Pantani 99 vs Armstrong 99

[Gregga]

i've actually been watching the 2000 Tour this week, and i've been wondering what exactly everyone was using at that Tour. there was rumors of an EPO test, so if we are to believe Lance, he used just one blood bag (presumably before Ventoux) with Hamilton and Livingston. this is also corroborated by Tyler in his book. so how was Lance so good on Hautacam, then? the rest of the team vanished on the Aubisque, but Lance won the stage by about 3 minutes over everyone that he started the climb with (Heras, Virenque, Jimenez, and Beloki started the final climb ahead by a minute or so). and what was Pantani using? do you think he was also using transfusions or was he risking it with EPO? the rest of the race seems relatively clean, although Beloki and Ullrich were most likely using some form of blood vector doping to stay with Lance and Pantani for as long as they did on Ventoux, and obviously everyone was still training with EPO.

That's a very good question...
It seems part of the peloton was afraid of the new test (I clearly remember the medias talked a lot about it, it wasn't only a rumour) and didn't take any risk in the first part of the TdF (Ullrich, Pantani), even though they probably started the race at 49% as they were no OOC testing for EPO. Another part didn't believe in the test and took EPO, like Hervé who was impressive (but get caught for EPO in the following Giro) or Moreau (4th but nowhere in the following TdF, until 2003). In the second part of the TdF, riders like Ullrich, Pantani, Heras were surprisingly stronger, which could mean the had a blood bag in the third week.

Regarding Armstrong, he was clearly 10% stronger than the others on Hautacam, IMO he had 2 blood bags for that TdF, one before Pyrenees, one before Ventoux. Hamilton was not aware of it, but remember in his book :
1/ during the blood donation in June Hamilton had the impression it wasn't Armstrong's first time
2/ Armstrong was already weak before that blood donation, in the Dauphiné, he couldn't follow Hamilton on Ventoux, which IMO means he had already dropped a bag before Dauhiné

So, 2 BB out before, 2 BB in during TdF...
Of course Armstrong is revisiting the story of that TdF, in "the Armstrong lie", he says that the TdF 2000 was "won pre transfusion", meaning he was the strongest anyway, but on Hautacam he clearly had someting the others hadn't.

By the way, maybe transfusions were used before the EPO test :

- In his book, Rendell notices the weird distibution of Pantani's red cells count at Madonna di Campiglio, consistent with a transfusion, which could mean Pantani was already using transfusions in 1999

- in Vayer's "not normal", Jalabert Hct in Ferrari's files in 1997 is 54% one day, 50% the day after, just before the Giro di Lombardia he won... I wonder if the doping scheme post 50% threshold wasn't EPO up to 54% -> one BB out -> one BB in AFTER the UCI vampires test...

- in the Freiburg clinic files, there is a mention of a blood bag tested for doping purpose in 1998 by the Telekom doctors

- Hamilton's testimony of Riis telling him he had 3 BB's in the 1996 TdF

Well, that's a lot of "if" and "maybe", it seems reality was far more complex than we believe.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

- In his book, Rendell notices the weird distibution of Pantani's red cells count at Madonna di Campiglio, consistent with a transfusion, which could mean Pantani was already using transfusions in 1999.

Couldnt that be due to the massive dilluting of the blood with lots of water? Wasnt that where that whole CONI campaign was all about? You know, where mister clean Andrea Tafi was part of.

But good point, a bloodbag would lower ones htc. Didnt help Bjarne a lot according to Jeff d'Hondt though...

 

[Berzin]

Hamilton's testimony of Riis telling him he had 3 BB's in the 1996 TdF

The problem with anecdotal evidence is exactly that.

Riis never took any transfusions during his 1996 Tour win. He was doing massive amounts of EPO, but transfusions were not on the wine list.

As for the 2000 Tour, we can only speculate as to what was going on. Ferrari had insider knowledge of what the labs were doing. He could have told Armstrong "don't worry about the test. It won't be ready for the Tour. Let the rumor circulate so you can have an extra advantage".

 

[Netserk]

The problem with anecdotal evidence is exactly that.

Riis never took any transfusions during his 1996 Tour win. He was doing massive amounts of EPO, but transfusions were not on the wine list.

Is that an opinion or fact?

 

[Futuroscope]

Pantani 2000 at TDF wasn't close to his form at the Giro in 99. I also think people are making a big miscalculation when they think that Lance could have mentally destroyed a Pantani in top shape. I think exactly the reverse might have happened. Armstrong would have tried to chase Pantani and would have gotten blown up in the mountains.

Pantani was mentally fragile but that does NOT apply to all situations. A Pantani who is feeling good, riding good and without getting thrown out of the 99 Giro is a completely different beast compared to a broken man (as he already was in 2000). Let's not forget that Pantani had connections in the peloton and also had the ability to play mindgames with his opponents.

 

[Futuroscope]

Someone said that Armstrong would have controlled Pantani the same way as Indurain did. To this I have to say that Armstrong was a different rider compared to Indurain, not the same psyche. With his ego and aggressive riding style I find it likely he would have blown up in the mountains if he tried to go head to head with Pantani.

Also a Pantani in his 99 shape is a different thing than a young Pantani in 94-95. In 99 he was better in the TT and better in the mountains.

 

[Gregga]

Couldnt that be due to the massive dilluting of the blood with lots of water? Wasnt that where that whole CONI campaign was all about? You know, where mister clean Andrea Tafi was part of.

But good point, a bloodbag would lower ones htc. Didnt help Bjarne a lot according to Jeff d'Hondt though...

Abnormal red cells distribution = mixed population of small and big red cells, which can not occur if your red cells are growing "normally". Adding water (ie plasma or saline infusion) would change the red cell/volume ratio (Hct), but not the distribution.

But, yes, these values in Rendell's book are from the CONI program "I don't risk my health" during the 2000 season. His retyc values after TdF 2000 were also close to zero, as it happens after a reinfusion.

Were Riis' BBs real or not, I don't care, maybe it's was just for manipulating Tyler, but when I read that I found it quite consistent with the TdF 96 story : Riis getting stronger every day when all the others were also doing EPO, Riis attacking from the start in the (shorten) Sestriere stage, as if he knew he "had to" use his fresh ammunitions, Riis fading in the final ITT, just like Armstrong after his last BB in 2000...

 

[Cloxxki]

Has the HemAssist story been debunked, that it's not being mentioned here are an explanation? Or was it simply not yet available at this time?

If Armstrong had a limited supply of HA, and it was kept a higher level of secret than his first blood bags, he may well have used it to have a bit extra when he felt he needed to make up time, and the stage ahead would pose a great opportunity (bad weather and climbs) to make a one-man-show of it.

 

[Futuroscope]

Has the HemAssist story been debunked, that it's not being mentioned here are an explanation? Or was it simply not yet available at this time?

If Armstrong had a limited supply of HA, and it was kept a higher level of secret than his first blood bags, he may well have used it to have a bit extra when he felt he needed to make up time, and the stage ahead would pose a great opportunity (bad weather and climbs) to make a one-man-show of it.

I think Armstrong had access to stuff that his rivals didn't. That is how he got that extra edge on some stages.

 

[McLovin]

2000 Hautacam seems to me a lot more impressive than any of his other wins in the mountains. Either Ullrich & co were all paniagua, either Armstrong came with something new or something the other guys were afraid to use at that point. All that talk about Ullrich and bad weather are nonsense. Maybe some excuse for bad bags or something. He won his gold in Sidney on rainy weather. There is a lot more rain in Germany than in Texas for God's sakes.
As to the topic, it's to bad we missed a 99 Tour with Ullrich, Armstrong and Pantani, all without a fear of using EPO. (sounds sad)

 

[Futuroscope]

Sometimes I really miss the all out EPO years.

 

[McLovin]

Sometimes I really miss the all out EPO years.

Not so much if you think from a clean rider perspective.

 

[jens_attacks]

Sometimes I really miss the all out EPO years.

imo the situation was much better in 1994-1998 years than after. because just like you see now, uci can select who tests positive and who not and gives a lot of power. 2000 hautacam was probably one of the first big advantages lance had because the other feared something. it was much simple when there wasn't a test for epo. put a hemoglobin barrier and that's it.

 

[Futuroscope]

Not so much if you think from a clean rider perspective.

Agreed, which is one reason (there are several other reasons too) why I said 'sometimes'

 

[Futuroscope]

imo the situation was much better in 1994-1998 years than after. because just like you see now, uci can select who tests positive and who not and gives a lot of power. 2000 hautacam was probably one of the first big advantages lance had because the other feared something. it was much simple when there wasn't a test for epo. put a hemoglobin barrier and that's it.

Yes, the EPO era can be divided into different phases. Before 94 you had the early adopter phase, 94-98 you had a stabilization phase. Then you had Festina in 98, which lead to several complications (one being french riders couldn't be competitive anymore). Then you have the armstrong era with his political protection and I would also argue that he had access to stuff that others didn't. He also really benefited from working with Ferrari. Not everyone had access to that type of expertise. This was really valuable when they started with EPO testing.

 

[Granville57]

How should Lance have beaten Pantani as he wasn't a time trialer or a climber before?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Armstrong by several minutes.

If Marco had skipped the '99 Giro and focused all on the Tour, he still likely would have finished second. Yes, Marco was destroying everyone in the mountains in the '99 Giro and had all three jerseys after an insanely long 7 hour epic mountain stage. But there simply were no stages like that in the '99 Tour that makes me think he could have made up minutes on LA he would have lost in the ITTs.

 

[MonkeyFace]

Armstrong by several minutes.

If Marco had skipped the '99 Giro and focused all on the Tour, he still likely would have finished second. Yes, Marco was destroying everyone in the mountains in the '99 Giro and had all three jerseys after an insanely long 7 hour epic mountain stage. But there simply were no stages like that in the '99 Tour that makes me think he could have made up minutes on LA he would have lost in the ITTs.

Armstrong barely "beat" Zulle in 99 if you take into account that Armstrong got a several minute lead on him due to many getting held up when water started flowing over a bridge. As good as Zulle was, 99 Pantani would beat Armstrong unless he got held up at the bridge.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

I think it´s pretty simple: If Ullrich couldn´t beat LA on full fuel in 5 tries, there is no way Pantani wins vs LA in 1999. Even if there was 0 km of ITTs. So now next thread please...

ullrich never tried on full fuel against lance until 2003 when despite overweight and lack of form and an illness he nealry beat the uniballer. pantani would've smoked lance pre-cocaine

 

[deValtos]

Armstrong barely "beat" Zulle in 99 if you take into account that Armstrong got a several minute lead on him due to many getting held up when water started flowing over a bridge. As good as Zulle was, 99 Pantani would beat Armstrong unless he got held up at the bridge.

Armstrong "barely" beat Zulle (taking out the time he lost at the passage du gois) because Zulle was also a monster at the TT's.

Go back and take a look at the 1999 route, there would be an uproar if a course like that was annouced as a future route.

3 MTF's and 4 "hilly" stages + 120km of ITT's ... compared to say 2014 where we had 5 MTF's and 5 "hilly" stages + 54km of ITT.

An in form Wiggins would've had more chance than an in form Pantani.

 

[jens_attacks]

guys don't forget that lance was "green" for 1999 tour in terms of wattage. portoleau and vayer confirm it. the only after indurain 1992 if i remember right
in my opinion again ,with the 1999 giro form, marco would have absolutely slaughtered lance even with that route. keeping in mind that lance had quite a human team with livingston and tyler, marco could have attack from far away and win easily minutes after minutes. i don't think lance would have big advantages in the itt's anyway

 

[roundabout]

Didn't he take something like 5 minutes out of Olano in tt's?

Ok, Olano crashed in the first, but as far as I remember it did not cost him that much time.

 

[kingjr]

Didn't he take something like 5 minutes out of Olano in tt's?

Ok, Olano crashed in the first, but as far as I remember it did not cost him that much time.

When was Olano ever any good in the Tour anyways after 97.

 

[roundabout]

When was Olano ever any good in the Tour anyways after 97.

He was 5th and 6th or something like that in the 2 TTs that year. Pantani would have been super jacked up to achieve that.

Edit: 4th and 6th after looking it up

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

pantani would've smoked lance pre-cocaine

No he wouldn´t. His Hct was between 52 and 61 recorded. You can´t get much higher than this. So what he does after losing minutes to LA in TTs? Bringing his Hct up to 70% or what?
As Alpe said, LA by several minutes.... even in 99, pre-coke, pre-depression.