The revenge of Rasmussen ...

Page 10 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
boonen didn't ride any better than other years where he was'nt injured and gilbert this year sucked because he didn't bother to train in the winter. still his wc was impressive without ibarguren :rolleyes:
Clueless


Please, don't waste my time with this idiot act.
 
Aug 7, 2010
1,247
0
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
so breukink was using epo, eventhough he and everyone else with once knew it didn't work on him? makes real sense :rolleyes:
A naturally high hematocrit actually made you less valuable to a team that would prefer to take a 39-42 guy up to 49. If you are already close, they can't really dope you.
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,137
1
0
Fortyninefourteen said:
A naturally high hematocrit actually made you less valuable to a team that would prefer to take a 39-42 guy up to 49. If you are already close, they can't really dope you.
what did that have to do with breukink. epo didn't work on riders who didn't have a high hematocrite either. like zabel.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
yeah whatever. maybe next time register on a forum. click the x button on the right top.
Ignore button is a better option, not having to read the bs you post on here, 10.000 in 2,5 years time - you must have a busy social life :eek: - is sufficient to say you haven't read well in the clinic.

#ignore
 
Aug 7, 2010
1,247
0
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
what did that have to do with breukink. epo didn't work on riders who didn't have a high hematocrite either. like zabel.
Just stating that it might have been possible. There were some years when he (Breukink)was considered a real contender, only to get crushed by the guys that were taken from low 40's to the 49%. His gains were minimal compared to the gains that others may have derived.
The irony is that a naturally high hematocrit that would almost guarantee success in the pre-epo era, would ultimately be your undoing as of 1988-89 (?) ....

We are in agreement, by the way...
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Susan Westemeyer said:
FGL and Ryo, cool it with the insults or be prepared for a ban.

Susan
No problem at all, can you point me where the ''ignore'' button is on this forum? Would be delightfull not having to read some folks's thoughts. After that, you can delete this post.
 
Sep 12, 2012
12
0
0
Dear Wiggo : Why do you conclude that I am a fan-boy. You are free to disagree with my final conclusions - they are my opinion only and only mine. However - you cannot disagree with the data - they are facts. The trends are real and unambiguous. It is also unambiguous that LA was not the only one on the trend curves. So exactly what do you disagree with? Is your operating assumption that sport should not be fair? If cycling wants to continue be taken seriously as a sport then simply going after one guy and then stating that `` all is well again'' is simply rubbish. Are you suggesting that the sport is clean again and can continue as before by simply purging LA from the record books?
 
Sep 12, 2012
12
0
0
I dont have the times for the Guerini climb - if someone has them I would appreciate having them. The fact that times from that year are not on the list indicates that they were not in this top 36.
 
Dear Wiggo said:
Look at the data. No problem. I am responding to your "conclusions are not liked". But when you realise a fanboi put a study together, you also have to acknowledge bias. His conclusions ("investigate other riders, it's NOT FAIR *pout*") are laughable and have nothing to do with the data.
No I think it is a legitimate point. Everybody was cheating, but given that and ignoring the fact that USADA is USADA and not WorldADA (oh wait that would be WADA, wouldn't it) why not go after the crook who gained the most first? I'm guessing a number of bank robbers got away during the time that Bernie Madoff was in the news, but do some people think they should have ignored him and gone after the little guys instead?
 
Sep 12, 2012
12
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
No I think it is a legitimate point. Everybody was cheating, but given that and ignoring the fact that USADA is USADA and not WorldADA (oh wait that would be WADA, wouldn't it) why not go after the crook who gained the most first? I'm guessing a number of bank robbers got away during the time that Bernie Madoff was in the news, but do some people think they should have ignored him and gone after the little guys instead?
That strategy is fine - as long as it does not end after LA and efforts are made to go after everyone that is suspicious. Ending things after LA will do nothing other than change the strategy used to win. I find the UCI current attitude poor given that they have so much data and its analysis is straightforward. Their expressions of surprise and shock I found to be a joke.
 
SavageKiwi said:
That strategy is fine - as long as it does not end after LA and efforts are made to go after everyone that is suspicious. Ending things after LA will do nothing other than change the strategy used to win. I find the UCI current attitude poor given that they have so much data and its analysis is straightforward. Their expressions of surprise and shock I found to be a joke.
OK try to follow along. UCI protects the superstar dopers. If you get "caught" for doping then that just means you were not big enough. Everyone is "suspicious" but the point here is to try to get UCI to go after the big stars instead of the second level guys that they have been "catching" in the past 15 years. The UCI attitude will always be wrong, they simply should not have anything to do with drug testing.
 
SavageKiwi said:
I dont have the times for the Guerini climb - if someone has them I would appreciate having them. The fact that times from that year are not on the list indicates that they were not in this top 36.
Guerini was faster than some on the list. Have seen times of 41, 42 minutes quoted before.

The list is hardly exhaustive. In 2004, a total of roughly 153 riders beat Lemond and Hinault's given time for 2006. Ok, so it was a time trial but even so this shows that that there are some times missing. In 2004, Gonzalez, Guerini, Karpets, Basso and Moncoutie produced sub 40 minute times. (These are all calculated by assuming that every rider did the c. 1km bit of the TT on the flat before alpe d'huez in the same time as Armstrong. In reality most would have taken a few seconds longer than Armstrong but this would mean that their alpe d'huez deficit was less than shown below)

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/road/2004/tour04/?id=results/stage16
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Breukink was 40 flat, but correct me if I am wrong. You remember, Erik the climber.

http://wielerhelden.blogse.nl/log/erik-breukink.html

''Erik Breukink

His best three days in a row he had in the Tour of 1990. From 12 to 14 July saw the international cycling an almost unbeatable Erik Breukink who rode so well that insiders at that time very carefully the thought expressed that the real rider around for years here was risen. Holland was again a winner, because Erik Breukink in this form was unbeatable.
The triptych is easy mapping. On the road to Alpe d'Huez (from St. Gervais) he must be a big gap to bridge. He remains calm and masterful climbs to the frontrunners. He recalls: "At the foot of the climb, I had almost two minutes behind and I'm in my own pace gone up."

After an impressive cavalcade came Fracture at Bugno, Claveyrolat, Parra and Lemond and saw the four in wonder how frail Dutchman sails through large drove. When it arrived at the Alp on sprinting proved Breukink not bold enough. In the famous left turn he let himself wegdrummen. Bugno and Lemond names pushing and cutting off the road PDM rider size. The
question remains where he came from. Breukink: 'In the penultimate descent there were a few men drove off and we PDM had missed the battle. We must give it great that flat, Kelly and Alacala reason and Ampler, including us, refused to cooperate, who drove for himself, I remember. I had very good legs when I was at the foot of the pass came, yes, I may safely say ... I rode that day very strong. Why I can not brutally drove by that corner? Oh, I was not like elbows, that's known. Maybe I should run away, I have sometimes thought later, but this thought does not change the story, is not it? "
A day later, the rematch there. In the trial of Fontaine to Villard-de-Lans triumphed unleashed Breukink and he kept three Spaniards (Delgado, Indurain and Lejaretta) and Lemond and Chiappucci (in yellow) far behind. The sweetness of victory that tasted very good and the Fracture demolition in the direction of the yellow jersey. In the Netherlands there was "a pleasant tour fever, radio and television programs were very well listened and watched, because those neat clean Breukink drove very strong.
The dangerous, relatively short stage to Saint-Etienne that followed brought Chiappucci to totter and showed Breukink in superb form, in an insane pace he tore by, the headgroup *** to pieces and arrived in Saint - Etienne his old enemy, the sprint, once again against.
The man who climbed beautifully, that the best was in the time trial, could not win the sprint from another iron, the Spaniard Eduardo Chozas. Later Breukink sometimes jokingly say that precisely the two matigste sprinters of the whole tour there came together after a great stage where Chiappucci nearly five minutes on his pants got their daring and almost foolhardy way quotes.
On the 14th of July was Breukink in the top three in the standings, but three days later, on the road to Luz Ardiden (where he any help from teammate Raoul Alcala needed in order not to drown) made a weak day him vulnerable. Although he drove in the final major trial back the stone from the street (profit in Lac de Vassievière-and-Limousin) and he was in the final ranking third (at 2.29 behind Lemond and only thirteen seconds behind Chiappucci), but the above three days were eminent class in the Tour-existence of the man who stepped eleven times in the Tour, who wore yellow and white and the four stage victories to his name.
About that climb to Alpe d'Huez then only briefly. Although there is no official ranking of tracked was Breukink then drove the fastest time ever (in a stage with some mountains for the last Alp-climbing). He remembers his time? Breukink: "They have told me once. Forty minutes I believe. Yes, I drove well. "
Modesty has always been in his family crest.''


According to this site Contadope has the record on the Alp:
http://www.klimgeiten.nl/specials/alpedhuez/huez.htm
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
sniper said:
here's a link to a dutch documentary on pdm's intralipid affair:
http://tvblik.nl/andere-tijden/de-bedorven-kip-van-pdm
haven't seen it myself. not sure how deep they go wrt doping.
Considering what we know we can surmise they went all the way down the rabithole. (Theunissen, Rooks, Draaijer, Intralipid). There is at least one link with Epo (Draaijer). Had they not had the intralipid affair they certainly would have been the first big Epo team. Of that I have no doubt at all.

It's what makes Breukink a special case. Considering his earlier performances in the Giro he clearly was not someone made by Epo and yet his joining PDM always made me wonder about 1990. The best we can say is that he didn't really transform and that he did podium in the Giro twice pre-epo.

Breukink, Lemond, Mottet, Indurain, they are the enigma of that era... when did Epo start to show up? GL/CM the clean side, EB the question mark, and MI the adopter... but one who surely was recognized as a GT thoroughbred years before Epo hit the peloton.
 
Mar 31, 2010
18,137
1
0
Franklin said:
Considering what we know we can surmise they went all the way down the rabithole. (Theunissen, Rooks, Draaijer, Intralipid). There is at least one link with Epo (Draaijer). Had they not had the intralipid affair they certainly would have been the first big Epo team. Of that I have no doubt at all.

It's what makes Breukink a special case. Considering his earlier performances in the Giro he clearly was not someone made by Epo and yet his joining PDM always made me wonder about 1990. The best we can say is that he didn't really transform and that he did podium in the Giro twice pre-epo.

Breukink, Lemond, Mottet, Indurain, they are the enigma of that era... when did Epo start to show up? GL/CM the clean side, EB the question mark, and MI the adopter... but one who surely was recognized as a GT thoroughbred years before Epo hit the peloton.
the reason he joined pdm in 1990 was because pdm was the richest team in the world and they offered him the most money. it the simplest and most often truth of anything despite what the clinic will have you think and try to talk it all up to doping. sevilla didn't go to t-mobile because they had a more advanced doping system. he went for the money and chances, hamilton to csc, landis to phonak, ullrich to bianchi and countless other examples
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
the reason he joined pdm in 1990 was because pdm was the richest team in the world and they offered him the most money.
Where did I say Breukink joined because of the doping? :confused: Take a few deep breaths and read a post before feeling compelled to answer.

I found you are on a crusade on clinic posters, but it would be nice if you read my posts. Also, you could take a cue out of my book and focus on verifyable data ;)
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Ryo Hazuki said:
they basically say it wans't doping, just badly kept new preps(intrapilid), and they were probably right, no evidence ever found that it was doping
Ryo, that's pretty discutable. Already that year medical personel questoined Intrlipid considering it amounts to approximately the energy of 1 cut of bread. Worse, the doctors involved (amongst other Sanders) certainly would have known about the nonsense of the treatment.

Now if we also keep in mind that PDM was indeed a very dirty team and that Sanders was indeed a doping doctor your "probably right" is amusing. Looking at what is known it's "probably not the whole truth". ;)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS