• 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!

Marco Pantani -10 years since his death (pictures of his career)

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Marco's disgrace coincided with Armstrong’s rise to supremacy. Whether or not the two were interconnected, it is undeniable that there were some very influential people in the sport who benefited most happily from the situation. Whereas at the same time there was every reason to make of the Italian a pariah and silence him for the information he potentially could have revealed.

In Italy, these two coincidences have fueled suspicion that the official story (that his hematacrit was simply too high and that he died of a self-inflicted drug overdose) isn't the one that portrays the full reality, or even approximately.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,320
0
0
Visit site
Echoes said:
You read me !

I can even give you an anecdote.

In June 2004 I was already frequenting forums (VCN). You then had a thread about the best riders from the 90's. Some listed Jalabert, Museeuw, etc.

Along came a Belgian with Italian origin. He listed a dozen riders like the two mentioned above but no Pantani (though he was a fan). Next came an Italian poster who mentioned Pantani.

And then the Belgian guy of Italian descent quoted him and said : "Pantani !!! I forgot about him. HE is the best rider of the nineties."

And the OP (French poster) to quote him: "So the best rider of the decade is a rider that you forgot about, old fool."

I had to laugh my head off !!! :D He WAS completely forgotten until his unexpected death gave him media attention again. "Better to burn out than to fade away."

All this mythology around Pantani is really beyond me. I'll never understand it, for the life of me...
This is pretty funny, you make your conclusion based on an internet forum ten years ago and tell us this is the truth? Better say your truth next time.

What is next? Tom Simpson is forgotten? Stylish Frank VdB?
 
Pantani, a man always alone: when he won and when he derailed.
He wasn’t an angel nor a devil: he came from an antique cycling, spoke a different language, on the frame of his bike was all of Italy.

Ten years ago the mysterious death. By Gianni Mura

Ten years without Pantani, a story of triumph and downfall.

It’s already been ten years, but you’re still here to exalt a drug addict? Or else: but haven’t you understood that he was the sacrificial lamb? Ten years after his death, Pantani continues to divide, like ten days after the fact. Only when he raced and won everybody made him their own. I don’t recognize myself in either of the two factions, that of the devil or that of the angle. Too extreme, in a certain sense too convenient.

It would be better to reconcile them: even devils have positive aspects, even angels don’t always resist temptations and, consequently, for this Pantini was consummately human. A man alone at the helm when he dropped everybody on the climb. A man alone on a crash course after Madonna di Campiglio. The long, painful descent to the bottom in which he was no longer able to distinguish between true friends and false ones, those that worry about your unhappiness and those that cover you with white dust and paid-for women.

I rather recognize my view in a book that has just come out (“Pantani was a God”) written by Marco Pastonesi, a colleague from la Gazzetta dello Sport whose first love is rugby, but as regards cycling can stay on the wheels of the great suiveurs of the pink daily. He is one who knows how to observe and listen, Pastonesi, and he’s also honest. The first lines of the preface: “Pantani wasn’t one of my favorites. No champion, no winner, however victorious, is one of my preferred. Mine are the racers that, as professionals, haven’t even won once.” Thus not Pantani.

Over the past ten years many books about the life and death of Pantani were published, written by Italian as well as foreign journalists, by his manager and even his mother Tonina. In addition a made for television film and a long, painful and most humane play at the Teatro delle Albe di Ravenna (romagnoli like him) were produced, as well as a dozen songs…not to mention the solemn parades and the blogs on the Cesenatico cemetery where he is buried. Then there are the those on the climbing feats of Pantani: like the domestic ones such as the beloved Carpegna, the Centoforche and the Fumaiolo; or the more famous Mortirolo, Alpe d’Huez, Galibier and Ventoux. Because of how he raced, I can say that all the climbs were Pantani’s. They were his natural turf, his vertical sea, they were both his crosses to bear and delicacies to savor. The cross was the one called agony, the hardest fatigue. The delights were his attacking the group from the back and then, bit by bit, passing everyone while looking at their faces. He did it on purpose, not by chance. Nor was it by chance that he got rid of any excess baggage before attacking, for it was a warning. Like the tolls of death bells: now I’m going to get serious, follow me if you dare. And it wasn’t a random case, either, that Pastonesi completes the picture by recounting the words of all his domestiques, of those who trained and raced with him, or rather for him (because Mercatoni Uno contemplated only one leader, Pantani, and all the others at the service of the cause). If Pantani won, everybody did. Whereas if he lost, everyone did. In the details of the picture there are great romagnoli cyclists of old and great climbers like Gaul, Bahamontes, Massignan, just as the first great climber, René Pottier, winner of the 1906 Tour, who hung himself from a beam of a Peugeot garage on January 25, 1907. A love loss, they said at the time. No letter was left, another mysterious death.

Like Pantani’s death, which has two big question marks in two hotel rooms. One is that of Madonna di Campiglio, June 5, 1999, the beginning of the end. How on earth, given that it was an announced drug test, did Pantani’s blood show a hematocrit of 52 (when it would have been easy for him, given the forewarning, to lower it had he needed to)? And what really took place in room D5 of the Le Rose residence at Rimini, just the final end of it all? Philippe Brunel’s book, by the l’Equipe journalist, has documented how many grey areas and lacunas there were in the police investigation. Doubts remain, while that residence no longer exists, having been demolished as it was soon thereafter, which is surprising given our bureaucracy.

Yet the doubts don’t remain among those who only speak of Panatini as a drug addict, both on and off the bike, or else merely as a fallen angel. To relive those years between the end of the 80’s and the first years of the 2000’s, is like following the course of EPO. Did Pantani use it? Yes, like everyone else. How much? Pastonesi cites rather high levels. Would he have won otherwise? Yes, if all were on the same fuel. Yet, since Pantani’s death, it has come out that in regards to someone (Armstrong) the UCI kept open a huge umbrella.

Honestly, just as Pastonesi has written that Pantani wasn’t one of his favorites, I must admit that he was one of mine. Because, like the cyclists of old, during the race he went on instinct. He didn’t use a heart rate monitor and when he trained at home he road on bread and pecorino. Because, even more than the victories, I remember the expectation that he could win, or in any case that he would eventually, at some point, go on the attack and in this he never disappointed. But also the enthusiasm of the fans, like a sonorous ovation from switchback to switchback. To say nothing of the whole of Italy on his frame, and the French who got pi$$ed-off, though not entirely, since they liked to listen to Charlie Parker.

Because he was an artist. Because he was so small. Because he spoke a different language. Pastonesi called me from the office that February 14, 2004. I was on vacation and at lunch in Florence. Pantani’s dead. Nobody knows exactly how, but in a residence. I need a crocodile, fast. Taxi, hotel, television breaking news, details. I still have readers who tell me that that article written in the heat of the moment about Pantani’s death, was among the most beautiful that I ever wrote. I would never have wanted to write it. It just came out like that: like turning on a faucet or cutting a vein.
 
Il Pirata was a tragic figure. He was like a character in a Film Noir; you knew from the opening scene it wasn't going to end well for him. But he has flamboyant. And he was spectacular.

I was never a fan, but it was a far better show with him in it.


EDIT:
Okay, who edited my post and changed Il Elefantino to Il Pirata?
 
Aug 13, 2010
3,317
0
0
Visit site
hrotha said:
The UCI looking the other way and not displaying any will to root out the problem, instead acting like it was just some bad apples.

Yes it's kind of redundant considering the rest of the paragraph.
I thought you were saying that Pantani was the one with the 'token but faux adherence to the rules' - that was why I was curious. Thanks for clearing up.
 
Mar 17, 2009
2,295
0
0
Visit site
rhubroma said:
Pantani, a man always alone: when he won and when he derailed.
He wasn’t an angel nor a devil: he came from an antique cycling, spoke a different language, on the frame of his bike was all of Italy.

Ten years ago the mysterious death. By Gianni Mura

Ten years without Pantani, a story of triumph and downfall.

It’s already been ten years, but you’re still here to exalt a drug addict? Or else: but haven’t you understood that he was the sacrificial lamb? Ten years after his death, Pantani continues to divide, like ten days after the fact. Only when he raced and won everybody made him their own. I don’t recognize myself in either of the two factions, that of the devil or that of the angle. Too extreme, in a certain sense too convenient.

It would be better to reconcile them: even devils have positive aspects, even angels don’t always resist temptations and, consequently, for this Pantini was consummately human. A man alone at the helm when he dropped everybody on the climb. A man alone on a crash course after Madonna di Campiglio. The long, painful descent to the bottom in which he was no longer able to distinguish between true friends and false ones, those that worry about your unhappiness and those that cover you with white dust and paid-for women.

I rather recognize my view in a book that has just come out (“Pantani was a God”) written by Marco Pastonesi, a colleague from la Gazzetta dello Sport whose first love is rugby, but as regards cycling can stay on the wheels of the great suiveurs of the pink daily. He is one who knows how to observe and listen, Pastonesi, and he’s also honest. The first lines of the preface: “Pantani wasn’t one of my favorites. No champion, no winner, however victorious, is one of my preferred. Mine are the racers that, as professionals, haven’t even won once.” Thus not Pantani.

Over the past ten years many books about the life and death of Pantani were published, written by Italian as well as foreign journalists, by his manager and even his mother Tonina. In addition a made for television film and a long, painful and most humane play at the Teatro delle Albe di Ravenna (romagnoli like him) were produced, as well as a dozen songs…not to mention the solemn parades and the blogs on the Cesenatico cemetery where he is buried. Then there are the those on the climbing feats of Pantani: like the domestic ones such as the beloved Carpegna, the Centoforche and the Fumaiolo; or the more famous Mortirolo, Alpe d’Huez, Galibier and Ventoux. Because of how he raced, I can say that all the climbs were Pantani’s. They were his natural turf, his vertical sea, they were both his crosses to bear and delicacies to savor. The cross was the one called agony, the hardest fatigue. The delights were his attacking the group from the back and then, bit by bit, passing everyone while looking at their faces. He did it on purpose, not by chance. Nor was it by chance that he got rid of any excess baggage before attacking, for it was a warning. Like the tolls of death bells: now I’m going to get serious, follow me if you dare. And it wasn’t a random case, either, that Pastonesi completes the picture by recounting the words of all his domestiques, of those who trained and raced with him, or rather for him (because Mercatoni Uno contemplated only one leader, Pantani, and all the others at the service of the cause). If Pantani won, everybody did. Whereas if he lost, everyone did. In the details of the picture there are great romagnoli cyclists of old and great climbers like Gaul, Bahamontes, Massignan, just as the first great climber, René Pottier, winner of the 1906 Tour, who hung himself from a beam of a Peugeot garage on January 25, 1907. A love loss, they said at the time. No letter was left, another mysterious death.

Like Pantani’s death, which has two big question marks in two hotel rooms. One is that of Madonna di Campiglio, June 5, 1999, the beginning of the end. How on earth, given that it was an announced drug test, did Pantani’s blood show a hematocrit of 52 (when it would have been easy for him, given the forewarning, to lower it had he needed to)? And what really took place in room D5 of the Le Rose residence at Rimini, just the final end of it all? Philippe Brunel’s book, by the l’Equipe journalist, has documented how many grey areas and lacunas there were in the police investigation. Doubts remain, while that residence no longer exists, having been demolished as it was soon thereafter, which is surprising given our bureaucracy.

Yet the doubts don’t remain among those who only speak of Panatini as a drug addict, both on and off the bike, or else merely as a fallen angel. To relive those years between the end of the 80’s and the first years of the 2000’s, is like following the course of EPO. Did Pantani use it? Yes, like everyone else. How much? Pastonesi cites rather high levels. Would he have won otherwise? Yes, if all were on the same fuel. Yet, since Pantani’s death, it has come out that in regards to someone (Armstrong) the UCI kept open a huge umbrella.

Honestly, just as Pastonesi has written that Pantani wasn’t one of his favorites, I must admit that he was one of mine. Because, like the cyclists of old, during the race he went on instinct. He didn’t use a heart rate monitor and when he trained at home he road on bread and pecorino. Because, even more than the victories, I remember the expectation that he could win, or in any case that he would eventually, at some point, go on the attack and in this he never disappointed. But also the enthusiasm of the fans, like a sonorous ovation from switchback to switchback. To say nothing of the whole of Italy on his frame, and the French who got pi$$ed-off, though not entirely, since they liked to listen to Charlie Parker.

Because he was an artist. Because he was so small. Because he spoke a different language. Pastonesi called me from the office that February 14, 2004. I was on vacation and at lunch in Florence. Pantani’s dead. Nobody knows exactly how, but in a residence. I need a crocodile, fast. Taxi, hotel, television breaking news, details. I still have readers who tell me that that article written in the heat of the moment about Pantani’s death, was among the most beautiful that I ever wrote. I would never have wanted to write it. It just came out like that: like turning on a faucet or cutting a vein.

thanks for posting that
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
Visit site
rhubroma said:
Pantani, a man always alone: when he won and when he derailed.
He wasn’t an angel nor a devil: he came from an antique cycling, spoke a different language, on the frame of his bike was all of Italy.

Ten years ago the mysterious death. By Gianni Mura
. . . .

Rhub, unless you ARE Gianni Mura, it would be appropriate, and appreciated, if you listed or linked your source on this.

Otherwise, I also add a "chapeau" for putting it up in here.
 
Echoes said:
When he was still alive in 2003 I was already frequenting cycling forums. NOBODY remembered him but die-hard fans. His death changed a lot. "It's better to burn out than to fade away", said Neil Young. I guess it applies for what Pantani has become after his death. A drug-addicted icon.

Even shortly after his death nobody would consider him a top champion from the nineties. It all gradually developed.

The CN article makes me wanna puke. I mean 5 days ago was the 5th anniversary of Frederiek Nolf's departure and nobody got moved :( but Pantani ...

Pantani took dope to the excess and died from it, period. He ain't no example for the youth. May he be forgotten !

How could he have been forgotten when he raced the Giro in 2003? It was his last hoorah. His winning the Tour and Giro in the same year cemented his legend status. I think your extreme dislike for anything other than the classics has clouded your judgement.:(
 
rhubroma said:
Did Pantani use it? Yes, like everyone else. How much? Pastonesi cites rather high levels. Would he have won otherwise? Yes, if all were on the same fuel. Yet, since Pantani’s death, it has come out that in regards to someone (Armstrong) the UCI kept open a huge umbrella.

To say nothing of the whole of Italy on his frame, and the French who got pi$$ed-off, though not entirely, since they liked to listen to Charlie Parker.

Well written. "Would have he won otherwise? Yes". I agree, though we'll never know just how good he was. His Flo-Jo-like Alpe d'Huez record is irrelevant. The age of EPO took that away from him: the ability to set benchmarks that would forever be looked as references, like Beamon's 8.90m in long jump. How good was he? How great? "On the same fuel" was he 1% or miles better than a clean Virenque :rolleyes: for example? Too bad. One thing for sure: he was the best climber of his generation.

For the second part of me quoting you, the French and Charlie Parker, I didn't get it. Can you explain it to me? :confused:

RIP Marco.
 
Angliru said:
I think your extreme dislike for anything other than the classics has clouded your judgement.:(

Start a thread about Museeuw or Bartoli and you'll see what I think about them.

Though I guess most of you, uneducated cycling fans, don't even know these dopers exist.


Tonton said:
Well written.

Cool. The "everybody used it" syndrom. Easy to put it forward when the memory of Mr Pantaloni is at stake.

Van Hooydonck raced clean. Okay? Frans Maassen raced clean. Gilles Delion raced clean, right? Peter De Clerck raced clean. Jim Van de Laer, ditto.

Every cyclist is a doper? As if they carry in them the plague of doping, just because they have a cycling licence. That's defamatory and very very insulting for some thousands of riders, amateurs or pros around the globe, right?


In the end we'll get to believe that after all EPO is moral. Say it, if you've got the balls to. Reversal of values, while you are at it. :rolleyes:
 
Echoes said:
When he was still alive in 2003 I was already frequenting cycling forums. NOBODY remembered him but die-hard fans. His death changed a lot. "It's better to burn out than to fade away", said Neil Young. I guess it applies for what Pantani has become after his death. A drug-addicted icon.

Even shortly after his death nobody would consider him a top champion from the nineties. It all gradually developed.

The CN article makes me wanna puke. I mean 5 days ago was the 5th anniversary of Frederiek Nolf's departure and nobody got moved :( but Pantani ...

Pantani took dope to the excess and died from it, period. He ain't no example for the youth. May he be forgotten !

Lol Mr Elitist has arrived again. I remember it too, I was a 13y/o ffs and I listened to the radio in bed that night to what happened.
 
Echoes said:
Start a thread about Museeuw or Bartoli and you'll see what I think about them.

Though I guess most of you, uneducated cycling fans, don't even know these dopers exist.




Cool. The "everybody used it" syndrom. Easy to put it forward when the memory of Mr Pantaloni is at stake.

Van Hooydonck raced clean. Okay? Frans Maassen raced clean. Gilles Delion raced clean, right? Peter De Clerck raced clean. Jim Van de Laer, ditto.

Every cyclist is a doper? As if they carry in them the plague of doping, just because they have a cycling licence. That's defamatory and very very insulting for some thousands of riders, amateurs or pros around the globe, right?


In the end we'll get to believe that after all EPO is moral. Say it, if you've got the balls to. Reversal of values, while you are at it. :rolleyes:

I don't see what your comment has to do with my post, where you read that I condone doping. Sorry.
 
Echoes said:
You've just approved of a post that did.

"Did Pantani use it? Yes, like everyone else" Wrong.

Nobody can make such statement.

Nope. I wrote well-written about the piece as a whole, and then I contributed to the thread by making one particular point: we'll never know how good he (and his generation) really was/were. On an even playing field, results may have remained more or less the same. Judging by top-10s in the TdF during Pantani's career, yes, they all doped, with maybe one or two exceptions. Had Pantani climbed the Ad'H in 38 minutes, clean, it would be a benchmark. His 36 minutes are meaningless.

That is my point. My contribution. Unlike you, I contribute. I don't just go out there and criticize. :D My recommendation: get a girlfriend. ;)
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
Visit site
hiero2 said:
Rhub, unless you ARE Gianni Mura, it would be appropriate, and appreciated, if you listed or linked your source on this.

Otherwise, I also add a "chapeau" for putting it up in here.

rhubroma said:

Tonton said:
Well written. "Would have he won otherwise? Yes". I agree, though we'll never know just how good he was. His Flo-Jo-like Alpe d'Huez record is irrelevant. The age of EPO took that away from him: the ability to set benchmarks that would forever be looked as references, like Beamon's 8.90m in long jump. How good was he? How great? "On the same fuel" was he 1% or miles better than a clean Virenque :rolleyes: for example? Too bad. One thing for sure: he was the best climber of his generation.

For the second part of me quoting you, the French and Charlie Parker, I didn't get it. Can you explain it to me? :confused:

RIP Marco.

@Tonton: please notice that Gianni Mura actually wrote that bit - Rhubroma kindly provided a link to the original. It is, indeed, beautiful writing. See the link above, but you'll have to read Italian - or google translate might work.
 
I should say that my views do not entirely coincide with those of Mura. I just thought that in the Italian's typical journalistic fashion he spoke to the heart, rather than the mind and poetically.

Aside from this, the great injustice with doping is that it changes an athlete to varying degrees among the other dopers, such that one never knows his or her real values on the playing field. Thus it is not possible to say that Pantani would have been the climber he was in a clean peloton. However in the dirty one in which he road, he undeniably gave the tifosi something uncommon, unique and special. I find no conflict of interests in reconciling reason with sentiment in this case, that is to disdain the doping that has poisoned the sport, while remembering Marco for the special emotions he gave those that loved watching him while he raced.

This is the spirit, more or less, of Mura's piece.