Re:
good post, interesting & legimitate questions. Will address some later today.@NL_LeMondFans said:
- Status
- Mar 13, 2009
- 16,853
- 2
- 0
Re: Re:
This is what Yesalis or Hoberman were alluding to, athlete norms, and how doping now becomes a Red Queen norm, athletes match like-to-like. The academics who work in the field of dope.
Yesalis at Penn State, and Hoberman is U Texas I think.
Maxiton said:
This is what Yesalis or Hoberman were alluding to, athlete norms, and how doping now becomes a Red Queen norm, athletes match like-to-like. The academics who work in the field of dope.
Yesalis at Penn State, and Hoberman is U Texas I think.
Re:
There is no tinfoil hat here. There is irritation that an ill-informed poster (i.e. you) keeps connecting non-existing dots and keeps rehashing the same old arguments as if they are new and basically don't pay any attention to what is said by others that don't agree to your narrative. Let me correct that, you acknowledge what is said by them to only come back a few posts later with exact same arguments and questions.
As to your questions:
Q: how did the rumor come in the peloton, you think? Who spread it?
A: Who knows. It is in the character of rumors that there origin is often not clear. It may have been that he did introduce EPO, it might that they felt there was no other way to explain LeMond's results, it may have been jealousy, spite, etc.
To quote pmcg76: "Rumours are created and spread and escalate because people like to feel important and need an excuse to do bad thing."
and: "LeMond rode for PDM were Gibers was a DS and Dhaenans a rider. He was paid big money whilst there but didn't perform and broke his contract to leave. The next season LeMond returns as Tour Champion. How do you think the guys at PDM felt? Did it ever occur to you that the "rumour" may have been started malicioulsy out of bitterness. Or maybe like many others, they just put 2+2 together and came up with 5 and have no real insight or knowledge. Perhaps he was using EPO in 1988 to ride the likes of the Tour of Holland or Nissan Classic."
It seems clear that Dhaenens started it and then it spread. It utter folly to think that we can accurately trace back the origins and route of that rumor.
Q: But certainly you'll agree that the fact that the rumor existed in the early 90s (see Dhaenens + Dutch/belgian blogger) seems to discard Lance as a source?
A: Yes, hard to deny that. By the way there are also rumors going around that people never actually landed on the moon and that Madonna can actually sing in key. You and I both know those rumors to be false so do we attribute any credence to them merely because they exist?
There you have it, asked and answered.
sniper said:Boogerd said "the peloton he rode in". Lance said "everybody knows". Vandeweghe also speaks of 'the peloton', which I take to suggest 'the peloton at large'. Of course, many caveats, mind.
And mind: just saying what they seem to have said. Not assigning truth to anything, least of all to Lance's assertion. But point is: the rumor was there, and definitely not limited to Dhaenens, as both pmcg and Red have asserted. So, for the sake of consistency, please reply to them as well and tell them they're bending facts to suit their agenda. Like you do with me all the time
Anyway, many important points were made in the previous pages and are waiting for you to address them, preferably without the aggression you and pmcg put in your posts. It doesn't help the discusion. It's not about me. You're reading way too much into my posts. It's almost as if you have a tinfoil hat on everytime you reply to my posts. Which is funny considering how you accuse me of conspiracy thinking. You and pmcg see a conspiracy behind everything I write. I assure you there's no need for that. Peace in the middle east. Or take Red's example, he's ignoring me which is always the best option if you're out of arguments. Aggression is never the answer.
Anyway, points were made, and questions were asked, such as: how did the rumor come in the peloton, you think? Who spread it?
I know many posters are on the record putting every bit of Lemond critique down to a Lance smear campaign (again the conspiracy angle, ironically).
But certainly you'll agree that the fact that the rumor existed in the early 90s (see Dhaenens + Dutch/belgian blogger) seems to discard Lance as a source?
Would love an honest/direct answer from you.
There is no tinfoil hat here. There is irritation that an ill-informed poster (i.e. you) keeps connecting non-existing dots and keeps rehashing the same old arguments as if they are new and basically don't pay any attention to what is said by others that don't agree to your narrative. Let me correct that, you acknowledge what is said by them to only come back a few posts later with exact same arguments and questions.
As to your questions:
Q: how did the rumor come in the peloton, you think? Who spread it?
A: Who knows. It is in the character of rumors that there origin is often not clear. It may have been that he did introduce EPO, it might that they felt there was no other way to explain LeMond's results, it may have been jealousy, spite, etc.
To quote pmcg76: "Rumours are created and spread and escalate because people like to feel important and need an excuse to do bad thing."
and: "LeMond rode for PDM were Gibers was a DS and Dhaenans a rider. He was paid big money whilst there but didn't perform and broke his contract to leave. The next season LeMond returns as Tour Champion. How do you think the guys at PDM felt? Did it ever occur to you that the "rumour" may have been started malicioulsy out of bitterness. Or maybe like many others, they just put 2+2 together and came up with 5 and have no real insight or knowledge. Perhaps he was using EPO in 1988 to ride the likes of the Tour of Holland or Nissan Classic."
It seems clear that Dhaenens started it and then it spread. It utter folly to think that we can accurately trace back the origins and route of that rumor.
Q: But certainly you'll agree that the fact that the rumor existed in the early 90s (see Dhaenens + Dutch/belgian blogger) seems to discard Lance as a source?
A: Yes, hard to deny that. By the way there are also rumors going around that people never actually landed on the moon and that Madonna can actually sing in key. You and I both know those rumors to be false so do we attribute any credence to them merely because they exist?
There you have it, asked and answered.
- Sep 16, 2010
- 7,617
- 1,054
- 20,680
Re: Re:
I've done the research honey, and shared it. And there is zero evidence for transfusions being regularly used in cycling in the 1970s.
So your evidence for the regular use of transfusions in the 1970s is this: the doctor who suggested a transfusion to Merckx must have carried out transfusions on others. Ditto Fuchs and Zoetemelk. QED transfusions were being regularly used in the 70s.
Bloomin' marvelous.
If you've read the previously linked articles you'll know that that question is answered.
Maxiton said:
I've done the research honey, and shared it. And there is zero evidence for transfusions being regularly used in cycling in the 1970s.
Maxiton said:
So your evidence for the regular use of transfusions in the 1970s is this: the doctor who suggested a transfusion to Merckx must have carried out transfusions on others. Ditto Fuchs and Zoetemelk. QED transfusions were being regularly used in the 70s.
Bloomin' marvelous.
Maxiton said:
If you've read the previously linked articles you'll know that that question is answered.
Re: Re:
@NLLemondfans.
To start off, bear in mind that, if you go through the thread, you'll find very few claiming Lemond doped for sure.
You will, however, find several claiming and insisting that Lemond was definitely clean.
So, the starting point (or null hypothesis) for the discussion is and has been "Lemond is the only clean GT winner of the past three decades" and that's also (imo) where the burden of proof lies. That starting point, in turn, raises questions along the lines of "if he was clean, then how do we explain xyz".
If "xyz" gets sufficiently explained, then the null hypothesis will be reinforced.
Right now what we're seeing (not from you, to be sure, but from some others) is deflection away from those questions along the lines of "you have no cred, therefore there is no need to address your arguments" (tapping straight from Lance's repertoire, ironically), and "I made up my mind decades ago, so that's that".
As long as these posters continue to vociferously maintain Lemond was definitely clean meanwhile refusing to address the questions, then these questions will obviously be repeated, and repeated, and repeated. See Red and pmcg, after dozens of posts on the topic, still ignoring that the EPO rumor wasn't just Dhaenens.
But other than that, I think there's been good debate with interesting new info in both directions!, to be sure.
btw, you'll also have noticed Maxiton's suggestion that while Greg may have been clean according to the rule book, that doesn't exclude the possibility that he transfused early on in his carreer and/or used EPO later in his carreer (both methods not being illegal at the time he used them). Personally I find that an interesting and attractive hypothesis. For now, I think that is the hypothesis with most explanatory power, so to say. I mean, it could explain his stance against testosterone, but it could also explain why he was able to win three GTs amid a doped up field. It could explain the stance of guys like Voet that Lemond was clean, and it could explain the rumors in the peloton that he introduced EPO. So that hypothesis cuts nicely both ways.
Of course we can speculate about the crhonology of individual events, such as Lemond's rumored(!) introduction of EPO. If that happened, it must (imo) have been in 89 (iron shot incident).
But for now the shooting incident seems to provide a good enough explanation, no?
Could be anything, really, including the possibility that he refused to dope and so wanted to leave.
Is there an official version from Lemond himself about this? Or only what Stanko told us? (which for me is still very decent evidence in favor of Lemond). Is there an official response from PDM?
If indeed this is how it went, well I'd say that speaks in Lemond's favor.
(But I could be wrong)
I would also like to refer back to Frankin's post. I linked it on the previous page. It explains some of the events in Lemond's carreer that raise doubts from a performance and training perspective.
@NLLemondfans.
To start off, bear in mind that, if you go through the thread, you'll find very few claiming Lemond doped for sure.
You will, however, find several claiming and insisting that Lemond was definitely clean.
So, the starting point (or null hypothesis) for the discussion is and has been "Lemond is the only clean GT winner of the past three decades" and that's also (imo) where the burden of proof lies. That starting point, in turn, raises questions along the lines of "if he was clean, then how do we explain xyz".
If "xyz" gets sufficiently explained, then the null hypothesis will be reinforced.
Right now what we're seeing (not from you, to be sure, but from some others) is deflection away from those questions along the lines of "you have no cred, therefore there is no need to address your arguments" (tapping straight from Lance's repertoire, ironically), and "I made up my mind decades ago, so that's that".
As long as these posters continue to vociferously maintain Lemond was definitely clean meanwhile refusing to address the questions, then these questions will obviously be repeated, and repeated, and repeated. See Red and pmcg, after dozens of posts on the topic, still ignoring that the EPO rumor wasn't just Dhaenens.
But other than that, I think there's been good debate with interesting new info in both directions!, to be sure.
btw, you'll also have noticed Maxiton's suggestion that while Greg may have been clean according to the rule book, that doesn't exclude the possibility that he transfused early on in his carreer and/or used EPO later in his carreer (both methods not being illegal at the time he used them). Personally I find that an interesting and attractive hypothesis. For now, I think that is the hypothesis with most explanatory power, so to say. I mean, it could explain his stance against testosterone, but it could also explain why he was able to win three GTs amid a doped up field. It could explain the stance of guys like Voet that Lemond was clean, and it could explain the rumors in the peloton that he introduced EPO. So that hypothesis cuts nicely both ways.
Nobody knows if he doped. And if he did, in terms of chronology, we have very little. Which in itself is not surprising. Even for Lance we still don't know when he started taking what, inspite of a big fat pile of affidavits.@NL_LeMondFans said:
Of course we can speculate about the crhonology of individual events, such as Lemond's rumored(!) introduction of EPO. If that happened, it must (imo) have been in 89 (iron shot incident).
Several options, including the "bread and water" option. Imo nothing except EPO and HGH can be discarded at present. Certainly blood transfusions seems like a plausible option, imo. I would argue that he and his entourage had the means and know-how. (which, again, doesn't mean he actually did it)
We don't know if he doped. If he did, we still don't know which products, when, etc. So much to factor in there, including, hypothetically, issues relating to the governing body and the testing. \
But for now the shooting incident seems to provide a good enough explanation, no?
Again, shooting accident + recovery? Or something else. Could be plenty.
Good question.
Could be anything, really, including the possibility that he refused to dope and so wanted to leave.
Is there an official version from Lemond himself about this? Or only what Stanko told us? (which for me is still very decent evidence in favor of Lemond). Is there an official response from PDM?
Good question, do you maybe have a link to this? I've looked, but all I could find was Race Radio claiming this. I will look further, but if you have it at hand, i'd be happy if you cold share.
If indeed this is how it went, well I'd say that speaks in Lemond's favor.
Good question. As some have suggested, maybe Lemond wasn't the freakishly talented rider people say he was. To me personally, this doesn't indicate much either way. Could have a non-doping explanation, could have a doping explanation. Or something in between.
again, there can be doping and non-doping explanations for this, imo.
I'm not sure anybody claimed it's a myth. On the contrary. My interpretation was that it's not a myth, but merely that it doesn't fit well with the iron/anemia story.
(But I could be wrong)
I would also like to refer back to Frankin's post. I linked it on the previous page. It explains some of the events in Lemond's carreer that raise doubts from a performance and training perspective.
- May 14, 2010
- 5,303
- 4
- 0
Re: Re:
Just one correction. In 1986 transfusion was permitted and EPO very likely not available. Hence my assertion that LeMond could transfuse while staying within the rules. (Transfusion was banned towards the end of 1986.) By 1989, EPO would have been available, whereas transfusion was banned. Hence my assertion that LeMond could have used EPO, but would not have transfused presuming he wanted to stay within the rules.
My thinking about the iron shots is that in 1989 LeMond began to flag. If he was doing EPO it proved to be insufficient that particular time. Since his doctors were only too aware of LeMond's insistence on staying within the rules, they lied to him. They lied to him and he pretended to believe them, then they shot him up with whatever they thought he needed - cortisone, testosterone . . . who knows what. LeMond must have known they were lying and felt uncomfortable, as well as a bit concerned that his improvement in performance might be questioned, and that word might get out about "shots" - so he volunteered that he'd had iron shots.
On the one hand, Fignon was on every drug he could get his hands on, while on the other he hadn't gotten sleep, had a saddle sore, and was not aero. (We don't know with absolute certainty that he hadn't transfused, but it might be reasonable to think he'd have mentioned it before he died if he had been.) It seems fairly certain he didn't have access to EPO. LeMond, meanwhile, presuming he was indeed playing within the rules, only had going for him his aero profile, his own talent, and whatever measure of EPO he had allowed himself - against his degraded condition from having been shot. On balance, LeMond had the winning edge, but only just.
sniper said:
Just one correction. In 1986 transfusion was permitted and EPO very likely not available. Hence my assertion that LeMond could transfuse while staying within the rules. (Transfusion was banned towards the end of 1986.) By 1989, EPO would have been available, whereas transfusion was banned. Hence my assertion that LeMond could have used EPO, but would not have transfused presuming he wanted to stay within the rules.
My thinking about the iron shots is that in 1989 LeMond began to flag. If he was doing EPO it proved to be insufficient that particular time. Since his doctors were only too aware of LeMond's insistence on staying within the rules, they lied to him. They lied to him and he pretended to believe them, then they shot him up with whatever they thought he needed - cortisone, testosterone . . . who knows what. LeMond must have known they were lying and felt uncomfortable, as well as a bit concerned that his improvement in performance might be questioned, and that word might get out about "shots" - so he volunteered that he'd had iron shots.
On the one hand, Fignon was on every drug he could get his hands on, while on the other he hadn't gotten sleep, had a saddle sore, and was not aero. (We don't know with absolute certainty that he hadn't transfused, but it might be reasonable to think he'd have mentioned it before he died if he had been.) It seems fairly certain he didn't have access to EPO. LeMond, meanwhile, presuming he was indeed playing within the rules, only had going for him his aero profile, his own talent, and whatever measure of EPO he had allowed himself - against his degraded condition from having been shot. On balance, LeMond had the winning edge, but only just.
- May 14, 2010
- 5,303
- 4
- 0
Re: Re:
Honey, sweetie pie, sugar plum,
Merckx in 1972 and Zoetemelk in 1975 are the leading indicators. If their doctors were advising them to transfuse to increase performance, there is every reason to think they were advising others similarly. I mean, why wouldn't they? And in a team-oriented sport such as cycling, as soon as one rider, especially a leader, tries something that gets great results, the word spreads, first on his own team, subsequently to other teams riders move to. That in fact is the nature of information spread. Furthermore, the efficacy of transfusion in endurance sport was not only well known then, even in the sporting press, but being practiced to great effect in Europe.
This is from the book Eddy Merckx: The Cannibal
fmk_RoI said:
Honey, sweetie pie, sugar plum,
Merckx in 1972 and Zoetemelk in 1975 are the leading indicators. If their doctors were advising them to transfuse to increase performance, there is every reason to think they were advising others similarly. I mean, why wouldn't they? And in a team-oriented sport such as cycling, as soon as one rider, especially a leader, tries something that gets great results, the word spreads, first on his own team, subsequently to other teams riders move to. That in fact is the nature of information spread. Furthermore, the efficacy of transfusion in endurance sport was not only well known then, even in the sporting press, but being practiced to great effect in Europe.
This is from the book Eddy Merckx: The Cannibal
Re: Re:
Reading back I see my "both methods not being illegal at the time he used them" was ambiguous, but i meant it as you say it, i.e. they weren't illegal at the respective times he used the respective methods.Maxiton said:
- Jul 4, 2009
- 9,666
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
...makes sense that a pre-emptive strike would be a good means to explain the quite miraculous resurgence LeMond had by the end of the 89 Giro....he would either have to explain the miracle then or lay down a plausible excuse before the fact...
Cheers
Maxiton said:
...makes sense that a pre-emptive strike would be a good means to explain the quite miraculous resurgence LeMond had by the end of the 89 Giro....he would either have to explain the miracle then or lay down a plausible excuse before the fact...
Cheers
- Jul 4, 2009
- 9,666
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
....to the bolded....this idea that information invariably flows as surely as the sun rising in the east gets constantly trotted out here like some sort of trump card, but I have to, as I have before, very strongly disagree....
...to wit...you go to great lengths to plan and execute something that is untoward, say some doping or maybe in a different situation a crime....so you pull off the most brilliant scam and/or heist and then the information flow theory demands you suddenly leave the smarts behind and go all blotto stupid and blab about it to a 1000 of your closest friends....yep that makes a load of sense...
....hint to those in the crowd who are thinking of maybe doing something shady....its one great trick to pull off something that is beyond the rules that no one anticipated, but the real great trick is to get away with it clean....
....as the great Dizzy Dean/Pee Wee Reese broadcast team once pointed out, many a million dollar catch has been wasted on a 10 cent throw....
Cheers
Maxiton said:
....to the bolded....this idea that information invariably flows as surely as the sun rising in the east gets constantly trotted out here like some sort of trump card, but I have to, as I have before, very strongly disagree....
...to wit...you go to great lengths to plan and execute something that is untoward, say some doping or maybe in a different situation a crime....so you pull off the most brilliant scam and/or heist and then the information flow theory demands you suddenly leave the smarts behind and go all blotto stupid and blab about it to a 1000 of your closest friends....yep that makes a load of sense...
....hint to those in the crowd who are thinking of maybe doing something shady....its one great trick to pull off something that is beyond the rules that no one anticipated, but the real great trick is to get away with it clean....
....as the great Dizzy Dean/Pee Wee Reese broadcast team once pointed out, many a million dollar catch has been wasted on a 10 cent throw....
Cheers
- May 14, 2010
- 5,303
- 4
- 0
Re: Re:
Sure, but don't forget the historical context. In the context of the 1970s transfusion wasn't a crime, it wasn't even cheating. That's why athletes were talking about it at press conferences and to Stern magazine, and why the French Cycling Federation mentioned it publicly in its own magazine (even if it was for the purpose of discouraging the practice). It may have been something frowned on by certain members of the general public, who preferred to think of their athletic heroes as totally paniagua, but among those athletes, administrators, journalists, and informed fans who knew about it, it was merely another aid to performance.
As an aid to performance it would have been recommended by those team doctors who were aware of it. If a rider tried it and found it to be a big help, there is no reason to think he wouldn't inquire about the practice upon arriving at another team where the technique was not in use.
blutto said:
Sure, but don't forget the historical context. In the context of the 1970s transfusion wasn't a crime, it wasn't even cheating. That's why athletes were talking about it at press conferences and to Stern magazine, and why the French Cycling Federation mentioned it publicly in its own magazine (even if it was for the purpose of discouraging the practice). It may have been something frowned on by certain members of the general public, who preferred to think of their athletic heroes as totally paniagua, but among those athletes, administrators, journalists, and informed fans who knew about it, it was merely another aid to performance.
As an aid to performance it would have been recommended by those team doctors who were aware of it. If a rider tried it and found it to be a big help, there is no reason to think he wouldn't inquire about the practice upon arriving at another team where the technique was not in use.
- May 15, 2014
- 417
- 3
- 4,285
Re: Re:
Good post.
I went on to read Franklin's post. What's frightening is that it took 150 more pages to get back at the same point, roughly. And, mind you, 4 years ago, the iron shots story already felt like re-hashing.
Point being : to me, considering the context and Greg's profile, his story adds up. I think the base for interpretations and rumours is that 1/Greg always spoke freely, spontaneously and never maintained much secrecy about anything (hence the iron shots rumours) 2/he was a freak of nature in a world where there had always been an explanation for freakish performances.
If you want to, you'll always find room for suspicion.
sniper said:
Good post.
I went on to read Franklin's post. What's frightening is that it took 150 more pages to get back at the same point, roughly. And, mind you, 4 years ago, the iron shots story already felt like re-hashing.
Point being : to me, considering the context and Greg's profile, his story adds up. I think the base for interpretations and rumours is that 1/Greg always spoke freely, spontaneously and never maintained much secrecy about anything (hence the iron shots rumours) 2/he was a freak of nature in a world where there had always been an explanation for freakish performances.
If you want to, you'll always find room for suspicion.
- Jul 4, 2009
- 9,666
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
...to the bolded...depends what you are selling....squeaky clean, at least to me sounds a whole lot better than not illegal, but most maybe ethically dodgy....and LeMond had been banging that all-Merikan boy against those dastardly Euros drum to great effect in the home market for quite a while ( so yeah context is important )....
Cheers
Maxiton said:
...to the bolded...depends what you are selling....squeaky clean, at least to me sounds a whole lot better than not illegal, but most maybe ethically dodgy....and LeMond had been banging that all-Merikan boy against those dastardly Euros drum to great effect in the home market for quite a while ( so yeah context is important )....
Cheers
- May 15, 2014
- 417
- 3
- 4,285
Re: Re:
Giro 1989 : Greg never had a team of doctors. And if he had, after the 1986 "check the urine samples" incident, I am pretty sure he wouldn't let any unidentified product near him. Greg had his family (they weren't on the Giro) and his personal soigneur, Otto Jacome.
TDF 1989 : if Greg had had access to EPO and used it, he would have won by minutes, not seconds.
Maxiton said:
Giro 1989 : Greg never had a team of doctors. And if he had, after the 1986 "check the urine samples" incident, I am pretty sure he wouldn't let any unidentified product near him. Greg had his family (they weren't on the Giro) and his personal soigneur, Otto Jacome.
TDF 1989 : if Greg had had access to EPO and used it, he would have won by minutes, not seconds.
- May 14, 2010
- 5,303
- 4
- 0
If LeMond was playing by the rules, he was almost certainly the only GC rider doing so. Why isn't he allowed to do whatever he can to be competitive within the scope of those rules? Why this insistence on LeMond the saint? If we can't have Saint LeMond, we can't have any LeMond at all? How about LeMond the pioneering, super competitive athlete who insisted on playing by the rules? Isn't that enough? It's more than you'd get with any other TdF champion.
- Apr 20, 2012
- 6,320
- 0
- 0
I have just three letters:
WOW
And I nearly forgot:
WOW
Hans Vandeweghe [who clearly got his assumption from Rudi Daenens - the WC of 1990 'surprise']
Rudi Daenens
Lance Armstrong [From Lance to Landis citing a Donati report that no - one seems to be able to find]
I have more sources that 'claim' LeMond was doping.
Please, google better.
WOW
And I nearly forgot:
WOW
Hans Vandeweghe [who clearly got his assumption from Rudi Daenens - the WC of 1990 'surprise']
Rudi Daenens
Lance Armstrong [From Lance to Landis citing a Donati report that no - one seems to be able to find]
I have more sources that 'claim' LeMond was doping.
Please, google better.
fgl, good 2 see ya.
i remember you spoke of the rumor that lemond introduced creatine, which is not banned, so no doping story here, but it fits nicely with Maxiton's "the pioneering, super competitive athlete" depiction.
i like the "google better" suggestion
but is there anything in the donati report that hasn't been covered yet?
i thought that was merely about Lemond 'working' with Vanmol, which brings us straight back to ADR 1989 and iron shots.
or was there more to it?
i remember you spoke of the rumor that lemond introduced creatine, which is not banned, so no doping story here, but it fits nicely with Maxiton's "the pioneering, super competitive athlete" depiction.
i like the "google better" suggestion
but is there anything in the donati report that hasn't been covered yet?
i thought that was merely about Lemond 'working' with Vanmol, which brings us straight back to ADR 1989 and iron shots.
or was there more to it?
Vanmol is mentioned in the Donati dossier in one breath with Conconi and Ferrari as the three cycling docs who've pioneered the use of EPO.
Vanmol threatened to sue Donati. But I'm not sure if he ever did.
I'm not finding the dossier.
From what I can tell (discussion on blogs), the dossier mentions Lemond as receiving 'banned substances' from Vanmol in 1989 (which wouldn't exactly be a shocker, considering what esafosfina told us). I'm not sure if EPO is explicitly mentioned in relation to Lemond.
edit: if this is the entire report, Lemond is not mentioned, at least not by his full name. However, Vanmol, like Fuentes, worked with abbreviations, so maybe I'm missing something.
https://sites.google.com/site/dopingitalia/home/documenti/doping-nel-ciclismo---dossier-di-sandro-donati-1994
Anyway, the stuff about Vanmol is no kids play.
Vanmol threatened to sue Donati. But I'm not sure if he ever did.
I'm not finding the dossier.
From what I can tell (discussion on blogs), the dossier mentions Lemond as receiving 'banned substances' from Vanmol in 1989 (which wouldn't exactly be a shocker, considering what esafosfina told us). I'm not sure if EPO is explicitly mentioned in relation to Lemond.
edit: if this is the entire report, Lemond is not mentioned, at least not by his full name. However, Vanmol, like Fuentes, worked with abbreviations, so maybe I'm missing something.
https://sites.google.com/site/dopingitalia/home/documenti/doping-nel-ciclismo---dossier-di-sandro-donati-1994
Anyway, the stuff about Vanmol is no kids play.
- Apr 20, 2012
- 6,320
- 0
- 0
Re:
I back up my sources, I will give you a bonus:
So, for the record, an unnamed amateur cyclist, presumably Dutch, is said to be claiming in ''Het Haarlems Dagblad'' - yep, a local, regional newspaper, no other newspaper ever re-printed this story, while we in Holland dont have newspaper Gestapo like in some other very close countries - Greg LeMond is taking incredibly expensive doping only he and other American citizens can buy.
Lets make a switch now:
A review about ''Het Laatste Geel'', a book about the last Dutch yellow yersey in the Tour de France...
http://www.parool.nl/sport/steven-rooks-nam-epo~a249092/
for non-Dutch:
Matthieu Hermans states here he used EPO while being on Caja Rural, where he had Fuentes as a doctor, at a mediocre Spanish team.
google translate give this:
So, Hermans winning five stages in the 1988 Vuelta with Fuentes on a mediocre team like Caja Rural, versus the INCREDIBLE expensive new drug called EPO taken by LeMond?
Does this mean LeMond didnt took it? No.
But it beats everything I have read here the last few days by a mile. Come on, Eddy B? 1984?
Again, google better and get your sources sorted out or you will look like a fool.
And, please take note of when Fuentes worked at Caja Rural - and when LeMond had a shitty season at PDM - , you can check on Dopeology, it seems Larry has his sources right every now and then....
How many times have I told you to back up your sources?sniper said:fgl, good 2 see ya.
i remember you spoke of the rumor that lemond introduced creatine, which is not banned, so no doping story here, but it fits nicely with Maxiton's "the pioneering, super competitive athlete" depiction.
i like the "google better" suggestion
but is there anything in the donati report that hasn't been covered yet?
i thought that was merely about Lemond 'working' with Vanmol, which brings us straight back to ADR 1989 and iron shots.
or was there more to it?
I back up my sources, I will give you a bonus:
So, for the record, an unnamed amateur cyclist, presumably Dutch, is said to be claiming in ''Het Haarlems Dagblad'' - yep, a local, regional newspaper, no other newspaper ever re-printed this story, while we in Holland dont have newspaper Gestapo like in some other very close countries - Greg LeMond is taking incredibly expensive doping only he and other American citizens can buy.
Lets make a switch now:
A review about ''Het Laatste Geel'', a book about the last Dutch yellow yersey in the Tour de France...
http://www.parool.nl/sport/steven-rooks-nam-epo~a249092/
for non-Dutch:
Matthieu Hermans states here he used EPO while being on Caja Rural, where he had Fuentes as a doctor, at a mediocre Spanish team.
google translate give this:
So, Hermans winning five stages in the 1988 Vuelta with Fuentes on a mediocre team like Caja Rural, versus the INCREDIBLE expensive new drug called EPO taken by LeMond?
Does this mean LeMond didnt took it? No.
But it beats everything I have read here the last few days by a mile. Come on, Eddy B? 1984?
Again, google better and get your sources sorted out or you will look like a fool.
And, please take note of when Fuentes worked at Caja Rural - and when LeMond had a shitty season at PDM - , you can check on Dopeology, it seems Larry has his sources right every now and then....
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 36K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 41K
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
-
Teams & Riders Everybody needs a little bit of Roglstomp in their lives- Started by johnymax
- Replies: 23K
-
Teams & Riders Jonas Vingegaard thread: Love in Iberia- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 10K
-
Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.- Started by Miburo
- Replies: 22K
Latest posts
-
-
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Latest: GenericBoonenFan
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram