• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

LeMond III

Page 95 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Re:

@NL_LeMondFans said:
sniper said:
I'm just fascinated by the believe, in the absence of evidence, that Greg is clean.

You know it's impossible to prove a negative. In the absence of proof of negative and positive, it's up to anyone's opinion, I guess.

sniper said:
Me and a few others started posting some things up that suggest Lemond is no different from other GT winners, and from that point onwards we faced a whole serious of bogus counterarguments which have kept this thread going and going. The EPO rumor being "the words of a man who's been dead for 20 years" is a nice case in point.

I'm afraid in this discussion there has been a lot bogus arguments from all sides.

sniper said:
And please remember why this thread was bumped a few days ago in the first place: because evidence surfaced that people were on EPO already in 1989.
One of Lemond's fiercest defenders, Race Radio, had previously claimed the view of riders being on EPO in 1989 was "revisionist history".
I think that deserved to be corrected, don't you? (honest question)

I have a different perspective, I think, because I came into this discussion very late in the game. It seems that some people on these boards have a strong relationship and history. Agendas, manipulations occurred over time and I think it explains the animosity in some posts and the will (for some people) to get a revenge or "right back at you". I can't really judge since I wasn't around when the drama occurred but from where I stand it looks silly and even a bit immature. But then again I've seen this on other (non cycling) boards and know that forums are sometimes flamed with passion. Which is a good thing if it stays under control.

To the bolded : I didn't follow the whole "EPO in 1989" thing too closely but if true it's a fair point.

sniper said:
Speaking of which, it's funny how the same people who are constantly preaching me about "facts" and "lies" and "agendas", weren't in the least bothered by Race Radio's misinformation.

I just met Race Radio once on a bike sportive and he was a super nice guy. Accusing him of "misinformation" seems harsh because, as you pointed out it would imply a desire from him to hide or cover something. I just think he is convinced about what he says. Maybe he's wrong. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you're wrong. Just my opinion.

sniper said:
Let me try to get this back on topic with a serious question.
If Mathieu - the Lantern Rouge - and Jacobs were on EPO already in 1989, how many EPO-fueled riders do you think Lemond had to beat in 1990?

Again, from my perspective it took a while before EPO became widespread and truly efficient because dopers didn't figure out how to use it until after a few trials. Are Mathieu and Jacobs real names ? I don't know them.
In my eyes the first EPO ride from a high profile rider is Bugno's 1990 Giro. Ironically Mottet was second that year. Then the 1-2 spots at the 1990 worlds by Dhaenens and De Wolf... In 1991 all hell breaks loose with Chiapucci at the Tour, Chioccioli at the Giro, Mauri at the Vuelta. All frauds. And it was just the start. "Mig-Hell" as you like to remind me, benefited from this but, contrary to those frauds he was a very strong rider from the get go.
To answer your question : Bugno was probably on it but didn't use it as well as in the Giro, Chiappucci I'd say not yet or, more likely, only at the end of the Tour, which would explain his attack on the Luz Ardiden stage.
Very informative info.

Ref Bungo; how about his 7th in the 90 Tour...continuation of use after the Giro? On Chiappucci; are you referring to the 90 Tour, and not the 91? In the 90 Tour, he finished 2nd just a few minutes behind LeMond. Looking at his GT results from a year earlier, he goes 46th at 89 Giro and 81st at the Tour, and then the gigantic jump to 2nd at the 90 edition....practically an overnight sensation. Could he have been one of the very first riders to use and receive a substantial performance boost from EPO?

Also, looking at the 1990 Tour top 10 results below (Wikipedia), how many riders in that group do you think may have been experimenting with EPO? As I mentioned, Chiappucci had that big leap from 89. And Indurain appears in 10th, up from 17th in 89 and 47th in 88 (is he far more suspicious in his dynasty years?).

Final general classification (1–10)[1]
Rank Rider Team Time
1 Greg LeMond (USA) A yellow jersey. Z–Tomasso 90h 43' 20"
2 Claudio Chiappucci (ITA) Carrera Jeans–Vagabond + 2' 16"
3 Erik Breukink (NED) PDM–Concorde + 2' 29"
4 Pedro Delgado (ESP) Banesto + 5' 01"
5 Marino Lejarreta (ESP) ONCE + 5' 05"
6 Eduardo Chozas (ESP) ONCE + 9' 14"
7 Gianni Bugno (ITA) Chateau d'Ax–Salotti + 9' 39"
8 Raúl Alcalá (MEX) PDM–Concorde + 11' 14"
9 Claude Criquielion (BEL) Lotto–Superclub + 12' 04"
10 Miguel Indurain (ESP) Banesto + 12' 47"

I'm curious with the initial use/experimentation of EPO in the earlier 90s: Would riders have initially self-medicated or was medically-supervised use of the drug started with first usage? (for example, did Concini start working with some riders as earlier as 1990?). In the case of medically-supervised administration, would the doctors have been conservative with Hct levels, first seeing how that works out in competition, or was Hct taken to polycthemia levels (>55%) during the build-up period and up through competition? And in the case of self-administration, would riders just take risks boosting to polycthemia levels, once realizing how effective EPO was with other riders?

Interesting time period with EPO...the start of the "game-changer" in professional cycling.
 
Re: Re:

sniper said:
Tienus said:
the comments you read up-thread from Nijs. ""Lemond do not want to use drugs. He is stubborn and always just rely only on his own production."
I would take that quote with a pinch of salt.

Paul Nijs was a pharmacist who sold dope to riders. He worked with Freddy Maertens who had a most remarkeble comeback in 1981. Maertens stopped working with him because he felt like being a guinea pig.


Why did Lemond choose to work with this guy?
good question.

I believe Freddy's official story (e.g. in his biography) is that Nijs provided him with a variety of natural products.

Freddy's brother Marc tested positve three times in 1983 (2x) and 1987, but I'm not sure if there is a link to Nijs.
http://www.dopeology.org/people/Marc_Maertens/

And

Benotti69 said:
Nick C. said:
This may be old but isn't Lemond treated differently because he has a straight line of success at every level? There are no pictures of his giving up his bike to the early 80s equivalent of a Greg Henderson and pushing him off. Nor did he spend tours as a supposed TT specialist, never finishing in the mix outside of maybe a 4 days of Dunkerque

Plenty had the straight line of success at all levels and still doped.

I dont think anyone is posting that LeMond was a donkey turned racehorse by doping.

I agree that LeMond should not get a pass based on his calling out Armstrong and Landis.

He is happy to call Pantani a great, be friends with Vino, Contador, Hinault, Indurain and Merckx!!! Hardly a bunch of good clean guys and not too different from Armstrong/Landis in doping terms.

That trip down the Champs-Élysées with 3 big time dopers was pretty disgusting from LeMond. But hey he has bikes to sell.......

So it's about time to educate everybody yet again on the "Benotti-doctrine". Here goes:

1. You cannot (claim to) be clean and be friends with known dopers or risk being called a hypocrite or far worse.
2. Also you cannot be in the same picture with both you and the known doper laughing, holding or shaking hands, embracing or generally appearing to have a good time together or risk being called a hypocrite or far worse.
3. If one finds oneself inadvertently in the same picture with known doper it can only be while the known doper's face is making contact with you fast approaching fists or you risk being called a hypocrite or far worse.
4. You cannot call a known doper your friend without the explicit caveat that you know they have doped and you seriously condemn there previous behavior but nevertheless you do like them. Failure to do so will lead to risk of being called a hypocrite or far worse.

If everybody just adhered to this, we would have so much less acrimonious debates in the Clinic. :D ;)
 
Re: Re:

sniper said:
@NL_LeMondFans said:
sniper said:
I'm not sure why you're expecting us to treat Lemond differently.

Well... Besides the fact that LeMond is different in many ways... You can't blame people for treating people they love differently. Very human basic reaction. And, be honest, admit that you've treated Greg differently too, with that investigation of yours. I shall return the question : why the need to prove Greg is a doper, which could ultimately lead to everyone is a doper. What's in it for you ?
Again, the null hypothesis is clear. All I've done is provide some evidence that supports it.
And even in the absence of that evidence (or in the case you don't find it evidence), the null hypothesis remains unchanged. The null hypothesis is not an opinion. It's based on historical patterns.

I'm just fascinated by the believe, in the absence of evidence, that Greg is clean.
Me and a few others started posting some things up that suggest Lemond is no different from other GT winners, and from that point onwards we faced a whole serious of bogus counterarguments which have kept this thread going and going. The EPO rumor being "the words of a man who's been dead for 20 years" is a nice case in point.

And please remember why this thread was bumped a few days ago in the first place: because evidence surfaced that people were on EPO already in 1989.
One of Lemond's fiercest defenders, Race Radio, had previously claimed the view of riders being on EPO in 1989 was "revisionist history".
I think that deserved to be corrected, don't you? (honest question)

Speaking of which, it's funny how the same people who are constantly preaching me about "facts" and "lies" and "agendas", weren't in the least bothered by Race Radio's misinformation.

But enough metacommentary.

Let me try to get this back on topic with a serious question.
If Mathieu - the Lantern Rouge - and Jacobs were on EPO already in 1989, how many EPO-fueled riders do you think Lemond had to beat in 1990?

The null hypothesis is agreed by you. You keep claiming that is generally accepted, but is is not as is abundantly clear from the very existence and length of this tread. It is your null hypothesis based on your current day view of a period you were not part of and that you haven't experienced first hand.You are measuring the 80's cycling scene by 90's, 00's and 10's standards. That inevitably leads to in my opinion the wrong conclusions and the persistence of that is wat, irks at least me and I think others. Somehow you fail to see that.
 
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
He is happy to call Pantani a great, be friends with Vino, Contador, Hinault, Indurain and Merckx!!! Hardly a bunch of good clean guys and not too different from Armstrong/Landis in doping terms.

That trip down the Champs-Élysées with 3 big time dopers was pretty disgusting from LeMond. But hey he has bikes to sell.......

I have a funny idea...

It's been said on these boards that LeMond's case is interesting because, if proved clean, it would lead to the possibility of clean riders in cycling.

Following that way of thinking, I dare you, Benotti69, to meet your own standards. I dare you to tell us what your job is and explain how, at work, you avoid meeting / shaking hands / talking/ smiling / posing for pictures with people you either don't like or hate or think are unprofessional or unethical. Tell us how you pull this off.

Just prove it is possible for someone NOT to be a hypocrite from time to time.

Because, you know what ? If you can't prove it, this makes you the worst world class hypocrite there ever was, calling other people hypocrites.

Prove us there is at least one person 100% non-hypocritical, bulletproof to compromise.

I'm genuinely curious how you can pull this off.
 
Re: Re:

Nomad said:
Very informative info.

Ref Bungo; how about his 7th in the 90 Tour...continuation of use after the Giro? On Chiappucci; are you referring to the 90 Tour, and not the 91? In the 90 Tour, he finished 2nd just a few minutes behind LeMond. Looking at his GT results from a year earlier, he goes 46th at 89 Giro and 81st at the Tour, and then the gigantic jump to 2nd at the 90 edition....practically an overnight sensation. Could he have been one of the very first riders to use and receive a substantial performance boost from EPO?

Also, looking at the 1990 Tour top 10 results below (Wikipedia), how many riders in that group do you think may have been experimenting with EPO? As I mentioned, Chiappucci had that big leap from 89. And Indurain appears in 10th, up from 17th in 89 and 47th in 88 (is he far more suspicious in his dynasty years?).

Final general classification (1–10)[1]
Rank Rider Team Time
1 Greg LeMond (USA) A yellow jersey. Z–Tomasso 90h 43' 20"
2 Claudio Chiappucci (ITA) Carrera Jeans–Vagabond + 2' 16"
3 Erik Breukink (NED) PDM–Concorde + 2' 29"
4 Pedro Delgado (ESP) Banesto + 5' 01"
5 Marino Lejarreta (ESP) ONCE + 5' 05"
6 Eduardo Chozas (ESP) ONCE + 9' 14"
7 Gianni Bugno (ITA) Chateau d'Ax–Salotti + 9' 39"
8 Raúl Alcalá (MEX) PDM–Concorde + 11' 14"
9 Claude Criquielion (BEL) Lotto–Superclub + 12' 04"
10 Miguel Indurain (ESP) Banesto + 12' 47"

I'm curious with the initial use/experimentation of EPO in the earlier 90s: Would riders have initially self-medicated or was medically-supervised use of the drug started with first usage? (for example, did Concini start working with some riders as earlier as 1990?). In the case of medically-supervised administration, would the doctors have been conservative with Hct levels, first seeing how that works out in competition, or was Hct taken to polycthemia levels (>55%) during the build-up period and up through competition? And in the case of self-administration, would riders just take risks boosting to polycthemia levels, once realizing how effective EPO was with other riders?

Interesting time period with EPO...the start of the "game-changer" in professional cycling.

It's just my opinion, based on observations. I think Bugno was on it in 1990 but as I said might not have figured out how to maintain the effects throughout the Tour after the Giro (or maybe it was too expensive and he was out of stock). I think Chiappucci might have started taking towards the end of the 1990 Tour, when it was clear he was going to earn enough money in order to afford the treatment. The PDM team was probably experimenting in 1990 Tour. Alcala's ITTs are really suspicious to me. But I leave Indurain and Breukink off the hook that year because they were always good consistant riders.

In 1991 Chiappucci is to me the most obvious. His rise is a robbery. Indurain is on it too but he would have been good anyway.

I don't think Perico Delgado took EPO. I might be wrong but my theory on Delgado is that he was so ashamed of the polemic following his 1988 win that he stopped doping. Which would explain that he never was as strong after that, never won a Tour stage again, never wore the yellow jersey again. Lejaretta ? Maybe... Not sure they (ONCE) were already on it. Chozas took a lot of time on stage win breaks, that was his MO.
 
Re: Re:

Nomad said:
@NL_LeMondFans said:
sniper said:
I'm just fascinated by the believe, in the absence of evidence, that Greg is clean.

You know it's impossible to prove a negative. In the absence of proof of negative and positive, it's up to anyone's opinion, I guess.

sniper said:
Me and a few others started posting some things up that suggest Lemond is no different from other GT winners, and from that point onwards we faced a whole serious of bogus counterarguments which have kept this thread going and going. The EPO rumor being "the words of a man who's been dead for 20 years" is a nice case in point.

I'm afraid in this discussion there has been a lot bogus arguments from all sides.

sniper said:
And please remember why this thread was bumped a few days ago in the first place: because evidence surfaced that people were on EPO already in 1989.
One of Lemond's fiercest defenders, Race Radio, had previously claimed the view of riders being on EPO in 1989 was "revisionist history".
I think that deserved to be corrected, don't you? (honest question)

I have a different perspective, I think, because I came into this discussion very late in the game. It seems that some people on these boards have a strong relationship and history. Agendas, manipulations occurred over time and I think it explains the animosity in some posts and the will (for some people) to get a revenge or "right back at you". I can't really judge since I wasn't around when the drama occurred but from where I stand it looks silly and even a bit immature. But then again I've seen this on other (non cycling) boards and know that forums are sometimes flamed with passion. Which is a good thing if it stays under control.

To the bolded : I didn't follow the whole "EPO in 1989" thing too closely but if true it's a fair point.

sniper said:
Speaking of which, it's funny how the same people who are constantly preaching me about "facts" and "lies" and "agendas", weren't in the least bothered by Race Radio's misinformation.

I just met Race Radio once on a bike sportive and he was a super nice guy. Accusing him of "misinformation" seems harsh because, as you pointed out it would imply a desire from him to hide or cover something. I just think he is convinced about what he says. Maybe he's wrong. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you're wrong. Just my opinion.

sniper said:
Let me try to get this back on topic with a serious question.
If Mathieu - the Lantern Rouge - and Jacobs were on EPO already in 1989, how many EPO-fueled riders do you think Lemond had to beat in 1990?

Again, from my perspective it took a while before EPO became widespread and truly efficient because dopers didn't figure out how to use it until after a few trials. Are Mathieu and Jacobs real names ? I don't know them.
In my eyes the first EPO ride from a high profile rider is Bugno's 1990 Giro. Ironically Mottet was second that year. Then the 1-2 spots at the 1990 worlds by Dhaenens and De Wolf... In 1991 all hell breaks loose with Chiapucci at the Tour, Chioccioli at the Giro, Mauri at the Vuelta. All frauds. And it was just the start. "Mig-Hell" as you like to remind me, benefited from this but, contrary to those frauds he was a very strong rider from the get go.
To answer your question : Bugno was probably on it but didn't use it as well as in the Giro, Chiappucci I'd say not yet or, more likely, only at the end of the Tour, which would explain his attack on the Luz Ardiden stage.
Very informative info.

Ref Bungo; how about his 7th in the 90 Tour...continuation of use after the Giro? On Chiappucci; are you referring to the 90 Tour, and not the 91? In the 90 Tour, he finished 2nd just a few minutes behind LeMond. Looking at his GT results from a year earlier, he goes 46th at 89 Giro and 81st at the Tour, and then the gigantic jump to 2nd at the 90 edition....practically an overnight sensation. Could he have been one of the very first riders to use and receive a substantial performance boost from EPO?

Also, looking at the 1990 Tour top 10 results below (Wikipedia), how many riders in that group do you think may have been experimenting with EPO? As I mentioned, Chiappucci had that big leap from 89. And Indurain appears in 10th, up from 17th in 89 and 47th in 88 (is he far more suspicious in his dynasty years?).

Final general classification (1–10)[1]
Rank Rider Team Time
1 Greg LeMond (USA) A yellow jersey. Z–Tomasso 90h 43' 20"
2 Claudio Chiappucci (ITA) Carrera Jeans–Vagabond + 2' 16"
3 Erik Breukink (NED) PDM–Concorde + 2' 29"
4 Pedro Delgado (ESP) Banesto + 5' 01"
5 Marino Lejarreta (ESP) ONCE + 5' 05"
6 Eduardo Chozas (ESP) ONCE + 9' 14"
7 Gianni Bugno (ITA) Chateau d'Ax–Salotti + 9' 39"
8 Raúl Alcalá (MEX) PDM–Concorde + 11' 14"
9 Claude Criquielion (BEL) Lotto–Superclub + 12' 04"
10 Miguel Indurain (ESP) Banesto + 12' 47"

I'm curious with the initial use/experimentation of EPO in the earlier 90s: Would riders have initially self-medicated or was medically-supervised use of the drug started with first usage? (for example, did Concini start working with some riders as earlier as 1990?). In the case of medically-supervised administration, would the doctors have been conservative with Hct levels, first seeing how that works out in competition, or was Hct taken to polycthemia levels (>55%) during the build-up period and up through competition? And in the case of self-administration, would riders just take risks boosting to polycthemia levels, once realizing how effective EPO was with other riders?

Interesting time period with EPO...the start of the "game-changer" in professional cycling.

I think there were a few guys who were being medically supervised, Indurain already had an established link with Conconi, Rominger and Argentin were openly linked with Ferrari. Chiappucci, I dont know if he was associated with anyone, maybe Conconi was already working with Carrera. Chiappuccis performances had been improving through 89/90. For example he was KOM at the Giro in 1990 and won a stage at Paris-Nice, but to the Tour only fans, he was a nobody. Gaining 10minutes on stage 1 was an advantage but he would have been expected to fade before fellow breakaway partners Steve Bauer and Ronan Pensec, both who had Top 10 finishes at the Tour previously.

I dont think EPO was the type of product you could self medicate without knowing what you were doing, hence the links to the deaths in 89/90. IMO the early beneficiaries were those who had trainers like Ferrari/Conconi who knew how to match the usage of EPO to training regimes effectively. Bjarne Riis talked about experimenting with it to determine how much was required for an improvement. When he arrived at Ariostea in 92, Ferrari/Cecchini were the team doctors. Ariostea were the most obvious example of a team who started crushing things.

Despite the attempts at revisionism here, the names most commonly linked to early effective EPO usage were those who had direct links to Ferrari/Conconi/Cecchini and guys who suddenly improved beyond recognition so Bugno/Chiappucci/Rominger/Mauri/Indurain/Chioccioli maybe Giovanetti/Ballerini. Later there was a host of others, primarily Italians. In 1990 only 3 Italian teams took part in the Tour, by 96 almost half the Tour teams were Italian. I still have the 1990 Season Preview edition of the old Winning magazine and it notes how 1989 had been a disastrous year for Italian cycling. What a turnaround. It is so staggering, it was hard to ignore.

Even though there are the stories of usage in Holland/Belgium, this is when cycling in those countries went into decline. From 4 strong Dutch teams in 1990, there were only 2 by the mid 90s. Likewise Belgium was reduced to Lotto whose team was infamously decimated at the 95 Tour. I remember when Museeuw and Bruyneel left Lotto to go to Italian/Spanish teams citing the lack of professsionalism at Lotto. It would seem if there was EPO usage in the Low Countries, they didnt have the know how to use it effectively like the Italians did. Van Mol worked with Italian teams from 1990 for example. Eric Rijckaert was considered conservative, hence the DR Punto nickname.

There is actually plenty of information in the relevant threads already, sadly they are often derailed by posters who are desperate to push EPO usage earlier and earlier just so they can try and link it to one rider.
 
Despite the attempts at revisionism here, the names most commonly linked to early effective EPO usage were those who had direct links to Ferrari/Conconi/Cecchini and guys who suddenly improved beyond recognition so Bugno/Chiappucci/Rominger/Mauri/Indurain/Chioccioli maybe Giovanetti/Ballerini. Later there was a host of others, primarily Italians. In 1990 only 3 Italian teams took part in the Tour, by 96 almost half the Tour teams were Italian. I still have the 1990 Season Preview edition of the old Winning magazine and it notes how 1989 had been a disastrous year for Italian cycling. What a turnaround. It is so staggering, it was hard to ignore.

After the Italian teams destroyed everyone in 94 and Ferrari making his famous orange juice comment the general conclusion was that EPO abuse was making the difference. Its safe to assume that by 1994 all teams had discovered EPO so how would that be possible?

The team doctor in 93, Walter Polini, seems to think the difference was made by experimenting with HCG.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/evgeni-berzin-russian-roulette/
Ferrari and Conconi were transforming cycling. Walter Polini, himself a former professional, had been the team’s medic but on 1 July he stated that he wanted nothing more to do with a sport he’d been around all his life. He said the whole thing was ‘filthy’ and so Ferrari, his star firmly in the ascendency, was added to the payroll. Two weeks later Alberto Volpi, another of his disciples, won the Leeds Classic for Mecair. On 25 July, however, the results came back from the lab. Volpi had been positive for growth hormone. The first cracks in fortress Bombini.

http://www.delpher.nl/nl/kranten/view?coll=ddd&query=%28mecair+hcg%29&cql%5B%5D=%28date+_gte_+%2201-01-1992%22%29&cql%5B%5D=%28date+_lte_+%2231-12-1995%22%29&identifier=ddd%3A010692107%3Ampeg21%3Aa0507&resultsidentifier=ddd%3A010692107%3Ampeg21%3Aa0507
de voormalige ploegarts van mecair - de huidige ploeg van Furlan - verklaarde afgelopen weekeinde dat het gebruik van verboden stimulerende middelen gemeengoed was binnen de formatie. "Ik was aangesteld om de volledige ploeg te begeleiden, maar mannen als Argentin, Oegromov, Bottaro en Volpi zwoeren bij de aanpak van Dokter Ferrari. Volgens mij werd door deze renners geexperimenteerd met Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin, een middel dat de aanmaak van testosteron stimuleerd." Hetbewuste zwangerschapshormoon HCG staat tevens te boek als maskeringsmiddel van anabolen steroiden.

the former team doctor of mecair - current squad of Furlan - said last weekend that the use of banned stimulants was widespread within the formation. "I was appointed to supervise the entire team, but men like Argentin, Oegromov, Bottaro and Volpi swore in working with Dr. Ferrari. I think he was experimenting with Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin, an agent that stimulates the production of testosterone. " The pregnancy hormone HCG is also on record as masking agent for anabolic steroids.
 
Yvan Vanmol is also talking about testosteron, EPO and HCG.

http://www.lemonde.fr/sport/article/2009/07/08/l-annee-ou-l-epo-a-change-le-velo-par-greg-lemond_1216520_3242.html#K1z2M41hRiBZj3q3.99
Last paragraph:
To be clear, I decided to consult Adrie Van Diemen, one of the best physiologists in the world. Unanswered, I turned to Yvon Van Mol, the doctor of the late ADR team, with whom I had won the Tour de France 1989. I wanted to know if studies could explain what was wrong with me. Dr. Van Mol examined me and did not detect anything particular that could explain my decline in level. He just let me know that I just needed EPO, testosterone, growth hormone to maintain my competitiveness. That's why I decided to end my career.

By the way: Adrie van Diemen another shady character Lemond decided to work with.
 
Re:

Tienus said:
Despite the attempts at revisionism here, the names most commonly linked to early effective EPO usage were those who had direct links to Ferrari/Conconi/Cecchini and guys who suddenly improved beyond recognition so Bugno/Chiappucci/Rominger/Mauri/Indurain/Chioccioli maybe Giovanetti/Ballerini. Later there was a host of others, primarily Italians. In 1990 only 3 Italian teams took part in the Tour, by 96 almost half the Tour teams were Italian. I still have the 1990 Season Preview edition of the old Winning magazine and it notes how 1989 had been a disastrous year for Italian cycling. What a turnaround. It is so staggering, it was hard to ignore.

After the Italian teams destroyed everyone in 94 and Ferrari making his famous orange juice comment the general conclusion was that EPO abuse was making the difference. Its safe to assume that by 1994 all teams had discovered EPO so how would that be possible?

The team doctor in 93, Walter Polini, seems to think the difference was made by experimenting with HCG.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/evgeni-berzin-russian-roulette/
Ferrari and Conconi were transforming cycling. Walter Polini, himself a former professional, had been the team’s medic but on 1 July he stated that he wanted nothing more to do with a sport he’d been around all his life. He said the whole thing was ‘filthy’ and so Ferrari, his star firmly in the ascendency, was added to the payroll. Two weeks later Alberto Volpi, another of his disciples, won the Leeds Classic for Mecair. On 25 July, however, the results came back from the lab. Volpi had been positive for growth hormone. The first cracks in fortress Bombini.

http://www.delpher.nl/nl/kranten/view?coll=ddd&query=%28mecair+hcg%29&cql%5B%5D=%28date+_gte_+%2201-01-1992%22%29&cql%5B%5D=%28date+_lte_+%2231-12-1995%22%29&identifier=ddd%3A010692107%3Ampeg21%3Aa0507&resultsidentifier=ddd%3A010692107%3Ampeg21%3Aa0507
de voormalige ploegarts van mecair - de huidige ploeg van Furlan - verklaarde afgelopen weekeinde dat het gebruik van verboden stimulerende middelen gemeengoed was binnen de formatie. "Ik was aangesteld om de volledige ploeg te begeleiden, maar mannen als Argentin, Oegromov, Bottaro en Volpi zwoeren bij de aanpak van Dokter Ferrari. Volgens mij werd door deze renners geexperimenteerd met Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin, een middel dat de aanmaak van testosteron stimuleerd." Hetbewuste zwangerschapshormoon HCG staat tevens te boek als maskeringsmiddel van anabolen steroiden.

the former team doctor of mecair - current squad of Furlan - said last weekend that the use of banned stimulants was widespread within the formation. "I was appointed to supervise the entire team, but men like Argentin, Oegromov, Bottaro and Volpi swore in working with Dr. Ferrari. I think he was experimenting with Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin, an agent that stimulates the production of testosterone. " The pregnancy hormone HCG is also on record as masking agent for anabolic steroids.

You can assume that all teams had discovered EPO but that seemed not to be the case. According to Willy Voet, Festina did not start a team program until 94, only first trying EPO at the 93 Tour when the lack of expertise made it uneffective. The testimonies in the Armstrong case indicate it was 95 before Motorola started using EPO. The dominance of the Italian teams at the Classics prompting the switch. French teams seemed to be slow to change with the times as well, the late Philipe Gaumont suggested it was 95 before Castorama switched wholesale to EPO despite people like team leader Armand De Las Cuevas working with Ferrari. It would seem GAN were just as slow if not one of the last teams on the EPO train. Nicolas Aubier who was at GAN from 93-95 said the first time someone suggested EPO to him was in 96 at Big Mat.

The reality was this, there was a global recession in the early 90s with sponsors leaving the sport regularly in most countries. One Country bucked that trend, Italy. They went from 10 teams in 1990 to as many as 15/16 by the mid 90s. Why did Italy buck the trend? Because all the success they achieved in the early 90s drew more sponors despite the recession. It would seem that the smaller Italian teams were better versed in EPO usage than some of their bigger international rivals by 93/94. In 1989, there were 14 Italian riders at the Tour(though Ariostea rescinded their invitation that year), by 1994 that number jumped to 45, by 96 it was 60. The amazing rise of Italian cycling from being also rans in 1989 to top dogs by 93/94 was more than likely built on EPO. They just had a 2-3 headstart on many of their international rivals.
 
Please explain why Adrie van Diemen is shady character. You cannot just claim something like that and not back it up. Ans please make it something else than sniper's null hypothesis that he is involved with cycling and is an exercise physiologist and therefore we must assume that he is dirty as hell.
 
Re:

GJB123 said:
Please explain why Adrie van Diemen is shady character. You cannot just claim something like that and not back it up. Ans please make it something else than sniper's null hypothesis that he is involved with cycling and is an exercise physiologist and therefore we must assume that he is dirty as hell.

At the time he was working with Lemond he also worked with Bart Veldkamp (olympic gold) and Danny Nelissen. Danny sued the FIOD to prevent getting his name published in the Sanders epo investigation. He later confesses to doping while at Rabo and Van Diemen was working with him there.

In this tv interview previously posted he is talking about Marianne Vos producing 6,63 watt/kg with a with a straight face.
viewtopic.php?p=1881717#p1881717
 
Re: Re:

sniper said:
MarkvW said:
When four or five people base their entire argument on blind faith, reason is wasted. That is what is happening here.
Fixed it for you. ;)

Seriously though, let's not turn the tables Mark.
The null hypothesis is clear to everybody who hasn't been living in a cave or under a rock in the past two to three decades. You normally don't win GTs on bread and water. If you think Lemond was an exception, it's time to start building your case. Otherwise it's just that, blind faith. And that's a rather objective state of affairs. If you don't like it either take it up with the history of the sport or, well, start reasoning.

Lemond mixing it up with dopers is no more and no less evidence than Froome mixing it up with Vino, or Wiggins with Lance. The case that Froome dopes does not at all rest on his friendly ties with Vino. But we still post up those pictures of them hanging out together, don't we. Same with Wiggo and Lance. Even if Wiggins really "never rode with Lance", he'd still be a doper in the eyes of everybody with a quarter of a brain. But that doens't make it less salient to post up those quotes where he says he loves Lance.
I'm not sure why you're expecting us to treat Lemond differently.

Props to NLLemondfans, who at present seems to be the only one trying to address some of the issues surrounding the Lemond-is-clean hypothesis, rather than deflect or whine.
NLLemondFans:
Besides being a doper, Freddy Maertens is also a nice guy with a sad history and real problems. So... Maybe (just maybe) there are other motives in Greg having dinner with him
very fair, and agreed.

Falsely quoting another person is a dishonest argumentative tactic. Typical of your posts in this thread.
 
Re: Re:

MarkvW said:
sniper said:
MarkvW said:
When four or five people base their entire argument on blind faith, reason is wasted. That is what is happening here.
Fixed it for you. ;)

Seriously though, let's not turn the tables Mark.
The null hypothesis is clear to everybody who hasn't been living in a cave or under a rock in the past two to three decades. You normally don't win GTs on bread and water. If you think Lemond was an exception, it's time to start building your case. Otherwise it's just that, blind faith. And that's a rather objective state of affairs. If you don't like it either take it up with the history of the sport or, well, start reasoning.

Lemond mixing it up with dopers is no more and no less evidence than Froome mixing it up with Vino, or Wiggins with Lance. The case that Froome dopes does not at all rest on his friendly ties with Vino. But we still post up those pictures of them hanging out together, don't we. Same with Wiggo and Lance. Even if Wiggins really "never rode with Lance", he'd still be a doper in the eyes of everybody with a quarter of a brain. But that doens't make it less salient to post up those quotes where he says he loves Lance.
I'm not sure why you're expecting us to treat Lemond differently.

Props to NLLemondfans, who at present seems to be the only one trying to address some of the issues surrounding the Lemond-is-clean hypothesis, rather than deflect or whine.
NLLemondFans:
Besides being a doper, Freddy Maertens is also a nice guy with a sad history and real problems. So... Maybe (just maybe) there are other motives in Greg having dinner with him
very fair, and agreed.

Falsely quoting another person is a dishonest argumentative tactic. Typical of your posts in this thread.

quite Mark....

and...for umpteenth time how can Froome be compared with lemond? You can't take any argument seriously if you cannot differentiate between these two riders.....

of course the case has been stated many times before, the fact the Lemond career straddles the pre and post epo era is instructive. As is his performance drop-off early 90's. To get round this argument we have had threads started to expressly build a case for far earlier peloton adoption of epo, widespread blood doping in the peloton throughout the 80s, and wholesale drug abuse since (aided and abetted by family) childhood...how else to square the circle....

and yet the circle is still square however much an innuendo of a rumour of a third had story is regurgitated as 'fact'......

it's not going to get to a square based on the case so far............................
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Tienus said:
GJB123 said:
Please explain why Adrie van Diemen is shady character. You cannot just claim something like that and not back it up. Ans please make it something else than sniper's null hypothesis that he is involved with cycling and is an exercise physiologist and therefore we must assume that he is dirty as hell.

At the time he was working with Lemond he also worked with Bart Veldkamp (olympic gold) and Danny Nelissen. Danny sued the FIOD to prevent getting his name published in the Sanders epo investigation. He later confesses to doping while at Rabo and Van Diemen was working with him there.

In this tv interview previously posted he is talking about Marianne Vos producing 6,63 watt/kg with a with a straight face.
viewtopic.php?p=1881717#p1881717
Interesting re: Danny and Bart.

iirc, there is an interview with Van Diemen from 1997 where he says he visited the Conconi and Ferrari lab to 'learn' from them and exchange intelligence. I remember the reporter saying Van Diemen insisted the word 'doping' not be mentioned in the interview. (interpret that as you will). I'll try to dig up the link when i have more time (or maybe somebody beats me to it). Van Diemen also worked closely with doctor Peter Vergouwen, a renowned campaigner for legalizing EPO in the nineties.

Van Diemen later of course went to work for Garmin on whose behalf he did a fair share of "perception is reality" PR in interviews ('times are down', 'new generation', etc.). Again, interpret that as you will.

If you trust Vos, Rabo, Nelissen and Garmin, then you have no reason to doubt Van Diemen's integrity.
 
The main issue I have with van Diemen is his hypocrisy. He seems to take every opportunity to advocate how cycling is getting cleaner and how he works with clean cyclists. On the other hand he accuses other riders and trainers of doping.

http://vorige.nrc.nl//sport/tour08/article1935271.ece/Garmin-trainer_Van_Diemen_schoon_en_succesvol
Doping is ook de belangrijkste reden dat Van Diemen, die onder meer Danny Nelissen als amateur naar de wereldtitel leidde en werkte met olympisch schaatskampioen Bart Veldkamp, een tijdlang niets meer met het profwielrennen te maken wilde hebben.

Doping is also the main reason that Van Diemen, who guided Danny Nelissen to the world title and worked with Olympic skating champion Bart Veldkamp, wanted nothing to do with professional cycling for a while

Zelf trainde hij in die tijd de junioren en amateurs van de Raboploeg. „Fantastisch werk. Wij leverden de beste jongens af, reden de hele boel op een hoop. Wat daar is neergezet, is absoluut uniek.

He himself trained in that time the juniors and amateurs of the Rabobank team. "Fantastic work. We delivered the best guys, the rest was nowhere. What we did there is absolutely unique.

Het grootste talent dat hij trainde? „Qua tijdrit en klimvermogen absoluut Thomas Dekker.
Moet je zien hoe snel hij goed is na een blessure of een rustperiode. De klasse druipt er vanaf.

The biggest talent he trained? "In terms of time trial and climbing absolutely Thomas Dekker.
Look how fast he is in shape after an injury or a rest period. His class is amazing.

Or from his own site:
http://www.webtrainer.com/nl/news/archive/2011/12/17/adrie-van-diemen-over-thomas-dekker-bij-garmin
Na zijn stormachtige entree bij de wielerprofs raakte Thomas Dekker in 2009 op een zijspoor door epo-gebruik. Buiten het zicht van de camera's helpt trainer Adrie van Diemen hem terugkeren op topniveau. 'Alles wat Thomas de afgelopen jaren had opgebouwd, is weg. Maar hij is een heel speciale knakker. Hij weet donders goed wat er gebeurt als hij nog een keer de fout ingaat. Als ik hem niet vertrouw, bel ik meteen onze manager Jonathan Vaughters. Dan vliegt hij er als een raket uit. Je denkt toch niet dat wij onze baan bij Garmin op het spel zetten voor één mannetje in de ploeg?', zegt Van Diemen in de Volkskrant.
'Thomas was trouwens al met doping gestopt toen hij positief werd bevonden (de dynepo-hertest in 2009 van een bloedstaal uit december 2007 deed hem de das om, red.). Zijn ogen waren al opengegaan, zo van: dit kan nooit de goede weg zijn op de langere termijn. Hij is gepakt, heeft zijn schorsing uitgezeten. En in onze christelijke samenleving heb je dan de rekening vereffend. Het is een leerproces geweest

After his stormy entrance to the cycling pros Thomas Dekker got sidetracked in 2009 by EPO use. Out of sight of the cameras trainer Adrie van Diemen helps him return to top level. "Everything that Thomas had built up over the years, is gone. But he is a very special bloke. He knows damn well what happens when he dopes again. If I do not trust him, I immediately call our manager Jonathan Vaughters. Then he gets sacked. You do not want us to risk our job at Garmin for one male in the squad? "Van Diemen said in the Volkskrant.
"Thomas in fact already stoppeddoping when he was found positive (Dynepo retest in 2009 from a blood sample from December 2007 took him off, ed.). His eyes were opened, like: this can never be the right path for the long term. He is caught, has served his suspension. And have you settled the bill in our Christian society. It has been a learning process

His answer on the first question in this interview is pure comedy. In Dutch language.
http://nos.nl/video/529775-wat-komt-er-kijken-bij-hard-fietsen.html
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
That whole interview is comedy.
He's so uncomfortable with even the most basic questions.
I reckon this is the kind of interview you get when you ask, say, a car salesman to explain what his job is about without mentioning the word 'car'.

This is what Lemond said about Van Diemen:
Adrie Van Diemen, whom I consider one of the best physiologists in the world.
http://www.velonews.com/2014/09/news/storm-exclusive-interview-greg-lemond_347148
In fairness, that doesn't bode well for the quality of the other physiologists Lemond has worked with.
 
Re:

Tienus said:
The main issue I have with van Diemen is his hypocrisy. He seems to take every opportunity to advocate how cycling is getting cleaner and how he works with clean cyclists. On the other hand he accuses other riders and trainers of doping.

I'm amazed by the use of the word "hypocrite" around here. This sentence defines the opposite of a hypocrite.
 
Re:

GJB123 said:
Please explain why Adrie van Diemen is shady character. You cannot just claim something like that and not back it up. Ans please make it something else than sniper's null hypothesis that he is involved with cycling and is an exercise physiologist and therefore we must assume that he is dirty as hell.

Well looks like you are not going to get anything more than the usual guilt by association game.

If Van Diemen is considered shady, then Vayer and Bassons would have qualified as shady as ***, I mean an exercise physiologist working at Festina at the height of the EPO era and a rider on the team, guilty as charged Sir. No questions asked. Amazing how some people cannot see past this one size fits all version of things.

Danny Nelisen actually named who doped him when he admitted his crimes, it was Geert Leinders, also amazing how someone who is being put forward as an important link at Rabobank never was mentioned once in the various confessions of ex-Rabo riders. In fact, I dont think I have ever heard Van Diemen even mentioned in relation to doping, not even in the realm of rumours and innuendo which sniper love so much.

The irony being of course that LeMond worked with Van Diemen when he had his worst years, 93/94.
 
Re: Re:

@NL_LeMondFans said:
Tienus said:
The main issue I have with van Diemen is his hypocrisy. He seems to take every opportunity to advocate how cycling is getting cleaner and how he works with clean cyclists. On the other hand he accuses other riders and trainers of doping.

I'm amazed by the use of the word "hypocrite" around here. This sentence defines the opposite of a hypocrite.

I agree thats not my best sentence.

He's bragging about how well he did with the Rabo youth and in particular Thomas Dekker. He is talking about marginal gains (7kg bicycle) with Nelissen when guiding him to the world title in a high altitude race with 3000m climbing. He talks about Vos producing more watts/kg than Horner but he only questions Horners peformance.
 
Danny Nelisen actually named who doped him when he admitted his crimes, it was Geert Leinders, also amazing how someone who is being put forward as an important link at Rabobank never was mentioned once in the various confessions of ex-Rabo riders. In fact, I dont think I have ever heard Van Diemen even mentioned in relation to doping, not even in the realm of rumours and innuendo which sniper love so much.

Nelissen only confessed because he had no other option and he only mentioned names that where allready exposed. Nelissen succesfully prevented publication of documents with his name in the earlier Sanders epo investigation.

Thomas Dekker has not been open about everyone in his book. Maybe he liked van Diemen and didnt want to ruin his career.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Nick C. said:
This may be old but isn't Lemond treated differently because he has a straight line of success at every level? There are no pictures of his giving up his bike to the early 80s equivalent of a Greg Henderson and pushing him off. Nor did he spend tours as a supposed TT specialist, never finishing in the mix outside of maybe a 4 days of Dunkerque
Whilst I agree the presence of a mid-carreer transformation is suspect, obviously (as Benotti also pointed out) the reverse (i.e. the absence of a mid-carreer transformation) means nothing either way.
Cases in point are plentiful, Lionel Messi, Serena Williams, Boris Becker, Christiano Ronaldo, Alberto Contador, Jan Ulrich, I think you get my drift.

So in that sense the "straight line" argument is rather similar to the "never tested positive" argument. Whilst a positive is proof of doping, the absence of a positive means virtually nothing either way.

Maybe you think Lemond didn't have an opportunity to dope in his junior days? (honest question). If so, we can have a closer look at the Amateur Sports Act and the OTC where Lemond trained between 78 and 80, or at exposed but unrepentant blood doper Eddie B. (the "Father of American doping" according to some, and like a "father" to Greg Lemond, according to...Greg Lemond), or at Gideon Ariel and Irving Dardik, the founders of the OTC and their particular views on (junior) doping, including blood doping, and their admiration for the Eastern bloc 'sport science'. Or maybe you wanna talk about Ed Burke (exposed blood doper) and Fritz Hagerman (expert on anabolic steroids) who did physiological testing on Lemond in the late 70s.
Since we've dealt with those names before, I propose if you wanna discuss them you either enter their names in the Clinic search engine, or feel free to send me a PM.

As for the straight line, well that's up for debate.
Where many riders were/are able to continue at the top level well into their thirties, Lemond couldn't finish races anymore.
In fact, the parallel with Nadal and Serena is interesting. Whilst neither of them have undergone a *mid-carreer* transformation, they have had remarkable *mid-season* transformations which were generally frowned upon. And both of them, especially Nadal, close to turning 30, his body seems to have worn out. Much like Thevenet, Maertens and Lemond.
“Used too much drugs”, said Max Testa about Lemond. If you insist on a more accurate diagnosis, perhaps look up “steroid myopathy”.
Either way I think this would be a quicky for Dr. House.
 
The irony being of course that LeMond worked with Van Diemen when he had his worst years, 93/94.

According to van Diemen Lemond wanted to work with him because he bought 3 SRM powermeters and he needed someone who knew how to work with them. The training advice was done by fax and van Diemen visited Lemond in the USA a few times.
This could be the true story. Perhaps it was only a coincidence that van Diemen was working with Peter Vergouwen at the time. In 1992 Vergouwen was involved in at least three olympic gold medals. Bart Veldkamp, Ellen van Langen and Dieter "the white Kenian" Baumann.

According to a testimonial from Baumann on the site of Vergouwen:
In elke medaille die ik heb gewonnen staat ergens de naam vergouwen gegraveerd.
On every medal I won the name Vergouwen is somewhere engraved.
http://www.elitesportsmedicine.nl/

Van Diemen continued to work with Vergouwen while at Rabobank.
http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/5009/Archief/article/detail/2676187/1997/02/28/Als-je-met-armen-en-benen-over-elkaar-gaat-zitten-gebeurt-er-niets.dhtml

Vergouwen in 1997:
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:eM5wdlWj_PgJ:https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/1997/07/12/peter-vergouwen-na-zeventien-jaar-weg-bij-sportkoepel-7360534-a1318999+&cd=2&hl=nl&ct=clnk&gl=nl
Vergouwen zou ook de trainingen van zijn patiënten willen bekijken en met ze mee op trainingskamp. “Daar zie je ze bewegen, zie je ze eten. Dan pas begrijp je de kern van de problemen.” Maar hij heeft er gewoon geen tijd voor.
Vergouwen would also like to see the training of his patients and join them at training camp. "You see them move, see you them eating. Only then will you understand the core of the problem. "But he's just not got the time for it
Van Diemen is the one who has the time to watch them train and he joins the cyclists at the training camps.
For the track and field athletes Vergouwen was woring closely with Henk Kraaijenhof .
 
Re:

sniper said:
Nick C. said:
This may be old but isn't Lemond treated differently because he has a straight line of success at every level? There are no pictures of his giving up his bike to the early 80s equivalent of a Greg Henderson and pushing him off. Nor did he spend tours as a supposed TT specialist, never finishing in the mix outside of maybe a 4 days of Dunkerque
Whilst I agree the presence of a mid-carreer transformation is suspect, obviously (as Benotti also pointed out) the reverse (i.e. the absence of a mid-carreer transformation) means nothing either way.
Cases in point are plentiful, Lionel Messi, Serena Williams, Boris Becker, Christiano Ronaldo, Alberto Contador, Jan Ulrich, I think you get my drift.

So in that sense the "straight line" argument is rather similar to the "never tested positive" argument. Whilst a positive is proof of doping, the absence of a positive means virtually nothing either way.

Maybe you think Lemond didn't have an opportunity to dope in his junior days? (honest question). If so, we can have a closer look at the Amateur Sports Act and the OTC where Lemond trained between 78 and 80, or at exposed but unrepentant blood doper Eddie B. (the "Father of American doping" according to some, and like a "father" to Greg Lemond, according to...Greg Lemond), or at Gideon Ariel and Irving Dardik, the founders of the OTC and their particular views on (junior) doping, including blood doping, and their admiration for the Eastern bloc 'sport science'. Or maybe you wanna talk about Ed Burke (exposed blood doper) and Fritz Hagerman (expert on anabolic steroids) who did physiological testing on Lemond in the late 70s.
Since we've dealt with those names before, I propose if you wanna discuss them you either enter their names in the Clinic search engine, or feel free to send me a PM.

As for the straight line, well that's up for debate.
Where many riders were/are able to continue at the top level well into their thirties, Lemond couldn't finish races anymore.
In fact, the parallel with Nadal and Serena is interesting. Whilst neither of them have undergone a *mid-carreer* transformation, they have had remarkable *mid-season* transformations which were generally frowned upon. And both of them, especially Nadal, close to turning 30, his body seems to have worn out. Much like Thevenet, Maertens and Lemond.
“Used too much drugs”, said Max Testa about Lemond. If you insist on a more accurate diagnosis, perhaps look up “steroid myopathy”.
Either way I think this would be a quicky for Dr. House.

Let me save anyone from having to read any of the garbage sniper claims. It is based primarily on snipers particular brand of nonsense, i.e, spin, innuendo, selective quoting, assumptions, plain misrepresentation and the denial of anything actually real e.g Steve Tilford on record. If putting 2+2 together and coming up with 10 is your thing, then knock yourself out. Just remember sniper has numerous bans for trolling, if you want real 'evidence' on that one, just read back through the banned Members thread. Undoubtedly this will now earn some form of rebuke from the mods, but unlike most of what sniper posts, the evidence is actully real and not imagined.

As a example of what would be in snipers list of garbage , I posted a few pages back how sniper would repeat the Max Testa claim over and over, but never actually mention the origin of the story and shock, horror..... there is mention of Max Testa again, but no mention of the story's origin which of course was Greg LeMond himself. Why is the fact that LeMond himself revealed this story aways left out by sniper? I think we already know the answer to that one.
 
Re:

Tienus said:
The irony being of course that LeMond worked with Van Diemen when he had his worst years, 93/94.

According to van Diemen Lemond wanted to work with him because he bought 3 SRM powermeters and he needed someone who knew how to work with them. The training advice was done by fax and van Diemen visited Lemond in the USA a few times.
This could be the true story. Perhaps it was only a coincidence that van Diemen was working with Peter Vergouwen at the time. In 1992 Vergouwen was involved in at least three olympic gold medals. Bart Veldkamp, Ellen van Langen and Dieter "the white Kenian" Baumann.

According to a testimonial from Baumann on the site of Vergouwen:
In elke medaille die ik heb gewonnen staat ergens de naam vergouwen gegraveerd.
On every medal I won the name Vergouwen is somewhere engraved.
http://www.elitesportsmedicine.nl/

Van Diemen continued to work with Vergouwen while at Rabobank.
http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/5009/Archief/article/detail/2676187/1997/02/28/Als-je-met-armen-en-benen-over-elkaar-gaat-zitten-gebeurt-er-niets.dhtml

Vergouwen in 1997:
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:eM5wdlWj_PgJ:https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/1997/07/12/peter-vergouwen-na-zeventien-jaar-weg-bij-sportkoepel-7360534-a1318999+&cd=2&hl=nl&ct=clnk&gl=nl
Vergouwen zou ook de trainingen van zijn patiënten willen bekijken en met ze mee op trainingskamp. “Daar zie je ze bewegen, zie je ze eten. Dan pas begrijp je de kern van de problemen.” Maar hij heeft er gewoon geen tijd voor.
Vergouwen would also like to see the training of his patients and join them at training camp. "You see them move, see you them eating. Only then will you understand the core of the problem. "But he's just not got the time for it
Van Diemen is the one who has the time to watch them train and he joins the cyclists at the training camps.
For the track and field athletes Vergouwen was woring closely with Henk Kraaijenhof .

As top exercise phsiologist, who exactly would you expect Van Diemen to be working with? This is all more guilt by association. Interesting you never addressed my point about Antoine Vayer who worked in the same field as Van Diemen. I think anyone who worked in the field of top level sports in the 90s could be accused of some level of hypocrisy but that doesn't make them automatically guilty of misconduct.

I am also not sure why Van Diemem bragging about the success of Rabo U-23 team as notworthy. They were successful and afaik, there has been no assocation of doping with that team. Did Dekker mention anything about Rabo U-23, because now it seems as though everyone is out to cover for Van Diemen.

Also, what is the context for the Marianne Vos 6.6 statement, what time frame was he talking about as I am pretty sure most average pros could put out that for short periods of time. A top female doing the same is really not that suspicious. That is not at all similar to someone putting out high watts over a long period of time like Horner did at age 40. Are you comparing apples with apples here? More context needed.
 
Interesting you never addressed my point about Antoine Vayer who worked in the same field as Van Diemen.
I did not reply to this as I fail to see the relevance of Vayer in this case.

I am also not sure why Van Diemem bragging about the success of Rabo U-23 team as notworthy. They were successful and afaik, there has been no assocation of doping with that team. Did Dekker mention anything about Rabo U-23, because now it seems as though everyone is out to cover for Van Diemen.

Dekker is also covering Frans Maassen who was working with him and van Diemen in the U-23. Dekker won the Dutch national elite championship ITT against known dopers at the age of 19, he repeated that result a year later.

Also, what is the context for the Marianne Vos 6.6 statement, what time frame was he talking about as I am pretty sure most average pros could put out that for short periods of time. A top female doing the same is really not that suspicious. That is not at all similar to someone putting out high watts over a long period of time like Horner did at age 40. Are you comparing apples with apples here? More context needed.

According to van Diemen in the interview:
With her numbers she would be one of the best climbers in the men pro peloton.

So i guess that she can sustain that 6,63 w/kg for a while. Her weight is also mentioned as 53kg so he is talking about an output of 351 watt which obviously is nowhere near her max.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS