- Status
Re:
i don't like american lible laws.
but really dumb? gimme a break, john.
anyway, since when are you into conspiracies?
imagine all these guys who think it was lemond who introduced epo.
all part of some large smearing campaign stretching over decades and through different cycling generations and cycling nations.
plausible
i don't know is my stance.ScienceIsCool said:
i don't like american lible laws.
but really dumb? gimme a break, john.
anyway, since when are you into conspiracies?
imagine all these guys who think it was lemond who introduced epo.
all part of some large smearing campaign stretching over decades and through different cycling generations and cycling nations.
plausible
- Apr 3, 2009
- 12,656
- 8,579
- 28,180
Re: Re:
You brought up dialysis patients and EPO and suggested it was a "dot" to connect Lemond to introducing EPO to the peloton. dpj is pointing out that Lemond didn't have kidney failure.
Lemond placed 3rd in his first tour in 1984. On EPO then? 2nd in 1985, and arguably was the strongest in the race and held back by his team. Anyway, second. On EPO then? Blood transfusions? They "existed" at the time. Seems clear EPO didn't. Wins in 1986, riding with the same strength he did in '85. On EPO? Take a look at the time on his climbs during that race, compare to times 5+ years later when the first big names are clearly on EPO, like Bugno, Indurain, etc. He was the biggest rider in the sport, and his performances offer absolutely nothing to suggest use of blood doping or EPO. You think he had access to EPO, a protocol to use it, and a doctor to manage it during the first clinical trials? Despite his performances offering nothing to suggest the use of EPO? EPO use boosts time to exhaustion and overall capacity by double-digit percentages in most cases and at the top 5% is conservative. What did he do then to suggest he was on EPO? Again, his coaches and teammates repeatedly saying they all thought he was clean? Have you heard Koechli talk about Lemond? He is almost sneering in his evaluation of Lemond's lack of aggression and panache, yet he says Lemond was clean, un-bidden. Why?
I don't see any possible way these results could be linked to EPO. So then you have some Dutch and Belgian amateurs dying from '87 on, and it would seem possible or likely that a few people in the peloton at that time may have started to sniff EPO. Meanwhile Lemond is out of the sport and in a hospital.
It just doesn't make any sense.
sniper said:
You brought up dialysis patients and EPO and suggested it was a "dot" to connect Lemond to introducing EPO to the peloton. dpj is pointing out that Lemond didn't have kidney failure.
anyway, yes, it's possible the europeans pioneeered it.
Which is why I asked: is there any rider besides Lemond who fits the mold?
Afaic, there is not a single rumor linking the introduction of epo to any european rider, is there?
Nor do I know any european rider with kidney failure and anemia, or do you?
Let alone one with a Mexican soigneur.
still, the Dutch link to epo is obvious and fascinating. The first reported/rumored epo deaths were all dutch and to a lesser extent belgian. From the article:
Anybody any ideas on that? I assume the Dutch epo link has been discussed somewhere, but can't find where.
Lemond placed 3rd in his first tour in 1984. On EPO then? 2nd in 1985, and arguably was the strongest in the race and held back by his team. Anyway, second. On EPO then? Blood transfusions? They "existed" at the time. Seems clear EPO didn't. Wins in 1986, riding with the same strength he did in '85. On EPO? Take a look at the time on his climbs during that race, compare to times 5+ years later when the first big names are clearly on EPO, like Bugno, Indurain, etc. He was the biggest rider in the sport, and his performances offer absolutely nothing to suggest use of blood doping or EPO. You think he had access to EPO, a protocol to use it, and a doctor to manage it during the first clinical trials? Despite his performances offering nothing to suggest the use of EPO? EPO use boosts time to exhaustion and overall capacity by double-digit percentages in most cases and at the top 5% is conservative. What did he do then to suggest he was on EPO? Again, his coaches and teammates repeatedly saying they all thought he was clean? Have you heard Koechli talk about Lemond? He is almost sneering in his evaluation of Lemond's lack of aggression and panache, yet he says Lemond was clean, un-bidden. Why?
I don't see any possible way these results could be linked to EPO. So then you have some Dutch and Belgian amateurs dying from '87 on, and it would seem possible or likely that a few people in the peloton at that time may have started to sniff EPO. Meanwhile Lemond is out of the sport and in a hospital.
It just doesn't make any sense.
Re: Re:
So Lemond beat a host of top level dopers clean?
red_flanders said:sniper said:
You brought up dialysis patients and EPO and suggested it was a "dot" to connect Lemond to introducing EPO to the peloton. dpj is pointing out that Lemond didn't have kidney failure.
anyway, yes, it's possible the europeans pioneeered it.
Which is why I asked: is there any rider besides Lemond who fits the mold?
Afaic, there is not a single rumor linking the introduction of epo to any european rider, is there?
Nor do I know any european rider with kidney failure and anemia, or do you?
Let alone one with a Mexican soigneur.
still, the Dutch link to epo is obvious and fascinating. The first reported/rumored epo deaths were all dutch and to a lesser extent belgian. From the article:
Anybody any ideas on that? I assume the Dutch epo link has been discussed somewhere, but can't find where.
Lemond placed 3rd in his first tour in 1984. On EPO then? 2nd in 1985, and arguably was the strongest in the race and held back by his team. Anyway, second. On EPO then? Blood transfusions? They "existed" at the time. Seems clear EPO didn't. Wins in 1986, riding with the same strength he did in '85. On EPO? Take a look at the time on his climbs during that race, compare to times 5+ years later when the first big names are clearly on EPO, like Bugno, Indurain, etc. He was the biggest rider in the sport, and his performances offer absolutely nothing to suggest use of blood doping or EPO. You think he had access to EPO, a protocol to use it, and a doctor to manage it during the first clinical trials? Despite his performances offering nothing to suggest the use of EPO? EPO use boosts time to exhaustion and overall capacity by double-digit percentages in most cases and at the top 5% is conservative. What did he do then to suggest he was on EPO? Again, his coaches and teammates repeatedly saying they all thought he was clean? Have you heard Koechli talk about Lemond? He is almost sneering in his evaluation of Lemond's lack of aggression and panache, yet he says Lemond was clean, un-bidden. Why?
I don't see any possible way these results could be linked to EPO. So then you have some Dutch and Belgian amateurs dying from '87 on, and it would seem possible or likely that a few people in the peloton at that time may have started to sniff EPO. Meanwhile Lemond is out of the sport and in a hospital.
It just doesn't make any sense.
So Lemond beat a host of top level dopers clean?
Re: Re:
all I said is Lemond was a kidney patient, by his own admission.
Amgen restricted the distribution of EPO to kidney disease centres.
If anybody would have had access to EPO in the pre-trial phase, it would 've been an American, or even better, an American with kidney problems, or even better an American athlete with kidney problems, or even better, an American athlete with kidney problems and plenty of cash to splash.
dialy-what?red_flanders said:
all I said is Lemond was a kidney patient, by his own admission.
Amgen restricted the distribution of EPO to kidney disease centres.
If anybody would have had access to EPO in the pre-trial phase, it would 've been an American, or even better, an American with kidney problems, or even better an American athlete with kidney problems, or even better, an American athlete with kidney problems and plenty of cash to splash.
no. Not on epo or transfusions. But growing sick and tired of losing out on the top spot? Very likely.
take it up with the guys who thought lemond pioneered it. Not with an anonymous internet wanker.
- Apr 3, 2009
- 12,656
- 8,579
- 28,180
Re: Re:
What is a top level doper in the mid 1980's? Certainly not someone on EPO or blood doping. So yes. It is widely considered the case that many riders won clean up until the early 90's. Certainly the best of those riders would be able to do so.
Many consider that Hampsten, Bauer, Mottet and a host of others were clean. When this is asserted no one balks. But to suggest Lemond was clean? Outrageous! Lance said it wasn't so! And astro-turfed every cycling forum with that suggestion for years.
BullsFan22 said:
What is a top level doper in the mid 1980's? Certainly not someone on EPO or blood doping. So yes. It is widely considered the case that many riders won clean up until the early 90's. Certainly the best of those riders would be able to do so.
Many consider that Hampsten, Bauer, Mottet and a host of others were clean. When this is asserted no one balks. But to suggest Lemond was clean? Outrageous! Lance said it wasn't so! And astro-turfed every cycling forum with that suggestion for years.
- Apr 3, 2009
- 12,656
- 8,579
- 28,180
Re: Re:
I think they're dead, so I can't. You're the one making the "case" here.
So not on EPO up to '86 is what I hear you agreeing to. So not losing up to '86. And in the hospital while EPO is introduced to the peloton. Or are you suggesting that he won in '86 on EPO.
That is laughable.
So how again did Lemond introduce EPO to the peloton?
sniper said:dialy-what?red_flanders said:
all I said is Lemond was a kidney patient, by his own admission.
Amgen restricted the distribution of EPO to kidney disease centres.
If anybody would have had access to EPO in the pre-trial phase, it would 've been an American, or even better, an American with kidney problems, or even better an American athlete with kidney problems, or even better, an American athlete with kidney problems and plenty of cash to splash.
no. Not on epo or transfusions. But growing sick and tired of losing out on the top spot? Very likely.
take it up with the guys who thought lemond pioneered it. Not with me.
again
I think they're dead, so I can't. You're the one making the "case" here.
So not on EPO up to '86 is what I hear you agreeing to. So not losing up to '86. And in the hospital while EPO is introduced to the peloton. Or are you suggesting that he won in '86 on EPO.
That is laughable.
So how again did Lemond introduce EPO to the peloton?
- Apr 3, 2009
- 12,656
- 8,579
- 28,180
Re:
You post an image of a local paper where some guy claims he thinks Lemond introduced EPO to the peloton. You use this as an argument that Lance didn't astro-turf every english cycling forum for years? I've seen this post what 3 times now in the last couple of days?
Conceded. Someone at the time thought Lemond and the Americans brought EPO to the peloton and some local paper posted the story. Now do you want to address the timeline? Explain to me how he brought EPO to the peloton while he was in a hospital and riders were already dying from it? Or are you suggesting he brought it to the peloton in 1986 before he became a "kidney patient" because he was "tired of losing"? Despite the fact that there is nothing in his performances to suggest a change of any kind from a time when EPO simply didn't exist?
Where is my strawman?
sniper said:
You post an image of a local paper where some guy claims he thinks Lemond introduced EPO to the peloton. You use this as an argument that Lance didn't astro-turf every english cycling forum for years? I've seen this post what 3 times now in the last couple of days?
Conceded. Someone at the time thought Lemond and the Americans brought EPO to the peloton and some local paper posted the story. Now do you want to address the timeline? Explain to me how he brought EPO to the peloton while he was in a hospital and riders were already dying from it? Or are you suggesting he brought it to the peloton in 1986 before he became a "kidney patient" because he was "tired of losing"? Despite the fact that there is nothing in his performances to suggest a change of any kind from a time when EPO simply didn't exist?
Where is my strawman?
Re: Re:
the guy in that newspaper is suggesting it.
boogerd, dhaenens, lance, gisbers, suggest it. An anonymous poster on a dutch/belgian forum says he was close to the peloton in the early 90s and riders he spoke to all thought lemond introduced epo. Maybe that was lance too, writing in Dutch.
(The latter also said Lemond was a Sergeant client 1989, btw. Bitter anonymous internet wanker.)
Sandro Donati (good luck attacking his cred) said Vanmol administered Greg with banned substances.
your response:
If it was Greg, the available evidence suggests he was a user in 86. (I previously argued 89, but I would now think 86). As the NYT article said, 1986 is when pre-trial abuse by athletes started.
Again, if anybody would have had access to pre-trial epo it would have been an athlete with lemond's profile.
Another possible scenario is that Greg did not introduce epo, but was a one-season user under Vanmol in 89.
Though then we're left to explain why so many different sources have rumored that greg introduced it.
I'm still highly curious as to how (through which channels) epo became so widespread so early on among Dutch (and lesser extent belgian) racers.
i'm not suggesting anything.red_flanders said:
the guy in that newspaper is suggesting it.
boogerd, dhaenens, lance, gisbers, suggest it. An anonymous poster on a dutch/belgian forum says he was close to the peloton in the early 90s and riders he spoke to all thought lemond introduced epo. Maybe that was lance too, writing in Dutch.
(The latter also said Lemond was a Sergeant client 1989, btw. Bitter anonymous internet wanker.)
Sandro Donati (good luck attacking his cred) said Vanmol administered Greg with banned substances.
your response:
...
Again, I don't know for sure it was Greg. It's why I've asked three times now if there are other candidates who fit the mold so neatly.
If it was Greg, the available evidence suggests he was a user in 86. (I previously argued 89, but I would now think 86). As the NYT article said, 1986 is when pre-trial abuse by athletes started.
Again, if anybody would have had access to pre-trial epo it would have been an athlete with lemond's profile.
Another possible scenario is that Greg did not introduce epo, but was a one-season user under Vanmol in 89.
Though then we're left to explain why so many different sources have rumored that greg introduced it.
I'm still highly curious as to how (through which channels) epo became so widespread so early on among Dutch (and lesser extent belgian) racers.
Re: Re:
He was not a kidney patiënt. He only had one functioning kidney instead of two functioning kidneys. You are kidney patient if you have no functioning kidneys (or less than 15%).
sniper said:
He was not a kidney patiënt. He only had one functioning kidney instead of two functioning kidneys. You are kidney patient if you have no functioning kidneys (or less than 15%).
- Jul 4, 2009
- 9,666
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
...and he most probably knew Weisel who had a back door to Amgen ( and who in 89 got a cycling World Championship himself....but that was just a coincidence eh...)
Cheers
sniper said:i'm not suggesting anything.red_flanders said:
the guy in that newspaper is suggesting it.
boogerd, dhaenens, lance, gisbers, suggest it. An anonymous poster on a dutch/belgian forum says he was close to the peloton in the early 90s and riders he spoke to all thought lemond introduced epo. Maybe that was lance too, writing in Dutch.
(The latter also said Lemond was a Sergeant client 1989, btw. Bitter anonymous internet 'custard'.)
Sandro Donati (good luck attacking his cred) said Vanmol administered Greg with banned substances.
your response:...
Again, I don't know for sure it was Greg. It's why I've asked three times now if there are other candidates who fit the mold so neatly.
If it was Greg, the available evidence suggests he was a user in 86. (I previously argued 89, but I would now think 86). As the NYT article said, 1986 is when pre-trial abuse by athletes started.
Again, if anybody would have had access to pre-trial epo it would have been an athlete with lemond's profile.
Another possible scenario is that Greg did not introduce epo, but was a one-season user under Vanmol in 89.
Though then we're left to explain why so many different sources have rumored that greg introduced it.
I'm still highly curious as to how (through which channels) epo became so widespread so early on among Dutch (and lesser extent belgian) racers.
...and he most probably knew Weisel who had a back door to Amgen ( and who in 89 got a cycling World Championship himself....but that was just a coincidence eh...)
Cheers
Re: Re:
Compare LeMond 84 and 85 with LeMond 86 and make your case that he was clearly on EPO in 86. Good luck!!
sniper said:i'm not suggesting anything.red_flanders said:
the guy in that newspaper is suggesting it.
boogerd, dhaenens, lance, gisbers, suggest it. An anonymous poster on a dutch/belgian forum says he was close to the peloton in the early 90s and riders he spoke to all thought lemond introduced epo. Maybe that was lance too, writing in Dutch.
(The latter also said Lemond was a Sergeant client 1989, btw. Bitter anonymous internet 'custard'.)
Sandro Donati (good luck attacking his cred) said Vanmol administered Greg with banned substances.
your response:...
Again, I don't know for sure it was Greg. It's why I've asked three times now if there are other candidates who fit the mold so neatly.
If it was Greg, the available evidence suggests he was a user in 86. (I previously argued 89, but I would now think 86). As the NYT article said, 1986 is when pre-trial abuse by athletes started.
Again, if anybody would have had access to pre-trial epo it would have been an athlete with lemond's profile.
Another possible scenario is that Greg did not introduce epo, but was a one-season user under Vanmol in 89.
Though then we're left to explain why so many different sources have rumored that greg introduced it.
I'm still highly curious as to how (through which channels) epo became so widespread so early on among Dutch (and lesser extent belgian) racers.
Compare LeMond 84 and 85 with LeMond 86 and make your case that he was clearly on EPO in 86. Good luck!!
You guys are a riot. Why not email or call Greg. I'm almost certain he'd be willing to engage and he could tell you all first hand about his experiences.
John Swanson
John Swanson
Dialy-what?
How can someone bring up kidney disease and make it a crucial part of their argument and not know what dialysis is?
How can someone bring up kidney disease and make it a crucial part of their argument and not know what dialysis is?
- Jul 4, 2009
- 9,666
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
....hmmm....84, finishes almost 12 min behind Fignon.... 85, was about 3 min behind Hinault before Hinault crashes and breaks his nose, finishes second....yup that right there are some good solid points to establish a really good straight-line kinda metrc...
Cheers
GJB123 said:sniper said:i'm not suggesting anything.red_flanders said:
the guy in that newspaper is suggesting it.
boogerd, dhaenens, lance, gisbers, suggest it. An anonymous poster on a dutch/belgian forum says he was close to the peloton in the early 90s and riders he spoke to all thought lemond introduced epo. Maybe that was lance too, writing in Dutch.
(The latter also said Lemond was a Sergeant client 1989, btw. Bitter anonymous internet 'custard'.)
Sandro Donati (good luck attacking his cred) said Vanmol administered Greg with banned substances.
your response:...
Again, I don't know for sure it was Greg. It's why I've asked three times now if there are other candidates who fit the mold so neatly.
If it was Greg, the available evidence suggests he was a user in 86. (I previously argued 89, but I would now think 86). As the NYT article said, 1986 is when pre-trial abuse by athletes started.
Again, if anybody would have had access to pre-trial epo it would have been an athlete with lemond's profile.
Another possible scenario is that Greg did not introduce epo, but was a one-season user under Vanmol in 89.
Though then we're left to explain why so many different sources have rumored that greg introduced it.
I'm still highly curious as to how (through which channels) epo became so widespread so early on among Dutch (and lesser extent belgian) racers.
Compare LeMond 84 and 85 with LeMond 86 and make your case that he was clearly on EPO in 86. Good luck!!
....hmmm....84, finishes almost 12 min behind Fignon.... 85, was about 3 min behind Hinault before Hinault crashes and breaks his nose, finishes second....yup that right there are some good solid points to establish a really good straight-line kinda metrc...
Cheers
- Apr 3, 2009
- 12,656
- 8,579
- 28,180
Re: Re:
The point, is that he doesn't fit the mold.
First it was '89 after he came back from his gunshot, now it's '86 with absolutely not a shred of reason for suspecting this.
A one-season user who introduced it after it was already introduced and people were already dying from it. Makes sense. Somehow, these rumors I've heard must be true!! Despite logic or facts.
Doctors. Start with the doctors.
sniper said:
The point, is that he doesn't fit the mold.
First it was '89 after he came back from his gunshot, now it's '86 with absolutely not a shred of reason for suspecting this.
What profile? A top athlete? How many of those were there? There is nothing, absolutely nothing in his performances in '86 to suggest EPO. There is no evidence at all that he used EPO in '86. None.
A one-season user who introduced it after it was already introduced and people were already dying from it. Makes sense. Somehow, these rumors I've heard must be true!! Despite logic or facts.
Doctors. Start with the doctors.
@blutto, you mention Weisel.
thanks for that.
Remember the discussion we had earlier about whether or not Lance, supposing he has dirt on Lemond, would spill the beans or not?
Back then I mentioned Carmichael as a possible reason why Lance wouldn't spill, but I should of course have mentioned Weisel in the first place.
thanks for that.
Remember the discussion we had earlier about whether or not Lance, supposing he has dirt on Lemond, would spill the beans or not?
Back then I mentioned Carmichael as a possible reason why Lance wouldn't spill, but I should of course have mentioned Weisel in the first place.
Re:
What a load of crap. Mitochondrial myopathy is a family of genetic disorders. http://www.emdn-mitonet.co.uk/pdf/encyclopedia_of_neurological_disorders_mitochondrial_myopathies.pdf
What's more is that Greg talked about mitochondrial myopathy as a possible reason for his drop in performance and as far as I know he never received a confirmation diagnosis. Other possible causes that he floated were the amounts of lead leaching into his blood. Finally, at some point he conceded that a large part of it was probably that everyone was on EPO and he couldn't recover enough to compete at 50 km/hr every day.
John Swanson
blutto said:
What a load of crap. Mitochondrial myopathy is a family of genetic disorders. http://www.emdn-mitonet.co.uk/pdf/encyclopedia_of_neurological_disorders_mitochondrial_myopathies.pdf
What's more is that Greg talked about mitochondrial myopathy as a possible reason for his drop in performance and as far as I know he never received a confirmation diagnosis. Other possible causes that he floated were the amounts of lead leaching into his blood. Finally, at some point he conceded that a large part of it was probably that everyone was on EPO and he couldn't recover enough to compete at 50 km/hr every day.
John Swanson
For which he received antibiotics, not dialysis. This is his rational for disliking needles. Pretty logical.
- 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
-
New Jerseys - 2026 Season - TeamKits-Maillots-Tricots-Tenues- Started by Armchair Cyclist
- Replies: 1
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram