Indurain EPO?

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Maxiton said:
Yeah, this doesn't give Indurain enough credit. Of course, we'll never know for sure unless he writes a book and tells the truth, but I suspect he retired when he did because he didn't want to be greedy and didn't want to overshadow the great riders of the past who didn't have EPO. He already had enough fame and money so what would have been the point in continuing?

EDIT: Oh yeah, I almost forgot: He was probably worried about the long-term health effects of EPO and whatever else he was doing. Who knows, that alone could have been reason enough to quit when he did.
He quit as soon as it became apparent that the 50% rule would be put in place for the '97 season.
 
I personally believe Indurain took EPO but the question is when did he start?

He progressed slowly rather than in sudden leaps and won smaller stage races before becoming a Tour contender, it was a mountain stage he also won in 89 and he finished 17th that year at 25yo.

I think Indurain could have won the Tour in 1990 if he had been Banesto team leader instead of Delgado, he finished ahead of Lemond in all the vital stages(including all individual TTs) and it was only the stage to Alpe d'Huez where he lost a shedload of time after dragging the break of Delgado, LeMond & Bugno to the foot of the Alpe, he then lost so much time(10min +) it would seem like he actually cruised up Alpe d'huez.

If Indurain was on EPO then, what was his team leader Delgado on because he sure wasnt the rider he had been the previous few years. Surely the domestique wouldnt be on better stuff than the team leader unless you believe the Conconi project angle. Personally I dont because there has never been a whisper about it, kinda like the LeMond doped theory.

I think Indurain might have won without EPO in 91 but after that I am not so sure. I know that seems illogical but that TT in Luxembourg 92 where he destroyed the field was unbelievable, he beat Fignon by over 6 minutes after which Fignon decribed Indurain as an "Extra-terrestial", I think that is a telling comment with the benefit of hindsight.

Obviously, pre-Festina, not as many questions were asked about doping and especially as Indurain was such a nice guy. He gave away so many stage victories in Giro and Tour so fellow riders really respected. He really was the anti-Lance. Some thought he was boring but give me the silent type over the media ***** anyday.

As a side-note on Reynolds/Banesto/Caisse, I remember Andy Hampsten mentioning in an interview that he was put under pressure to dope at a team late on his career, so that would be either Banesto 95 or US Postal 96. I know Eddie B was chief of Postal at the time, but would Hampsten have felt pressure to dope for the American circuit. I doubt it so and it would seem more likely Banesto is the team he refers to, as he didnt make their Tour team in 95.
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
pmcg76 said:
I personally believe Indurain took EPO but the question is when did he start?

He progressed slowly rather than in sudden leaps and won smaller stage races before becoming a Tour contender, it was a mountain stage he also won in 89 and he finished 17th that year at 25yo.

I think Indurain could have won the Tour in 1990 if he had been Banesto team leader instead of Delgado, he finished ahead of Lemond in all the vital stages(including all individual TTs) and it was only the stage to Alpe d'Huez where he lost a shedload of time after dragging the break of Delgado, LeMond & Bugno to the foot of the Alpe, he then lost so much time(10min +) it would seem like he actually cruised up Alpe d'huez.

If Indurain was on EPO then, what was his team leader Delgado on because he sure wasnt the rider he had been the previous few years. Surely the domestique wouldnt be on better stuff than the team leader unless you believe the Conconi project angle. Personally I dont because there has never been a whisper about it, kinda like the LeMond doped theory.

I think Indurain might have won without EPO in 91 but after that I am not so sure. I know that seems illogical but that TT in Luxembourg 92 where he destroyed the field was unbelievable, he beat Fignon by over 6 minutes after which Fignon decribed Indurain as an "Extra-terrestial", I think that is a telling comment with the benefit of hindsight..
I think Indurain was the first real success of EPO.. starting in 90..Perhaps he just maintained 45 hct...When Riis(mr 60%) came along things changed..If a little was good a lot should be a lot better. A little boost was all Indurain needed but the Riis Armstrong era took it to a whole new level.
 
redtreviso said:
I think Indurain was the first real success of EPO.. starting in 90..Perhaps he just maintained 45 hct...When Riis(mr 60%) came along things changed..If a little was good a lot should be a lot better. A little boost was all Indurain needed but the Riis Armstrong era took it to a whole new level.
So if you think Indurain was on EPO in 90, what was Delgado taking that year because he sure werent flying or is this just a case of two different riders reacting differently to the effects of EPO.
 
pmcg76 said:
So if you think Indurain was on EPO in 90, what was Delgado taking that year because he sure werent flying or is this just a case of two different riders reacting differently to the effects of EPO.
Indurain had been working with Dr. Conconi for a long time. 1990 was before the age of team-wide EPO programs.

Delgado's steroids < Indurain's EPO.
 
BroDeal said:
Indurain had been working with Dr. Conconi for a long time. 1990 was before the age of team-wide EPO programs.

Delgado's steroids < Indurain's EPO.
Ok, fair enough which just shows that Indurain really should have been the leader that year:rolleyes:.

Now do you think Delgado ever got on the EPO train or just followed the Fignon route and faded out. I mean he was a Top 10 GC guy after 89 but that was it.
 
May 14, 2010
5,306
2
0
BroDeal said:
He quit as soon as it became apparent that the 50% rule would be put in place for the '97 season.
Good point. I think I was suffering from a momentary spasm of naive-itus. :rolleyes:
 
BroDeal said:
He quit as soon as it became apparent that the 50% rule would be put in place for the '97 season.
I don't know. That didn't stop Riis.
(It only stopped him from winning!)

Although I guess if Indurain was racing with a ridiculously high hematocrit he could have felt continuing for another year wasn't worth it.
 
Jul 27, 2010
260
0
0
hrotha said:
That's not very accurate. Indurain could keep up and usually even drop the best climbers up to the 1996 Dauphine. He was defeated at the 1996 TdF and withdrew from the Vuelta, after which he retired. The 1995 TdF was the one he dominated the most in the mountains. If Indurain started using EPO before most other riders, by 1994-95 it would seem most everybody was using it too. The reasons of Indurain's demise are probably more psychological than physical: at 32, he had done 23 GTs and he probably felt he didn't have a lot left to do.

Unless what made him retire was the introduction of blood tests, of course!
I had always thought that it was 95-96 that EPO really came about . . . then my theory would make a little more sense
 
Mar 10, 2009
272
0
0
I seem to remember Indurain stating that he wanted to retire because he was a family man and his family and himself had sacrificed so much. I kind of recall him talking about it prior to losing to Riis. He did however rethink this for a little while when ONCE offered him about 7 million to race one more season, but ended up knocking it back.

Indurain seemed to hold a grudge against Banesto management for awhile after his retirement over them making him ride the Vuelta. Which I agree they shouldn't have. I kind of think indurain had repayed them back enough overall and they shouldn't have pushed it. So perhaps he isn't a very forgiving man. But a doper or not he was a great champion on and off the bike. he was well respected by other riders. Even Chris Boardman who I suspect didn't dope stated he really respected him and couldn't find anything to be angry at about him when trying to psyche up for a timetrial. I guess that says alot, for a non doper to respect a doper. What was it about Indurain that was so worth respecting?

On a side note, I ran into an ex-Mormon Missionary who didn't quite understand how big Indurain was and went to see him. They went to his family house but he didn't live there anymore but his brother Prudencio did. He showed me a photo of them with him (it's posted on the internet somewhere). They said he was very nice and showed them the trophy room, talked a little religion, etc (the Indurain's apparently are quite religious) and then gave them the address to Miguel's house. I was suprised by this. Anyway they went there and only his wife was home, but she wasn't as accomodating as Prudencio. She just said he was out of town. i can understand it, she must get a lot of callers. But I would imagine that the towns folk realize he is a private man and seem to respect that overall.

Anyway, I wonder if Prudencio could have also been a champion had he doped. I don't think he did based on his results. I wonder how he feels about it all, living in his brother's shadow, knowing the truth and all. He is obviously a real nice guy.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
BroDeal said:
He quit as soon as it became apparent that the 50% rule would be put in place for the '97 season.
That's conjecture and a bit of a bitter remark. Considering that he was just top ten in 1996 with Jan coming as the new contender I seriously doubt that is the main reason.

Just a fact (no conjecture needed): With or without 50%, he was past his prime and there were enough indicators to suggest worse was to come in the form of Jan Ulrich.

Conjecture: Considering his palmares and money he didn't want more humiliation.

I personally find that a much more logical scenario.
 
Indurain said:
No we are getting into some of the more classic tours (87 to 89). Some great racing then. Indurain came 17th in 89 tour. Given that he won a stage from an all day attack and then loss a bundle of time the next day in the mountains he did okay. He did win a few smaller stage races too pre 90. So Obviously the talent was there. He still considers himself a late bloomer. I would have liked to seen how well he would have went without EPO (and a clean field) as he was definately on the improve.

Major results pre 90
Paris–Nice (1989)
Critérium International (1989)
Volta a Catalunya (1988)
Tour de l'Avenir (1986)
He also won a mountain stage at Izoard at Tour de l´Avenir back in -86 so i would definitively say there were signs of him doing well in the mountains, becoming a complete cyclist.

He was a physical superhuman, that´s the way i see it. EPO? Perhaps. Can´t say i have seen decent evidence for this but if there are any, that won´t really change my opinion of him. Still the best rider of his generation.
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
Franklin said:
Just a fact (no conjecture needed): With or without 50%, he was past his prime and there were enough indicators to suggest worse was to come in the form of Jan Ulrich.
That's also conjecture. You can't say he was past his prime, as he had just dominated the Dauphiné a month previously.

Pedro Delgado at the time criticized the team management for losing Induráin the Tour. He said they made the same mistake with Induráin as they had made in 1991 with him: Make him race far too much, to the point where he got to the Tour exhausted and unable to compete.

It's impossible to say whether or not he was past it.
 
May 25, 2010
250
0
0
issoisso said:
That's also conjecture. You can't say he was past his prime, as he had just dominated the Dauphiné a month previously.

Pedro Delgado at the time criticized the team management for losing Induráin the Tour. He said they made the same mistake with Induráin as they had made in 1991 with him: Make him race far too much, to the point where he got to the Tour exhausted and unable to compete.

It's impossible to say whether or not he was past it.
Right on the money!
 
BroDeal said:
He quit as soon as it became apparent that the 50% rule would be put in place for the '97 season.
"I will quit when you start suffering, when the amusement and objectives have gone, when i reach my peak, around 31 or 32".
-Miguel Indurain, Cycle Sport 1993

I think its fair to assume that he knew, three and a half years before, what would made him quit.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Indurain said:
On a side note, I ran into an ex-Mormon Missionary who didn't quite understand how big Indurain was and went to see him. They went to his family house but he didn't live there anymore but his brother Prudencio did. He showed me a photo of them with him (it's posted on the internet somewhere). They said he was very nice and showed them the trophy room, talked a little religion, etc (the Indurain's apparently are quite religious) and then gave them the address to Miguel's house. I was suprised by this. Anyway they went there and only his wife was home, but she wasn't as accomodating as Prudencio. She just said he was out of town. i can understand it, she must get a lot of callers. But I would imagine that the towns folk realize he is a private man and seem to respect that overall.
Interesting story.

I have always heard that Indurain was a member of Opus Dei.
 
Mar 10, 2009
272
0
0
I have always heard that Indurain was a member of Opus Dei.
Yes I think your right. I knew it was something to do with the Catholics. Wonder how they feel about EPO. Oh well at least he kept some of the religious principles. Never heard him slandering another rider (even though I suspect that he didn't like Olano or Virenque much). LIke I said, seemed very popular amongst the other riders.

I remember he outsprinted Virenque for a KOM sprint once for the hell of it. Virenque didn't look too impressed at being beat and just stared him down. But I guess Big Mig showed him who was boss and that he was only the KOM because he had allowed him to be. Even Armstrong says that he didn't laugh at him when he said he was going to win the Tour (like many other pro's did). Armstrong says he asked him what training he was doing. I suspect he really asked him what pharmacies he was using.
 
Indurain said:
I remember he outsprinted Virenque for a KOM sprint once for the hell of it. Virenque didn't look too impressed at being beat and just stared him down. But I guess Big Mig showed him who was boss and that he was only the KOM because he had allowed him to be. Even Armstrong says that he didn't laugh at him when he said he was going to win the Tour (like many other pro's did). Armstrong says he asked him what training he was doing. I suspect he really asked him what pharmacies he was using.
I think during the 1994 TdF Indurain was ****ed off by Festina so he went out of his way to make sure Virenque and Leblanc stayed out of the podium, although he was quite subtle about it. I don't remember why that was, though.
 
May 12, 2009
65
0
8,680
hrotha said:
I think during the 1994 TdF Indurain was ****ed off by Festina so he went out of his way to make sure Virenque and Leblanc stayed out of the podium, although he was quite subtle about it. I don't remember why that was, though.
one possibility would be Leblanc who bruyneeled him to the summit of Hautacam and pipped him at the line. Indurain had gone after Pantani in a rampage (something to behold!), and he may have begrudged Leblanc the fact that the latter's win watered down the message Mig wanted to convey, at that point in the race.
Then again, it's all conjecture, the man would not talk. Fine.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
issoisso said:
That's also conjecture. You can't say he was past his prime, as he had just dominated the Dauphiné a month previously.

Pedro Delgado at the time criticized the team management for losing Induráin the Tour. He said they made the same mistake with Induráin as they had made in 1991 with him: Make him race far too much, to the point where he got to the Tour exhausted and unable to compete.

It's impossible to say whether or not he was past it.
Well, can you really say it's conjecture he was beyond his prime? He gets beaten for the first time in two GT's and a young star hits the scene like a comet. We can go back and forth about this, but surely it's not conjecture to say he was beyond his prime and that he realised that.

On the racing too much... he did win two gt's in one year twice, so that argument is a bit strange. It does make an interesting point, namely that he wasn't in control of the calendar of the team.

As No_Ball says, he said he would retire at 31-32 and he did that, no need to look at the 50% rule. And before anyone gets upset... of course he is a prime Epo candidate. If he didn't use I would be shocked.
 
Franklin said:
Well, can you really say it's conjecture he was beyond his prime? He gets beaten for the first time in two GT's and a young star hits the scene like a comet. We can go back and forth about this, but surely it's not conjecture to say he was beyond his prime and that he realised that.

On the racing too much... he did win two gt's in one year twice, so that argument is a bit strange. It does make an interesting point, namely that he wasn't in control of the calendar of the team.

As No_Ball says, he said he would retire at 31-32 and he did that, no need to look at the 50% rule. And before anyone gets upset... of course he is a prime Epo candidate. If he didn't use I would be shocked.
Correct.

If you have a look at his results in 1996, he was in better form than the year before. Peaked too early is what I would think.
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
Franklin said:
Well, can you really say it's conjecture he was beyond his prime? He gets beaten for the first time in two GT's /QUOTE]

Not for the first time. Also, he had bronchitis at the Vuelta. He described it as "breathing through a straw".

Franklin said:
and a young star hits the scene like a comet. We can go back and forth about this, but surely it's not conjecture to say he was beyond his prime and that he realised that.
It's not a fact, so it's automatically conjecture.
 
Mar 10, 2009
272
0
0
Peaking early seems to be a problem for many older champions. It's like thier body doesn't hold onto the peak as long. I'd say that's pretty much what happened to Cadel and Basso this year. They can't ride like they use to, all year round. I think when you get older you need to specialise a lot more.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
issoisso said:
Franklin said:
Well, can you really say it's conjecture he was beyond his prime? He gets beaten for the first time in two GT's
Not for the first time. Also, he had bronchitis at the Vuelta. He described it as "breathing through a straw".
Ok rephrased... first time he got humiliated in a GT. And yes, yes... Riis is a bad man who was doped up to the gills... doesn't change that he was a shadow of his usual performance.

It's not a fact, so it's automatically conjecture.
Oh but this is where it becomes easy... as it is indeed a fact.

1. His performance before was top notch. (7 gts)
2. His performance afterwards is worse (gets humiliated in 2 GT's)

These two are undeniable facts, as thats exactly what happened.Roll this one any way you want, but that is a clear cut: beyond his prime. It's not conjecture to say Indurain's peak was between 1991-1995 and that afterwards he was worse. Had he pulled of an Armstrong 2004 year we had a discussion.

And before you come with a "what if" scenario... that's conjecture, not fact. What I mention are historical facts and not conjecture. The same goes for the 50% rule, it's existence is a fact.The conjecture I used is that him being beyond his prime had a significant impact on his decision of ending his career, whereas Brodeal conjectured it was the 50% rule.
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
Franklin said:
Ok rephrased... first time he got humiliated in a GT. And yes, yes... Riis is a bad man who was doped up to the gills... doesn't change that he was a shadow of his usual performance.



Oh but this is where it becomes easy... as it is indeed a fact.

1. His performance before was top notch. (7 gts)
2. His performance afterwards is worse (gets humiliated in 2 GT's)

These two are undeniable facts, as thats exactly what happened.


The problem is that you're slicing this as "Only GTs count". Delgado says Induráin peaked too early. Before his first GT of the season, Induráin annihilated the same riders he'd face in the Tour.

Saying he was washed up is not fact. It's conjecture.

Franklin said:
Roll this one any way you want, but that is a clear cut: beyond his prime. It's not conjecture to say Indurain's peak was between 1991-1995 and that afterwards he was worse. Had he pulled of an Armstrong 2004 year we had a discussion.
What? If he had had a career best year, then we'd have a discussion about whether or not he'd have been washed up? How does that make any sense?

Franklin said:
And before you come with a "what if" scenario... that's conjecture, not fact. What I mention are historical facts and not conjecture. The same goes for the 50% rule, it's existence is a fact.The conjecture I used is that him being beyond his prime had a significant impact on his decision of ending his career, whereas Brodeal conjectured it was the 50% rule.
You're the one pointing out "what if" scenarios. I pointed out the fact that he dominated the best riders in the world in other races. You refuse to look at more than two specific races.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 77
Similar threads
Indurain in the '96 Tour

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS