Most absurd TDF winners

[Tenacious P]

Agree with that. It crossed my mind that Sastre's win is what winning the TDF looks like when you're not juiced? Pure speculation of course but if true maybe we'd see more wins like that if cycling was proper clean?

 

[sublimit]

I was shocked when Riis won the tour, it was too absurd to contemplate.

Armstrong has to be right up there because of the manner of him battering everybody on the climbs.

 

[Hawkwood]

It should be also said that it (salbutamol) was not banned at the time.

I think he had a doctor's note as well. It came up in France where the product was banned at the time. I remember there being a lot of talk at the time as to whether salbutamol could actually make much difference to a non-asthmatic.

 

[Magnus]

Most absurd TDF winners in order..

#1 Lance Armstrong.. couldn't climb a ladder, no experience even contending then wins by 7 min bwahhhhhhaaaaa

#2 Bjarne Riis... Mr 60% indeed... go real fast

#3 Marco Pantani.. is dead

#4 Floyd Landis...bad hip..defrocked

#5 Jan Ulrich....Jim McMahon's lost german brother? Wonder how fat he is now. He should've added Midol to his program.

#6 Miguel Indurain...Too Big Mig.. Could kill all the moutain goats and all arounders at will...Often did not, on purpose

So you just listed every TDF winner from 91-06 (and other posted the 07-09 winners)?

But I suppose you're all right. Every TDF winner is absurd. My first thought when reading the headline was Walkowiak(Edit: but of course walko isn't really typical Clinic material).

 

[sadfitty]

Roger Walkowiak

Edit: Ops, just realised I was in the clinic. Walkowiak wasn't really absurd in that perspective....

It's a tie between Riis and Armstrong then...

 

[Anonymous]

The Pantani double was pretty absurd.

Basso's 2006 Giro was absurd. He wins by 9:18. Riiiggggghhhhhttt.

 

[Digger]

Was Fignon in the race in '87? He was battling injury mostly between 1984 and 1989 as I recall. Anyway, somebody had to win that Tour.

I forgot to add Carlos Sastre. While he was definitely the most deserving winner of all the 2008 contenders, being pretty much the only one of them to make a real attack over three flippin' weeks, the entire race was a pathetic farce of a Tour.

Yes.......enough said.

 

[samerics]

Riis.

From zero to hero in three years, and the way he rode alongside the group, looked at them and then rode off like he was on a Sunday club ride was farcical even then.

 

[Willy_Voet]

Agree with that. It crossed my mind that Sastre's win is what winning the TDF looks like when you're not juiced? Pure speculation of course but if true maybe we'd see more wins like that if cycling was proper clean?

LOlz, you think a rider who came from a Manolo Saiz team to a Bjarne Riis team is winning the TdF clean?!

 

[Nick777]

LOlz, you think a rider who came from a Manolo Saiz team to a Bjarne Riis team is winning the TdF clean?!

You would hope he is clean, but given everything that is coming out, it's pretty hard to argue with that logic.

 

[luigiV]

You would hope he is clean, but given everything that is coming out, it's pretty hard to argue with that logic.

oh no lance will be getting wrestless....i think floyd better go in issolation or get a permanent bodyguard hehe

mr steroid floyd might have to start driving around like the pope in one of those cars with buletproof windows!

 

[Indurain]

Lemond said that epo seems to help the bigger stature riders more than the smaller pantani like riders. Perhaps more blood in the system or something. This is why we saw 70+ kg riders like Indurain, Ullrich, Landis, Armstrong, etc start dominating in the mountains and the timetrials.

Indurain may have been doped but at least he was physically unique and an okay climber before epo (won TdF mountain stages in 87, 89 and 90 I think) and could timetrial well (always the best timetrial time in 87 tour before the real contenders toppled it).

HOwever Armstrong was a completely different story. An Australian commentator talking with Phil Anderson made a comment about Armstrong's superior ability before his cancer. I don't think Phil Anderson likes Armstrong, but he looked down and smiled and then couldn't hold himself back when he said, "before Amstrong's cancer, he couldn't timetrial or climb, no one in a million years would have picked him as a future ture winner". He basically said he was okay in a few classic racers. So Armstrong is the most absurd winner ever.

 

[Roninho]

Remember Evgeni Berzin?

He disappeared pretty much after winning the Giro in 94 at 24 years old.

Not entirely true, he finished 2nd in 95, 10th in 96 and won an TDF stage after the 94 giro. Berzin was more then likely fully doped when he won, but imo his lacklustre results compared to his 94 season had if i recall correctly more to do with motivational problems. He had achieved the big contract and western lifestyle, and seemed more focused on his car dealership then cycling.

 

[Tangled Tango]

So you just listed every TDF winner from 91-06 (and other posted the 07-09 winners)?

But I suppose you're all right. Every TDF winner is absurd. My first thought when reading the headline was Walkowiak(Edit: but of course walko isn't really typical Clinic material).

I was thinking on similar lines. Is this about doping or racing style and type?

What I´d like to know is who wasn´t an absurd TDF winner? What makes one absurd and another not?

If doping is the critirium, than of course they´re all absurd, which to my mind makes the point mute.

If this is also about body types and racing style (which some posts seem to imply) is there really supposed to be a correct type of Tour winner? A correct type racing style for a Tour winner?

Having Pantani on the same list as Indurain, among others makes the list appear to include basically every winner as these two couldn´t be farther apart in physique and racing style. If the absurdness is only about drugs, then OK, but that leaves very few Tour winners off the list.

This is fairly depressing as it is so vastly and completely negative, that it´s hard to believe there is much love of bike racing here. And if one can only love clean bike racing, you may as well never watch another race.

I like many here have come to the conclusion that most of the pro peloton have doped and still dope and will continue to dope to win. Yet I still love to watch races and still keep my eye on various racers whom I root for or follow. The fact that I wouldn´t be able to deny it if you asked me if I think they´re clean, doesn´t lessen my enjoyment of the sport. It is what it is. A lot of those named above were and to some extent still are heros to me. The only one who isn´t is Armstrong and not because he doped, but because of his overt and covert efforts to silence and even hurt those who were brave enough to speak out against doping.

Sorry for the long post. Hope I haven´t offended anyone LA excluded. I guess I love the sport too much to keep from saying something on such a negative thread.

 

[RedheadDane]

In a way you could say every GT winner is absurd! You need to be a little absurd in your head in order to want to ride a bike for around 200 k for 3 freaking weeks! Let alone trying to win!
No matter what anyone say bike riders are crazy! (And with all their knocking-the-head-into-the-ground it's no wonder!)

 

[redtreviso]

I was thinking on similar lines. Is this about doping or racing style and type?

What I´d like to know is who wasn´t an absurd TDF winner? What makes one absurd and another not?

If doping is the critirium, than of course they´re all absurd, which to my mind makes the point mute.

If this is also about body types and racing style (which some posts seem to imply) is there really supposed to be a correct type of Tour winner? A correct type racing style for a Tour winner?

Having Pantani on the same list as Indurain, among others makes the list appear to include basically every winner as these two couldn´t be farther apart in physique and racing style. If the absurdness is only about drugs, then OK, but that leaves very few Tour winners off the list.

This is fairly depressing as it is so vastly and completely negative, that it´s hard to believe there is much love of bike racing here. And if one can only love clean bike racing, you may as well never watch another race.

I like many here have come to the conclusion that most of the pro peloton have doped and still dope and will continue to dope to win. Yet I still love to watch races and still keep my eye on various racers whom I root for or follow. The fact that I wouldn´t be able to deny it if you asked me if I think they´re clean, doesn´t lessen my enjoyment of the sport. It is what it is. A lot of those named above were and to some extent still are heros to me. The only one who isn´t is Armstrong and not because he doped, but because of his overt and covert efforts to silence and even hurt those who were brave enough to speak out against doping.

Sorry for the long post. Hope I haven´t offended anyone LA excluded. I guess I love the sport too much to keep from saying something on such a negative thread.

The order of absurdity is the point..Armstrong wins...Riis was the first truly ridiculous.