Mediocrity Era!

[buckwheat]

In the book, Fignon also admitted to doping, describing drug-taking in the 1980s as widespread but not organized, often recreational rather than performance-enhancing -- aided by the strong Colombian involvement in cycling at the time, accompanied by large quantities of cocaine.

He said doping in cycling was revolutionized by the arrival of the blood-booster EPO in the early '90s. Fignon said he refused to take it -- and retired from competition in 1993 when he realized that mediocre riders were now keeping up with him.



Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...ap/index.html?eref=twitter_feed#ixzz0yD7stNGw

 

[BikeCentric]

RIP Fignon, one of the last true champions prior to EPO destroying the sport.

 

[ricara]

Fignon and EPO

He said doping in cycling was revolutionized by the arrival of the blood-booster EPO in the early '90s. Fignon said he refused to take it -- and retired from competition in 1993 when he realized that mediocre riders were now keeping up with him.

Here's the full details from an interview in 2005:

"In 1993, I knew that I was in great form. There was a mountain stage to Val d'Isère, over the Télégraphe and Galibier. I felt fantastic, and attacked at the foot of the Galibier. I felt I was climbing well.

"But in the blink of an eye, 30 riders had come past me, and I believed I was in good form, 30 riders, just like that. And after that I was riding with people I did not believe I would ever be riding with in the mountains. People who were riding on EPO," he says.

Full interview at:

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/497582/laurent-fignon-my-way-or-the-fairway.html

 

[hrotha]

When I started watching cycling I obviously didn't know anything about doping, I knew LeMond and Fignon were big names and very important riders and I couldn't help but laugh at them because of the huge chasm between their reputations and their performance (I'm talking of 1992-1993 here, mostly). I feel kind of bad about that now that I know why they weren't performing.

 

[Escarabajo]

Here's the full details from an interview in 2005:

"In 1993, I knew that I was in great form. There was a mountain stage to Val d'Isère, over the Télégraphe and Galibier. I felt fantastic, and attacked at the foot of the Galibier. I felt I was climbing well.

"But in the blink of an eye, 30 riders had come past me, and I believed I was in good form, 30 riders, just like that. And after that I was riding with people I did not believe I would ever be riding with in the mountains. People who were riding on EPO," he says.

Full interview at:

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/497582/laurent-fignon-my-way-or-the-fairway.html

Excellent interview. Thanks.

Just out of curiosity: This is the list of riders that rode him off and that rode with him up the mountain. Some of them were on EPO but it sounded like there were some that he knew by heart had no business climbing those hills:

Major Ascents: Glandon, Télégraphe, Galibier

1. Tony Rominger: 5hr 28min 52sec
2. Alvaro Mejia s.t.
3. Miguel Indurain s.t.
4. Andy Hampsten @ 1min 13sec
5. Zenon Jaskula s.t.
6. Erik Breukink @ 3min 32sec
7. Oliviero Rincon s.t.
8. Richard Virenque @ 4min 35sec
9. Roberto Conti s.t.
10. Javier Mauleon s.t
11. A. Martin @ 4' 37"
12 Mottet @ 5’ 04”
13. Delgado
14. Claveyrolat
15. Cubino
16. Bourguinon @ 6’ 04”
17. Martinez @ 6’ 57”
18. Zulle
19. Riis @ 7’ 21”
20 Fignon @ 7’ 42”
21 Bugno
22. Pillon
23. Dojwa
24. Gonzalez Arrieta
25. Rondon
26. Elli
27 Roche @ 8’ 49”
28. Boyer
29. Chiapucci
30. Alcala
31. Echave
32. Madouas
33. Poulnikov
34. Unzaga
35. Caritoux @ 10’ 33”

I think that one of the riders he was referring to was Riis, his friend. There were some others that were ahead of him that were known to be talented before 1990, but we are looking for the big a heavy ones that for almost 90 years of history could never climb.

 

[Cloxxki]

RIP Fignon, lots of respect for saying no! You're be remembered a hero of the sport.

If Riis lost so much time there, I am to expect he may have been relatively clean there, compared to his TdF winning season. Else, few of the ones in that group kept riding over the next years (broken by EPO?), or forgot how to use it properly.

If Fignon felt overwhelmed by the group overtaking him, sure, it was fueled by EPO mostly. But one or two clean riders may have needed a large fast group to hand on to, and Fignon himself may have lost some moral, fighting against spiked lions. Do you run your fastest when you're bluffing it out with a motorbike at the trafic lights? All the way to the next block?

 

[issoisso]

It was the EPO age. Odd things happened. Mediocre riders became excellent. Etc.

The most extreme case I can think of was probably Faustini. Turns pro at 28, immediately finishes Top10 at the Giro and Top 5 at the Vuelta, then the 50% cutoff comes in, he has 2 seasons of mediocrity and retires.

It's hard to find an odder career than that.

 

[Squares]

Everything said by Fignon could be repeated by Indurain...

He could say that in 1996, he felt good and then suddenly Riis and Ullrich were flying past him up the climbs. However, in Indurain's case - it has been proven by Riis' admission of doping and the association of Ullrich to the same, that Indurain was actually beaten in 1996 because he refused to dope and others readily embraced EPO.

 

[sida-mot]

Everything said by Fignon could be repeated by Indurain...

He could say that in 1996, he felt good and then suddenly Riis and Ullrich were flying past him up the climbs. However, in Indurain's case - it has been proven by Riis' admission of doping and the association of Ullrich to the same, that Indurain was actually beaten in 1996 because he refused to dope and others readily embraced EPO.

So if you're beaten by those that dope it proves that you are clean? No. Sorry it doesn't work that way.

 

[Arnout]

Indurain will always be the big questionmark of the 90s. And I don't want to know anything about him taking or not taking drugs.

 

[The Hitch]

im pretty certain indurain did dope, considering he dominated in that era, and we know how much of an advantage epo can give.

As for fignon, didnt he admit to taking some sort of (admitadly far lighter) peds?

if so. Why wouldnt he take epo. (the evidence does point to the fact that he didnt, and i applaud him for it, but why would someone take other peds then not move up to epo?)

 

[hrotha]

im pretty certain indurain did dope, considering he dominated in that era, and we know how much of an advantage epo can give.

As for fignon, didnt he admit to taking some sort of (admitadly far lighter) peds?

if so. Why wouldnt he take epo. (the evidence does point to the fact that he didnt, and i applaud him for it, but why would someone take other peds then not move up to epo?)

EPO was new and scary. Riders in the mid and late 90s had grown up with EPO so for them it wasn't a big deal, but riders from the 80s hadn't. They had their programs with which they had been doing fine, they probably didn't know how much of an advantage EPO gave and by the time they realized they were old and probably decided it wasn't worth it.

 

[python]

there could be several reasons why the 'old guard' who weren't immune to other peds did not jump on the epo wagon. hrotha covered the main one - the newness novelty as the epo was making its way into the peloton just about when the careers of the old guard were expiring - late 80s, early 90s.

another likely reason was the strong suspicion re deaths of the early users. these kinds of rumours spread in the peloton very quickly.

lastly, not everyone has the same confidence in shady medical advisers or shares love of needles. i heard some pros avoid needles and unlike the old peds, epo can not be ingested. it has to be injected.

overall, as zorzolli report indicated it takes 1-2 years for a new blood doping method to penetrate the peloton sufficiently so that it shows up in monitored blood values

 

[Squares]

So if you're beaten by those that dope it proves that you are clean? No. Sorry it doesn't work that way.

So, then by your application of logic, then Fignon is full of crap when he says that those that were out riding him were on EPO and he was not.

 

[hrotha]

So, then by your application of logic, then Fignon is full of crap when he says that those that were out riding him were on EPO and he was not.

You're not very good at logic.

 

[movingtarget]

im pretty certain indurain did dope, considering he dominated in that era, and we know how much of an advantage epo can give.

As for fignon, didnt he admit to taking some sort of (admitadly far lighter) peds?

if so. Why wouldnt he take epo. (the evidence does point to the fact that he didnt, and i applaud him for it, but why would someone take other peds then not move up to epo?)

Fignon was no saint but he was a great rider and an outspoken critic of professional cycling. As for Indurain, he was such a good time triallist and the time trials in those days were not usually the mickey mouse one's they have now. So he dominated the time trial and could climb as well as most of the elite and also had a good team with him. Plus he was supposed to have an incredible lung capacity. He was also an intelligent rider who was often dropped by people like Rominger in the mountains but always found his own rhythm and usually did not lose enough time to matter. I don't see why a dominant rider should be automatically tagged as a doper. Also I am a bit tired of hearing the phrase "that era," as if to say one era was worse than another as far as doping is concerned. It's all guesswork. People were doping long before Fignon's era and for years after up till now. Riders could be using something new, now and we would not know. People also assume that because a rider is not winning, he is not doping. If Armstrong had won three TDF's instead of seven, would he be hated as much ? I doubt it, even though it does not prove one way or the other that he was doping.

 

[Escarabajo]

... Also I am a bit tired of hearing the phrase "that era," as if to say one era was worse than another as far as doping is concerned. It's all guesswork. People were doping long before Fignon's era and for years after up till now. ..

??????

Again, does amphetamines give the same advantage as to EPO?

If no, then we can call it "that era".

 

[Escarabajo]

EPO was new and scary. Riders in the mid and late 90s had grown up with EPO so for them it wasn't a big deal, but riders from the 80s hadn't. They had their programs with which they had been doing fine, they probably didn't know how much of an advantage EPO gave and by the time they realized they were old and probably decided it wasn't worth it.

there could be several reasons why the 'old guard' who weren't immune to other peds did not jump on the epo wagon. hrotha covered the main one - the newness novelty as the epo was making its way into the peloton just about when the careers of the old guard were expiring - late 80s, early 90s.

another likely reason was the strong suspicion re deaths of the early users. these kinds of rumours spread in the peloton very quickly.

lastly, not everyone has the same confidence in shady medical advisers or shares love of needles. i heard some pros avoid needles and unlike the old peds, epo can not be ingested. it has to be injected.

overall, as zorzolli report indicated it takes 1-2 years for a new blood doping method to penetrate the peloton sufficiently so that it shows up in monitored blood values

+1. very good explanations.

Don’t forget that as you grow older you become more stubborn. Natural aging.

Some of the riders that retire in 93 or the following year: Hampsten, Herrera, Fignon, Delgado, Parra, Mottet, maybe Millar, Roche (He took EPO).

It looks like 1980 riders did not like needles.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Oh, methinks Miguel Indurain took a little sumphin sumphin too.

Miguelón was asked by José María García, a well-known sports radio commentator in Spain, right after the Navarrean's retirement and just as the Festina affair was in its full "glory", point blank: "Miguel, did you take EPO or any other performance enhancing substance during the 5 Tour de France you won?". To which he replied with a "Next question please". JMG asked him again, and Indurain replied with "No, no, no quiero decir nada sobre el asunto conque... siguiente pregunta por favor", which translates to "No, no, no I do not want to say anything on the subject so... next question please".

Although he didn't say anything... we can honestly say that Indurain took PEDs between 91 and 95. I haven't the slightest of doubt.

 

[L'arriviste]

Oh, methinks Miguel Indurain took a little sumphin sumphin too.

Miguelón was asked by José María García, a well-known sports radio commentator in Spain, right after the Navarrean's retirement and just as the Festina affair was in its full "glory", point blank: "Miguel, did you take EPO or any other performance enhancing substance during the 5 Tour de France you won?". To which he replied with a "Next question please". JMG asked him again, and Indurain replied with "No, no, no quiero decir nada sobre el asunto conque... siguiente pregunta por favor", which translates to "No, no, no I do not want to say anything on the subject so... next question please".

Although he didn't say anything... we can honestly say that Indurain took PEDs between 91 and 95. I haven't the slightest of doubt.

Not suggesting either way, but what a difference deleting a full stop (or period, if you prefer) could make for the career of a wonky journo: "No, no, no. I do not want to say anything on the subject so ... next question please."

 

[Señor_Contador]

And please, those of you who think Greg Lemond did not take certain things too... put down the crack pipe!

His entire moral superiority trip, I bet, is based on the fact that he was (comparatively) chewing on coca leaves, while this new generation was shooting up heroin, smoking crack and doing meth.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Not suggesting either way, but what a difference deleting a full stop (or period, if you prefer) could make for the career of a wonky journo: "No, no, no. I do not want to say anything on the subject so ... next question please."

No, there was no pause when Miguel said it, that's why you do not see a period there. BTW, he responded to all the doping questions in a manner that was very uncharacteristical of him: Very quickly, as though he was talking about something he did not feel comfortable talking about (nervous perhaps).

 

[Escarabajo]

And please, those of you who think Greg Lemond did not take certain things too... put down the crack pipe!

His entire moral superiority trip, I bet, is based on the fact that he was (comparatively) chewing on coca leaves, while this new generation was shooting up heroin, smoking crack and doing meth.

Who said that?

Why are you upset?

Why are we discussing Greg Lemond performances again, like for the million time????

 

[Señor_Contador]

Who said that?

Why are you upset?

Why are we discussing Greg Lemond performances again, like for the million time????

1. Greg LeMond.

2. Moi? Upset? I'm here to talk about cycling and anything related to cycling, not about how I feel. If I want to do that I'll go to Dr. Phil's website.

3. Chill out dude.

 

[kurtinsc]

Everything said by Fignon could be repeated by Indurain...

He could say that in 1996, he felt good and then suddenly Riis and Ullrich were flying past him up the climbs. However, in Indurain's case - it has been proven by Riis' admission of doping and the association of Ullrich to the same, that Indurain was actually beaten in 1996 because he refused to dope and others readily embraced EPO.

Too much smoke with Indurain to think he's clean.

I'm betting neither Lemond nor Fignon would ever defend Indurain as not using EPO.