Indurain - Am I assuming correctly?

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Of course he's going to downplay it, try to dispell and make it go away, he's become Wonderboy so to speak as far as denying doping allegations, it's almost comical now. Big Mig knows he doped, and pretty much everyone here knows he did too, he just refuses to admit it for some reason. It brings his legacy into question IMO.

It's a biography. He didn't even co-operate with it.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Re: Re:

Of course he's going to downplay it, try to dispell and make it go away, he's become Wonderboy so to speak as far as denying doping allegations, it's almost comical now. Big Mig knows he doped, and pretty much everyone here knows he did too, he just refuses to admit it for some reason. It brings his legacy into question IMO.

It's a biography. He didn't even co-operate with it.

I don't doubt it.

 

[Nomad]

Re: Re:

So. Yeah. Well. Gosh. There's a new Indurain biography. His fourth English-language outing but the first in about a decade and a half. And, well, surprise! it whitewashes the doping allegations. It's almost like reading those pre-2005 Armstrong books John Wilcockson used to do.

Of course he's going to downplay it, try to dispell and make it go away, he's become Wonderboy so to speak as far as denying doping allegations, it's almost comical now. Big Mig knows he doped, and pretty much everyone here knows he did too, he just refuses to admit it for some reason. It brings his legacy into question IMO.

A very smart man to play his cards that way, IMO. He's an icon in Spain with races named after him, and he gets to ride in the convertible with the other legends. Surprisingly, he still has quite a few worshipers who will fight you tooth & nail that he was clean. They cite his physiological features (e.g., 88 VO2max, 28 RHR, 7.8 L lung capacity, etc.) as their main point of contention. They remain oblivious to the other evidence that is overwhelming (e.g., alien power #'s, Concini connection, Davy testimony, etc.). Big Mig will never confess...why ruin a good thing?

 

[hrotha]

Indurain doesn't go around denying any doping allegations. He doesn't address them at all, which works out because nobody's really asking him.

 

[Bolder]

Re:

Indurain doesn't go around denying any doping allegations. He doesn't address them at all, which works out because nobody's really asking him.

That's really funny -- never thought of it that way. I'm not Spanish and don't know how Spain really thinks about dopers who get caught (Samu could be a nice barometer). But my impression is that he's untouchable in Spain and keeps a low profile everywhere else (and even in Spain to some extent).

At this point tbh I don't really care if he confesses or there's some kind of irrefutable proof offered like a syringe sticking out of his arse. He knows what he did or didn't do. I don't revere him as a superhuman champion but rather as an undeniable talent who navigated a nasty era in cycling with great success and came out largely unscathed, while others were thrown or threw themselves under the bus.

 

[absolutely_not]

Re: Re:

Indurain doesn't go around denying any doping allegations. He doesn't address them at all, which works out because nobody's really asking him.

That's really funny -- never thought of it that way. I'm not Spanish and don't know how Spain really thinks about dopers who get caught (Samu could be a nice barometer). But my impression is that he's untouchable in Spain and keeps a low profile everywhere else (and even in Spain to some extent).

At this point tbh I don't really care if he confesses or there's some kind of irrefutable proof offered like a syringe sticking out of his ****. He knows what he did or didn't do. I don't revere him as a superhuman champion but rather as an undeniable talent who navigated a nasty era in cycling with great success and came out largely unscathed, while others were thrown or threw themselves under the bus.

I can't say I agree. I would very much love to know WHO started with EPO. Who opened the floodgate for it so it became impossible to compete without it for the next 20 years?
I view Ullrich, Pantani, Armstrong and those that followed as victim of their era as they entered a sport where EPO was already there and almost mandatory if you wanted to be a pro.
Not sure I feel the same for Indurain. Sure, I guess he is nice, but he also is one of the first (if not THE first) TdF winner on EPO. He didn't just "navigated a nasty era in cycling", I feel he created that nasty era in a way few others did

 

[hrotha]

I find that notion a bit short-sighted. Sure, someone pioneered EPO, and sure, it might have been Indurain at that level, but ethically there's no difference between that and older drugs - they all were out to get the biggest boost they could manage. When the dam is full of cracks, it's a bit pointless to blame the very first hole to burst open.

 

[absolutely_not]

yeah I see what you mean.
But I feel you could decide to do without cortisone or testosterone in the 80's. Sure, almost nobody decided to do without. But you could.
You couldn't decided to do without EPO if you really wanted to be a pro. So I would tend to blame more those who entroduced it to their sport. And Indurain might very well be one of those. Sure, EPO would have entered the peloton, from one rider/team or another so I'm not stupid enough to blame all on the pioneer.
But the formulation "he navigated a nasty era" sounded a bit light to me. There was never a clean era in cycling. Ever. Not every riders introduced new drugs to the peloton.

 

[Saint Unix]

With Armstrong caught Indurain sits at the top of the pile when it comes to fraudsters who cheated their way into cycling legend, at least until Froome wins another couple of Tours.

EPO is absolutely worse than other drugs in that it gives riders that previously had no hope of winning stage races a great chance. There's absolutely no way scrubs like Riis, Chiappucci and Berzin would have been anywhere near a GT top 10 without it. Not a fat bastard like Indurain either. At least with the old doping it was possible to say that the best rider in a field of dopers would have won if the field was clean, i.e. the most naturally talented riders were the best riders. After EPO was introduced any hope of that ringing true went out the window and we had donkeys winning Grand Tours. It's fraud on a completely different level to what was previously possible.

I revere Coppi, Merckx, Hinault, Anquetil and the other pre-EPO greats, despite many of them testing positive and/or openly admitting to doping. Indurain is number one on my list of not-yet-caught riders I want to see dragged through the dirt. His legacy should have ended with maybe a few TT WCs or thereabouts.

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

I think Indurain gets a pass because it's hard to imagine him as an evil mastermind. He's perceived as a harmless person.

IMO he just did what he was told to do. He trusted his DS and team doctor and rode fast when he was asked to. Until he got bored with it.

EDIT : also... Indurain was a very good rider from the get go. He didn't suddenly appear on the map with EPO like others did. I don't like him one bit, to me he's the symbol of everything that started to go wrong with cycling but I can see why some people give him a pass.

 

[hrotha]

Re:

EPO is absolutely worse than other drugs in that it gives riders that previously had no hope of winning stage races a great chance.

Yes, absolutely, but from an ethical point of view it's the same. You don't get to be upset about a rival being a better cheat than you, in my opinion.

 

[Durden93]

Re: Re:

EPO is absolutely worse than other drugs in that it gives riders that previously had no hope of winning stage races a great chance.

Yes, absolutely, but from an ethical point of view it's the same. You don't get to be upset about a rival being a better cheat than you, in my opinion.

Is it though? For me, EPO is dramatically different than amphetamines. Look at Merckx, he tested positive for Fencfamin. Its main benefits are increasing alertfulness. In many cases, Amphetamines can allow athletes to push through the pain. That's understandable to me because cycling is tough. Especially in the past where you would have 250+km multi-mountain stages. It's understandable not wanting to ride that on bread and water.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re: Re:

EPO is absolutely worse than other drugs in that it gives riders that previously had no hope of winning stage races a great chance.

Yes, absolutely, but from an ethical point of view it's the same. You don't get to be upset about a rival being a better cheat than you, in my opinion.

Is it though? For me, EPO is dramatically different than amphetamines. Look at Merckx, he tested positive for Fencfamin. Its main benefits are increasing alertfulness. In many cases, Amphetamines can allow athletes to push through the pain. That's understandable to me because cycling is tough. Especially in the past where you would have 250+km multi-mountain stages. It's understandable not wanting to ride that on bread and water.

I think the point hrotha is driving at is, if EPO had been available in the pre-Indurain eras, do you think any of the riders of those eras that you reference wouldn't have used it? If not, then there is nothing differentiating Indurain from any of those that came before, except a lot of them might have been more ruthless than he was, because Miguelón wasn't given to throwing his weight around in the way other dominant champions like Hinault were. I mean, Merckx supposedly encouraged his son into using EPO, so can there be any doubt? Indurain just happened to be the one that came along as the technology of doping crossed the point of no return.

 

[Durden93]

Oh ok, Libertine. I see your point. I think you are correct. The history of sport is the history of doping.

 

[Angliru]

Re:

With Armstrong caught Indurain sits at the top of the pile when it comes to fraudsters who cheated their way into cycling legend, at least until Froome wins another couple of Tours.

EPO is absolutely worse than other drugs in that it gives riders that previously had no hope of winning stage races a great chance. There's absolutely no way scrubs like Riis, Chiappucci and Berzin would have been anywhere near a GT top 10 without it. Not a fat bastard like Indurain either. At least with the old doping it was possible to say that the best rider in a field of dopers would have won if the field was clean, i.e. the most naturally talented riders were the best riders. After EPO was introduced any hope of that ringing true went out the window and we had donkeys winning Grand Tours. It's fraud on a completely different level to what was previously possible.

I revere Coppi, Merckx, Hinault, Anquetil and the other pre-EPO greats, despite many of them testing positive and/or openly admitting to doping. Indurain is number one on my list of not-yet-caught riders I want to see dragged through the dirt. His legacy should have ended with maybe a few TT WCs or thereabouts.

You revere these guys but do you really believe that had they competed in Indurain's era that they wouldn't have used the same methods?

Edit: Of course Libertine beat me to posting this point.