Dr. Juice said:
Get your facts right. Not you, the one who mentioned 52-61 % in 99.
Cool down. I have mine straight. Never said Pantani had 52-61 in 99, but career-wise when caught. Did he manage to bring it under 50? Yes now and then, and then not (late Giro 99, inner Carerra tests, while laying in hospital after his Torino accident).
Was he ever above 61? Most certainly. There is around 5 papers showing his HcT. So if it fluctuates by almost 10% in competition, on this small sample size, it´s very likely it got up to 64 or more sometimes, before he diluted it down to pass the "health-checks". As we all know it didn´t always work out for him.
That´s the overall problem with people that defend
their doper. They try to twist reality until it fits their POV.
I OTOH am pretty emotionless in this debate. Don´t care about LA nor Pantani. Just compare the facts we have and discuss the matter a bit.
Dr. Juice said:
Don't understand why foxxybrown says he was jacked up almost to death.
Where did I say this?
Dr. Juice said:
I don't get this " 1 minute at every mountain finish". Would have been minutes every stage.
No it wouldn´t. As you certainly know, riders riding alone, while others in slipstream, use more energy.
What I said is that Pantani´s best climb time (at Alpe) was circa 1 minute faster than LAs (Pantani had his best three times between 36.40-37.15; LA 37.36 & 38.03). No more, no less.
On the Ventoux OTOH Pantani "owns"
LA only by some seconds (57.34 vs 57.52 & 57.49 for LA)...
Don´t do cherry picking to satisfy that nonsense that Pantani would have put minutes into LA on every one of the 4 mountain stages in 1999. That´s absurd and you know it.
Dr. Juice said:
Suicidial attack? To compare an ill 80-85% Pantani in 2000 with the one in 99...
Never did compare that.
Dr. Juice said:
Never ever could Lance relie on his teammates to bring him back. If Pantani attacked on the penultimate climb or even before, he would have had to respond himself. 1 vs 1. Far inferior in climbing, he would have blown up while trying to stay on the wheel. Not cracking in 7 years because he never had such an opponent.
You base that on what? Because he prevailed with that style vs the Salvodellis of the world, it auto works against a full prepared by Ferrari Armstrong?
Yikes, it even worked
only once vs Ullrich. In 1998 when his opponent had the infamous Hunger-Ast in terrible weather (BTW; something LA liked, but Ullrich not). Before that incident, Ullrich owned that TdF & and an in-form Pantani, leading him by 3.01 before the hunger stage.
Where was Pantanis super solos vs Ullrich (the one who always lost around 6 mins to LA, except 2003)? Aubisque-Tourmalet-DÀspin-Peyresoude-Stage. A hammer stage. How much did he put into Ullrich? A meh 23 seconds...
And finally, if Pantani was that great allrounder, why o why didn´t he own the TdF before LA came up in 1999?
All I saw and remember is that
LA attacked at the base of the (last) climbs on the
very first TdF high mountain stage (year in year out), riding alone into the sunset, and still putting minutes into his opponents. After that he was sitting on the lead, and now & then putting on another bizarre show and/or destroying the best ITTlers in the world. Again; at the TdF, not the Salvodelli-Gotti-and-what-else Giros...
Pantani in 1999 vs LA: No tiny chance to beat him. Never ever. Maybe one desperate solo ride would have prevailed, only to pay for it the next day.
Dr. Juice said:
The other stages, attacks from 60-70 km out. Solo rides 1 vs 1 with Lance. Somewhere LA would have cracked. Even without cracking 3 minutes every stage when alone vs Pantani for 70 km.
Maybe in your daily PCM game, but not in the real world. Pantani would have not been able to solo ride
every mountain stage, let alone putting 3 minutes into LA at each one of them. Just grotesque assumptions by you.