• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Random French guys ripping up the Tour

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
frenchfry said:
I disagree.

He maybe didn't come back to the same level as pre-Festina, but I have no doubt that he was doped right to the end. He won Paris - Tours in 2001 at the height of the dope-fest years and on a team that was no stranger to the needle, no way he did that clean. He was like his buddy Pascal Hervé, he would do anything to win and especially anything to stay in the limelight.

Then again I really dislike Virenque, both the person and the doper-cyclist, so might not be totally objective.

The mosquito video:

http://www.meltybuzz.fr/les-guignols-nadal-n-a-pas-du-tout-aime-les-galerie-237824-769402.html
Thanks for the video. A lot of folks will have a good laugh if they haven't watched it already.

Virenque is polarizing: you hate him or you love him. I was a fan of his, so my objectivity may be challenged as well :eek:. But looking at facts, I see a different post ban Virenque. Before, he could drop most big guns 'a la pedale', i.e. dropping JU and LA (in 2000 I think). After, he had to be in breakaways to stand a chance. In 2002, he wins on the Ventoux, but lost like 3 minutes in the final climb. that was a different Virenque.

Finally, in 'Not Normal', the data shows performances that seem less 'mutant' than his competition in the late '90s. One can only speculate how good he would have been clean against clean riders.
 
Mar 13, 2009
2,373
0
0
difdauf said:
Bull****, he was in no team for Paris Tour, it was a one time trial. How could he have take advantage of any team doping policy ? And even if he did, it would require like several trucks full of doping products for Contador to win Paris-Tours without team or racing days. You have to respect that even if you don't like him which is understandable.

You probably don't know what Virenque really get through to think that he could have dopped after 2001. He paid more for doping than no one ever did. The mosquito video is only one among hundreds, his life becomes hell because of doping, you really think he tried to fix that by doping more ? There is only one Ricco.
You appear to be confused about a lot of things, so I am not even going to try to reply.
 
Mar 13, 2009
2,373
0
0
Tonton said:
Thanks for the video. A lot of folks will have a good laugh if they haven't watched it already.

Virenque is polarizing: you hate him or you love him. I was a fan of his, so my objectivity may be challenged as well :eek:. But looking at facts, I see a different post ban Virenque. Before, he could drop most big guns 'a la pedale', i.e. dropping JU and LA (in 2000 I think). After, he had to be in breakaways to stand a chance. In 2002, he wins on the Ventoux, but lost like 3 minutes in the final climb. that was a different Virenque.

Finally, in 'Not Normal', the data shows performances that seem less 'mutant' than his competition in the late '90s. One can only speculate how good he would have been clean against clean riders.
I see what you are getting at, and you have a point. I still believe that Virenque was always doped just because I thing that was the kind of person he is (thus my reference to Hervé, who was as unrepentant a doper as you will ever meet). For me he never really admitted doping, he only stopped denying when it became so ridiculous that he didn't have any choice.

Was he really talented? Unfortunately, because of doping, we will never know, the same applys to almost successful athletes.
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
thehog said:
3 month ban I think he got? Off season as well. Threat of jail wasn't very nice though.
Virenque trying to be the French David Millar.........

The threat of sharing a shower in one France's gaols was the only thing that made Virenque admit to his doping. That he has not been stripped of his polka dots is another joke the sport keeps telling.......
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
difdauf said:
Maybe but that's still more than anyone else.
Really? really? Virenque paid back all the money he won by cheating? He gave back all those jerseys he won? He has no career in the sport? He is not lauded by the sport and his back slapped every July?

Plenty have had worse than Virenque, Landis, Ricco, Jascke, Kohl, Manzano never mind those that died from EPO.
 
thehog said:
3 month ban I think he got? Off season as well. Threat of jail wasn't very nice though.
I think that he got an 11 months ban: he missed the very end of 2000 and came back three weeks before Paris Tours. Not much, considering that 2 years is/was the usual price to pay.
 
Benotti69 said:
Virenque trying to be the French David Millar.........

The threat of sharing a shower in one France's gaols was the only thing that made Virenque admit to his doping. That he has not been stripped of his polka dots is another joke the sport keeps telling.......
I didn't get the David Millar thing.

True, when testifying, his only way out of jail was to sing. And he sang. Otherwise, he could have faced time for what was basically being part of a drug trafficking organization. :eek:

The investigation and sanctions were with regards to dope in the '98 TdF. That he kept jerseys and wins for other years was normal from in that regard.

That he (or Riis, Vino, et caetera) remain in the business bothers me more. ASO could simply decide not to give them credentials/passes, thus making it impossible for them to cover/work the TdF. There won't be clean cycling until the good guys run it.
 
Tonton said:
I didn't get the David Millar thing.

True, when testifying, his only way out of jail was to sing. And he sang. Otherwise, he could have faced time for what was basically being part of a drug trafficking organization. :eek:

The investigation and sanctions were with regards to dope in the '98 TdF. That he kept jerseys and wins for other years was normal from in that regard.

That he (or Riis, Vino, et caetera) remain in the business bothers me more. ASO could simply decide not to give them credentials/passes, thus making it impossible for them to cover/work the TdF. There won't be clean cycling until the good guys run it.
His Saint David moment;

The 200 or so pages of Ma Vérité camouflage this dodgy logic [that Virenque never took drugs because he was never caught taking drugs] with sometimes justifiable grievances against the breaches of confidence that have fed the press since the scandal broke. But they also skirt the substantive issues with tedious consistency. Readers after la vérité won't find it in Ma Vérité and fans who have invested emotions in Virenque's sporting career deserve better. If he's innocent, how does Virenque counter the accusations against him coming from all quarters? The answer is: he doesn't even attempt to. Virenque pathetically observes the peloton's custom of keeping mum: he never mentions coming into contact with doping practices, directly or indirectly. He doesn't describe techniques or list substances. He doesn't name names... he carries on as if the problem didn't exist. After all that has happened in the past year, there can be only one reason to buy a book by Richard Virenque: to read a detailed denial of involvement in doping, or a full, contrite confession. Ma Vérité has neither: and integrity is virtually undetectable too."
 
Jul 7, 2014
127
0
0
Benotti69 said:
Really? really? Virenque paid back all the money he won by cheating? He gave back all those jerseys he won? He has no career in the sport? He is not lauded by the sport and his back slapped every July?

Plenty have had worse than Virenque, Landis, Ricco, Jascke, Kohl, Manzano never mind those that died from EPO.
He has been the shame of a whole nation during several years, every day in every media, one of the main subject of joke in every schoolyard. That's not for nothing that a guy post one of this 15 years old video, Virenque's guignol is more famous in France than the real one.

His ban was less than one year but in fact it was more than that as between 1998 and 2000 he just tried to race through the crazyness around him. He learnt he would do the tour 99 one day before the start and had to come with a bodyguard. That's not really racing.

But must of all, he is the first real doping "case". Before him, doping wasn't really bad, no one really tried to prevent it before. If there weren't radar on the roads, you would probably be happy to try to reach the max speed of your new car and wouldn't think that's that bad. Every one do it and no one say anything, that has to be legit. It's easy to say 15 years later, "Oh what an awful cheater !".

Virenque was just the fuse, cycling used when people discovered cyclists were all cheaters. Ironically his former teamates zulle and Dufaux (suspended during winter) finished 2nd and 4th of the tour 99 behind Armstrong while all the world was flaming Virenque. The renew of cycling they said, the cheaters out !

You can't compare Virenque to Landis, Ricco or Armstrong. Those guys were trying to **** a system that was actually fighting doping. They prevent things to get better when things could have changed. It's easy for Millar to teach others lessons, should i recall that he was caught in 2004, 6 years after Festina, but yes it must be system's fault. Like Armstrong, he didn't have choice. He didn't know that was bad.

This 2000's generation had choice, they just didn't take it. 90's hadn't. That was arms race without any rules until the bubble exploded in 98.
 
Jul 11, 2013
2,656
0
0
difdauf said:
He has been the shame of a whole nation during several years, every day in every media, one of the main subject of joke in every schoolyard. That's not for nothing that a guy post one of this 15 years old video, Virenque's guignol is more famous in France than the real one.

His ban was less than one year but in fact it was more than that as between 1998 and 2000 he just tried to race through the crazyness around him. He learnt he would do the tour 99 one day before the start and had to come with a bodyguard. That's not really racing.

But must of all, he is the first real doping "case". Before him, doping wasn't really bad, no one really tried to prevent it before. If there weren't radar on the roads, you would probably be happy to try to reach the max speed of your new car and wouldn't think that's that bad. Every one do it and no one say anything, that has to be legit. It's easy to say 15 years later, "Oh what an awful cheater !".

Virenque was just the fuse, cycling used when people discovered cyclists were all cheaters. Ironically his former teamates zulle and Dufaux (suspended during winter) finished 2nd and 4th of the tour 99 behind Armstrong while all the world was flaming Virenque. The renew of cycling they said, the cheaters out !

You can't compare Virenque to Landis, Ricco or Armstrong. Those guys were trying to **** a system that was actually fighting doping. They prevent things to get better when things could have changed. It's easy for Millar to teach others lessons, should i recall that he was caught in 2004, 6 years after Festina, but yes it must be system's fault. Like Armstrong, he didn't have choice. He didn't know that was bad.

This 2000's generation had choice, they just didn't take it. 90's hadn't. That was arms race without any rules until the bubble exploded in 98.
What is the definition of choice in this instance?
Riis perfected his training and doping skills over years to beat a Indurain on the decline...
UCI practically sanctioned LA's regime after the Ullrich/pantani years right?
So what choice do you have if you want to provide your family with an income that will last longer then your carreer? Especially when you've seen others getting, what now looks like a "free pass".......
How many young and hopeful riders sacrificed their education and other paths to pursue the dream of beeing a professional only to find that there is no way of competing for real without doping in some way..
Many of these finally ended up in a situation which you describe as a choice.. I beg to differ on the meaning of the word in this context... The human beeing is not bulild as a perfect in the sence of morales and resiliense, nor should we be as it would make our lives rationallly boring hence removing the "thrill" of life to many..

Doping is wrong.. But the puerpertraders are not only the riders and possibly even more the governing agencies and the cycling community turning the blind eye because of the entertainment value that doping also provides...

To the point........

The discussion of this Tour beeing cleaner is superficial..
We don't know and never will.. Why?.... Because it's impossible to prove cleanliness... And that is sad..

If I was a major (unscrupulous) factor in this sport with it's history -I would speculate as to how I could dope without seeming to dope...
So are we all beeing hold for fools just because the two riders with the craziest performances are out?

Someone on this board called the competition to Nibali awful...
I think we might be contributing to the doping issues with these kind of statements..

On a last note, yes they might be cleaner, but that also yelds into superficial results (because peleton is not all clean) so practically we are screwed..

All in my opinion
(and a lot of it was not directly in cohesion with your post, forgive me)

EDIT: Thought this was the "most believable Tour in years thread" apologies...
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
difdauf said:
He has been the shame of a whole nation during several years, every day in every media, one of the main subject of joke in every schoolyard. That's not for nothing that a guy post one of this 15 years old video, Virenque's guignol is more famous in France than the real one.

His ban was less than one year but in fact it was more than that as between 1998 and 2000 he just tried to race through the crazyness around him. He learnt he would do the tour 99 one day before the start and had to come with a bodyguard. That's not really racing.

But must of all, he is the first real doping "case". Before him, doping wasn't really bad, no one really tried to prevent it before. If there weren't radar on the roads, you would probably be happy to try to reach the max speed of your new car and wouldn't think that's that bad. Every one do it and no one say anything, that has to be legit. It's easy to say 15 years later, "Oh what an awful cheater !".

Virenque was just the fuse, cycling used when people discovered cyclists were all cheaters. Ironically his former teamates zulle and Dufaux (suspended during winter) finished 2nd and 4th of the tour 99 behind Armstrong while all the world was flaming Virenque. The renew of cycling they said, the cheaters out !

You can't compare Virenque to Landis, Ricco or Armstrong. Those guys were trying to **** a system that was actually fighting doping. They prevent things to get better when things could have changed. It's easy for Millar to teach others lessons, should i recall that he was caught in 2004, 6 years after Festina, but yes it must be system's fault. Like Armstrong, he didn't have choice. He didn't know that was bad.

This 2000's generation had choice, they just didn't take it. 90's hadn't. That was arms race without any rules until the bubble exploded in 98.
Virenque never suffered for his doping. 3 polka dots jersey wins, a day in yellow and 4 stage wins from 99-04 and definitely not done on panyagua.

Virenque suffered, yeah like a unrepentant doper he suffered.

Thierry Ardisson, asked Virenque: "If you were sure of winning the Tour by being doped but knew you would not get caught, would you do it?"

Virenque replied:

"Win the Tour doped, but without getting caught? Yes."

Tells you all you need to know. Virenque was photographed on a French team bus the other day, all smiles from everyone.......
 
Aug 31, 2012
5,221
0
0
Benotti69 said:
Thierry Ardisson, asked Virenque: "If you were sure of winning the Tour by being doped but knew you would not get caught, would you do it?"

Virenque replied:

"Win the Tour doped, but without getting caught? Yes."

Tells you all you need to know.
It doesn't tell you much. This type of question never does.

It would have been hilarious had he answered "no" given that he actually doped to achieve lesser goals, without knowing he'd achieve them and without knowing wouldn't get caught.

Caught dopers say yes. Teflon dopers think yes and say no. Many clean riders think yes and say no.
 
Aug 3, 2009
3,045
0
0
Tonton said:
Yes, I remember reading a few excerpts of this masterpiece in l'Equipe. A whole lot of nothing. Pretty pathetic. Good material to start a barbecue, two pages at a time, or as relief toilet paper :D.
No thanks. I wouldn't want any of that rubbing off on my a$$...
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
SeriousSam said:
It doesn't tell you much. This type of question never does.

It would have been hilarious had he answered "no" given that he actually doped to achieve lesser goals, without knowing he'd achieve them and without knowing wouldn't get caught.

Caught dopers say yes. Teflon dopers think yes and say no. Many clean riders think yes and say no.
It does tell us much, because it was asked of Virenque as part of a documentary for TV and after he gave the above reply he contacted the interviewer and asked for the question and answer to be removed.
 
Benotti69 said:
3rd time a charm

:rolleyes:
It's a silly comment from Vayer. How many times have the climbed Bales? 3 times in the history of the Tour? Like Pena Cabarga when Horner rode. It was the 2nd time it had even been ridden in the Vuelta!

It's not like the EPO era had a crack at those climbs to use for comparison.
 
Benotti69 said:
3rd time a charm

:rolleyes:
Come on Benotti, it's the third time it's been raced and the second time as the final mountain. In 2010 it was cruised until the Andy Schleck bike maintenance seminar and in 2012 everyone had to sit around for Wigans. It's not like the record is a legacy of the 90's-mid 00's.
 
Benotti69 said:
It does tell us much, because it was asked of Virenque as part of a documentary for TV and after he gave the above reply he contacted the interviewer and asked for the question and answer to be removed.
Actually it happened at a Thierry Ardisson show, equivalent to a Jimmy Kimmel type of show. The show was live, and when it ended, Virenque asked something like "OK, so you edit my response right?" which goes to show once again what an idiot he is.

That bothers me when today's guys on the podium are referred to as first French riders to make a podium since '97. Until there is smoke (beyond the guilt by association argument - how about data, facts), I will believe that Bardet, JC and Pinot were favored by race circumstances, no early ITT, got good breaks, and some serious talent as well.

But again, I believed in Virenque until '98, in LA until '00, in Landis when he took off solo, I even believed in Vino...not :D
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
Tonton said:
Actually it happened at a Thierry Ardisson show, equivalent to a Jimmy Kimmel type of show. The show was live, and when it ended, Virenque asked something like "OK, so you edit my response right?" which goes to show once again what an idiot he is.

That bothers me when today's guys on the podium are referred to as first French riders to make a podium since '97. Until there is smoke (beyond the guilt by association argument - how about data, facts), I will believe that Bardet, JC and Pinot were favored by race circumstances, no early ITT, got good breaks, and some serious talent as well.

But again, I believed in Virenque until '98, in LA until '00, in Landis when he took off solo, I even believed in Vino...not :D
Until there is smoke? This is cycling, there is smoke everywhere on every team. The UCI hasn't changed in case you haven't noticed. The federations are still the same.

That you were fooled so many times, does not surprise me :rolleyes:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS