The revenge of Rasmussen ...

[frenchfry]

The four tested for the '99 prologue were positive. Armstrong was tested because he was first. The other testees were random selections. They were Hamburger, Beltran, and, if I remember correctly, Castelblanco. Zulle and Olano were not found posiitve by the retrospective testing.

Good memory. I always forget Castelblanco - he wasn't exactly a big name.

It is often said that there was a complot to get Armstrong, but most people forget that there were others whose 1999 sample were retested positive for EPO and were named. There could have been others using EPO as well, I don't think all the samples were retested - though I could be wrong about this.

Armstrong may not have introduced doping into pro cycling, but he certainly screwed up any possibility of a cleaner peloton following the Festina scandal.

 

[ChrisE]

Armstrong may not have introduced doping into pro cycling, but he certainly screwed up any possibility of a cleaner peloton following the Festina scandal.

LOL. C'mon my friend you really think cycling was on the verge of cleanliness after 98? Did Beltran etal that were found + retrospectively miss the memo, or was that some big LA conspiracy as well?

Hey, at least he had GL fooled lol.

 

[sniper]

Doesn't seem so difficult. As EPO came on, his GT results became non-existant.

exactly. so either he wasn't taking any or it wasn't working on him.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Doesn't seem so difficult. As EPO came on, his GT results became non-existant.

Perhaps he stopped EPO after the EPO overdose/intrapelid debacle?

 

[Benotti69]

Some riders did not respond to EPO. I think, not sure, that Stephen Swart was one of those who had no performance enhancement from using EPO.

 

[BroDeal]

Those are the 4 riders who got a backdated TUE for corticosteroids. You sure they're the ones who tested positive for EPO too? Honestly I don't remember.

I think just about everyone had a TUE for corticosteroids back then .

Those were the four tested after the prologue (assuming my memory of Castelblanco is correct), and all the prologue samples were positive.

 

[Cloxxki]

Why would Breuking not be an early adopter of EPO? There are strongly rumored EPO cases all the way back to the (early 1988 Calgary Olympics, of Dutch(wo)men who shortly after retired!
If he was a so-so talent and early on the juice, the real talents joining in would move him down the result sheets, I suppose?

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Why would Breuking not be an early adopter of EPO? There are strongly rumored EPO cases all the way back to the (early 1988 Calgary Olympics, of Dutch(wo)men who shortly after retired!
If he was a so-so talent and early on the juice, the real talents joining in would move him down the result sheets, I suppose?

yeah I'm sure he was epoing in 1987.. and he wasn't a so-so talent, but a really big one. his decline in his career ran exactly paralel to the raise of epo in the peloton.

 

[sniper]

at least he never attempted epo for himself

Breukink's career went down the toilet in the EPO era, so if he was a doper he was an "oldschool" doper.

Doesn't seem so difficult. As EPO came on, his GT results became non-existant.

his decline in his career ran exactly paralel to the raise of epo in the peloton.

these posts are assuming we know exactly when EPO arose in the peloton. do we?

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

these posts are assuming we know exactly when EPO arose in the peloton. do we?

yeah and we do. save some very rare exceptions like rooks I think, it all started in around 1991 and by 1992, in full scale. you can also look at the decline of the colombians which runs exactly paralel with this as well. I suggest you read this interview that describes very well how everything changed in the peloton in a very short time

http://www.cyclinginquisition.com/2012/06/victories-disappointments-and-how-epo.html

 

[Cloxxki]

these posts are assuming we know exactly when EPO arose in the peloton. do we?

Until someone starts claiming to have been the first ans another one claiming soon...
Something as well-published as EPO, you have to assume some riders were on it (thanks to their docs) within a year of the first available doses.
Certainly in 1988 there were some brow raising performances. Odd if you consider it pre-EPO. If you consider it as early EPO, it all makes sense.
Breuking doing well as a super early EPO user, makes one wonder whether his talent honestly was of Indurain-TT levels or he was a couple years ahead of the knowledge curve.

 

[sniper]

yeah and we do. save some very rare exceptions like rooks I think, it all started in around 1991 and by 1992, in full scale. you can also look at the decline of the colombians which runs exactly paralel with this as well. I suggest you read this interview that describes very well how everything changed in the peloton in a very short time

http://www.cyclinginquisition.com/2012/06/victories-disappointments-and-how-epo.html

thanks Ryo, great link, compelling interview.

But even more maddening was the way I was criticized by the press, at least certain Colombian journalists, who were not capable of understanding the fundamental change that was happening in cycling, I'm speaking of the new types of doping that became popular in the 1990s. They didn't have the guts to explain Colombian fans why our riders could no longer ride and compete like in the days of Lucho and Fabio Parra. They accused us of being lazy, and of having become bourgeois over time. It was incredibly unfair.

would be interesting to compare some Columbian pre-EPO times/speeds uphill with Wiggins/Froome times/speeds uphill, in order to get a clearer picture of what difference marginal gains really make.

 

[the asian]

these posts are assuming we know exactly when EPO arose in the peloton. do we?

Isn't that established now. First used in the pro peloton in 1989.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

it's a sad history, that by the time colombia got a great new generation of riders like mejia and rincon, european cycling changed so much, they didn't have a change. that is however changing now. the rapid raise of colombian cycling in recent years to me is prove it's getting very clean again, even cleaner perhaps than the 80s. it's only natural they should dominate from a physical perspective considering they are naturally doped. some like quintana and chaves I know are 100% clean from first hand and I've seen them come up in europe so rapidly at young age, which would've been impossible 20 years ago

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Isn't that established now. First used in the pro peloton in 1989.

According to the nice article on Cardenas it was 1991. the same year PDM/Breukink had some troubles at the Tour.
Or perhaps Cardenas meant when EPO use got massive?

Sad, sad story.

 

[theyoungest]

Until someone starts claiming to have been the first ans another one claiming soon...
Something as well-published as EPO, you have to assume some riders were on it (thanks to their docs) within a year of the first available doses.
Certainly in 1988 there were some brow raising performances. Odd if you consider it pre-EPO. If you consider it as early EPO, it all makes sense.
Breuking doing well as a super early EPO user, makes one wonder whether his talent honestly was of Indurain-TT levels or he was a couple years ahead of the knowledge curve.

Some stories trickle through the grapevine. And one of them is that Breukink thought EPO went too far. If you choose to believe it is up to yourself, but the evidence certainly points in that direction. You'd have to decide he was the first one to use it (as you do) to argue the contrary.

And another thing, please call him Breukink. Are you also one of those Dutchies who calls Gesink "Geesing"?

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

geesink eltingh, weenink, they all suck i tell you

 

[Gregga]

According to the nice article on Cardenas it was 1991. the same year PDM/Breukink had some troubles at the Tour.
Or perhaps Cardenas meant when EPO use got massive?

Sad, sad story.

Weird stuffs from the late eighties to 1990 :
- Rooks climbing better than Herrera in the 1988 TdF (Theunisse as well)
- Breukink crushing the 1989 TdF Prologue in Luxembourg, the 2nd and 3rd ITT in the 1990 TdF
- Alcala flying in the 1st ITT in the 1990 TdF

Almost all this in the same team, PDM, Johannes Draaijer's team, IMO the first "EPO team". In 1990, the italians began EPO but individually (Bugno in the Giro, Argentin in the spring classics, Chiappucci in the TdF)

In 1991 the spanish (Mauri, maybe Indurain)...

etc.

 

[hrotha]

some like quintana and chaves I know are 100% clean from first hand

Hahahaha. Right.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Weird stuffs from the late eighties to 1990 :
- Rooks climbing better than Herrera in the 1988 TdF (Theunisse as well)
- Breukink crushing the 1989 TdF Prologue in Luxembourg, the 2nd and 3rd ITT in the 1990 TdF
- Alcala flying in the 1st ITT in the 1990 TdF

Almost all this in the same team, PDM, Johannes Draaijer's team, IMO the first "EPO team". In 1990, the italians began EPO but individually (Bugno in the Giro, Argentin in the spring classics, Chiappucci in the TdF)

In 1991 the spanish (Mauri, maybe Indurain)...

etc.

lol. so basically any rider that year who broke through or won something used epo especially the claims around alcala are ridiculous consideirng how much he faded away when epo came up in early 90s. in the 80s before epo this was a massive talent. chiapucchi and bugno? bugno could only win gt's in 1990 and 1991. then he was gone. I suspect that others started (ab)using way more than him and chiapucchi, if they used it back then. there is no evidence for it though, unlike sudden rise of guys like rominger and ugrumov, which was far more suspicious

 

[sniper]

Fignon wrote in his book how the rise of EPO in the early 90s put him out of play. Though again, that doesn't necessarily mean there weren't individuals using it already in the late 80s.
The biggest problem, I guess, if EPO predates 1991, we once again have to account for Lemond's performances, who most seem to agree was comparatively (if not completely) clean.

With or without EPO, there can be no doubt that Panasonic/PDM were at the forefront of PED experimenting.

Wrt Breukink: the fact that he was picked up by Saiz in 1993 doesn't exactly suggest he was a clean crusader. I'm going for the hypothesis that EPO didn't work on him as it did on Jalabert and Zülle. I don't think Saiz would have kept Breukink in his TdF squad if he wasn't on the program.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

With or without EPO, there can be no doubt that Panasonic/PDM were at the forefront of PED experimenting.

I don't see Panasonic in this, not at all. Look at the results of the team, other than Vanderaerden and the young Breukink in the Giro they were relatively nowhere in stage races. Compare that to PDM.

Note the results riders who went to Post from PDM an vice versa.

Wrt Breukink: the fact that he was picked up by Saiz in 1993 doesn't exactly suggest he was a clean crusader. I'm going for the hypothesis that EPO didn't work on him as it did on Jalabert and Zülle. I don't think Saiz would have kept Breukink in his TdF squad if he wasn't on the program.

I really think his intrapelid/Epo overdose in 1991 was a clear warning for him not to overdo it.

One of the most interesting things I have always found is the statement by Rooks he used EPO in the last stage of his carreer, 'but just untill 50%, otherwise you would have a problem with the authorities' as stated by Rooks. Rooks stopped cycling before the 1997 50% rule. That is bothering me.

 

[Joachim]

EPO was in use by 1987 which is a pretty quick pick up when you consider that it's therapeutic use and licensing happened at the same time, or indeed slightly afterwards. A whole bunch of riders karked it in their sleep between 87-92, quite a number of them were Dutch. EPO was implicated, although not proven as of course there was no way of detecting it.

What people may not realise if they weren't around at the time is that the attitude towards PEDs was markedly different. More of a slap on the wrist scenario without the potential for immediate career termination that exists now. PED use centred around steroids, testosterone and amphetamine. There were deaths but not in the droves of the late 80's and early 90's. That was the catalyst for the change on attitudes, plus the fact that EPO made such a huge physiological difference, whereas amphets were largely psychological.

By the early 90's anyone listening knew what EPO was. I stopped watching european pro racing shortly after.

 

[SavageKiwi]

Sorry to be posting something that I posted previously, but on an LA thread. Here is a collection of performance data that I put together that shows "interesting" trends related to this discussion:
http://www.phys.washington.edu/users/savage/Cycling/LookingAtTheData/AIC.html

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Sorry to be posting something that I posted previously, but on an LA thread. Here is a collection of performance data that I put together that shows "interesting" trends related to this discussion:
http://www.phys.washington.edu/users/savage/Cycling/LookingAtTheData/AIC.html

Nice research, my compliments. Just too many colours for me, got me friggin crazy