no progress in performance at all, eh....

....and do keep in mind that the chart only looks at speed but the energy requirements to increase speed are not a linear function ( especially as you get closer to 27mph where aerodynamic considerations really start to brick-wall speed ...bike design generally, and in TT especially, really helps push the speed envelope as use of aerodynamic aids can increase speed without much higher energy expenditure...even something as seemingly mundane as kit made of slippery synthetics makes a significant difference... ).... there is also a reasonably direct relationship btwn Tour length/difficulty and average speed to be considered....

....read, this can be kinda complicated...

Cheers

Didn't LeMond win the 86 tour w/ clipless LOOK pedals? I'm not seeing or understanding why that needed to be pointed out about Hinault, should I?

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Re:

lol, I brought Lemond into this?

Anyway, I think it's perfectly clear why i mentioned him. It's called an argument.

But fair enough, forget Lemond: tell us why Miguel is such a bad guy?

I think Miguel is basically the Beatles of blood doping. With him, management and team doctors invented a lot of protocols which lead pro cycling to become a joke.

I don't necessarily think he is a bad person. I suspect he didn't care if it was good or bad. I suppose he just took it because he was told too. I don't really care, for that matter. But because his performances were stellar, many, many more cyclists thought they had no choice but to join the bandwagon.

I know he wasn't alone, I know someone else would have done it if not for him. But he did. And he got away with it.

Indurain represents the start of "why I lost interest for pro cycling". Just my opinion. He is also the symbol of a generation that "switched". In my opinion, there is definitely a "before EPO" era and an "after EPO" era and the guys that made the transition, well... I don't like them very much.

 

[86TDFWinner]

[quote="sniper[/urlthis whole exchange is interesting.
as you know, there was a rumor in the peloton in the 90s that Lemond introduced EPO in the peloton. Of course, there are also arguments to suggest that Lemond had nothing to do with EPO.
But the point is: as long as we don't know who was/were the first users of EPO, it seems unfair to speak about Indurain the way you do. And as you know, Lemond wouldn't talk about Indurain like that either.
[/quote]
Curious: If LeMond supposedly "introduced EPO to the peloton in 1990", a couple of things:

Why did he leave PDM almost immediately AFTER signing with them in 88(two years BEFORE he supposedly "introduced the peloton to EPO in 1990"), once he found out they were doping?

If he did(and we know by now he didnt), wouldn't Wonderboy have been able to get this info(as I assume: WADA/USADA/UCI would've as well) in order to smear LeMond even further years ago when he offered up his dough?

Wouldn't it have come out by now, certainly it would've?

Wouldn't Greg have tried to sweep it under the rug and not be so adament about his non doping career?

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

lol, I brought Lemond into this?

Anyway, I think it's perfectly clear why i mentioned him. It's called an argument.

But fair enough, forget Lemond: tell us why Miguel is such a bad guy?

I think Miguel is basically the Beatles of blood doping. With him, management and team doctors invented a lot of protocols which lead pro cycling to become a joke.

I don't necessarily think he is a bad person. I suspect he didn't care if it was good or bad. I suppose he just took it because he was told too. I don't really care, for that matter. But because his performances were stellar, many, many more cyclists thought they had no choice but to join the bandwagon.

I know he wasn't alone, I know someone else would have done it if not for him. But he did. And he got away with it.

Indurain represents the start of "why I lost interest for pro cycling". Just my opinion. He is also the symbol of a generation that "switched". In my opinion, there is definitely a "before EPO" era and an "after EPO" era and the guys that made the transition, well... I don't like them very much.

that's fair enough, thanks for expanding!

my point would be that there's little (if any) evidence that EPO started with Miguel.
Now if Indurain simply did what everybody around him was doing and turned out to be the best responder of the bunch (which I think is a possible scenario), then I don't think we can say he's worse than the others.
But I understand your sentiment.
And sure, I'm not discarding the possibility that he geared up more than others, either.

 

[sniper]

Curious: If LeMond supposedly "introduced EPO to the peloton in 1990", a couple of things:

Why did he leave PDM almost immediately AFTER signing with them in 88(two years BEFORE he supposedly "introduced the peloton to EPO in 1990"), once he found out they were doping?

If he did(and we know by now he didnt), wouldn't Wonderboy have been able to get this info(as I assume: WADA/USADA/UCI would've as well) in order to smear LeMond even further years ago when he offered up his dough?

Wouldn't it have come out by now, certainly it would've?

Wouldn't Greg have tried to sweep it under the rug and not be so adament about his non doping career?

I wish I could answer your questions. Unfortunately, the guys who spread the rumor and made public statements about it are not posting on this forum, to my knowledge. So until those guys speak up, it'll remain just that: a disturbing but wholly unconfirmed rumor.
But let's discuss Lemond stuff in the Lemond thread, unless it relates to Indurain somehow, which your post does not.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Curious: If LeMond supposedly "introduced EPO to the peloton in 1990", a couple of things:

Why did he leave PDM almost immediately AFTER signing with them in 88(two years BEFORE he supposedly "introduced the peloton to EPO in 1990"), once he found out they were doping?

If he did(and we know by now he didnt), wouldn't Wonderboy have been able to get this info(as I assume: WADA/USADA/UCI would've as well) in order to smear LeMond even further years ago when he offered up his dough?

Wouldn't it have come out by now, certainly it would've?

Wouldn't Greg have tried to sweep it under the rug and not be so adament about his non doping career?

I wish I could answer your questions. Unfortunately, the guys who spread the rumor and made public statements about it are not posting on this forum, to my knowledge. So until those guys speak up, it'll remain just that: a disturbing but wholly unconfirmed rumor.
But let's discuss Lemond stuff in the Lemond thread, unless it relates to Indurain somehow, which your post does not.

I only mentioned his name because You/someone did.