The ultimate fanboy - Indurain says Armstrong is Innocent!

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Marcuccio said:
I would say half the guys, past and present are only kissing Lancey's @$$ cos they're paranoid he's got something on them...

Ultimate betrayal will be Lance outing those same dbs who are still saying he's a champ...
Could the 2 Spanish doctors open a can of worms in Spain
 
Dec 21, 2010
513
0
0
TheEnoculator said:
Maybe he wanted some spotlight on him. God knows people don't talk about him much anymore.
Yeah, he has resorted to doing goofy advertisments for (supposedly) cholesterol-lowering margarine on Spanish TV..... How low can one go??
 
Doofus said:
His 89 win was a tactical attack for Perico that no one chased. he was in the second group for the rest of the tour. 90 was a different Indurain all together.
No. His win 1989 was a display of power and promise for the future. Much like what have been the case earlier years.

Doofus said:
Tactical mistake. I never said it was by Indurain. It was a manager's misjudgment.
No, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. It was an order from Echavarri/Unzue to wait for the struggling Perico and haul him to the finish. They knew what was at stake.

Doofus said:
not a good try. banesto wanted him to dope. he wouldn't.
This confirms what i already suspected. You are an idiot. A biased idiot.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
So, Big Fraud backs up The Biggest Fraud who is also backed up by Eddy 'I sent my own son to alchemist Ferrari and he still couldn't win sh@t'?

Classic case of inbreed behaviour.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
So, Big Fraud backs up The Biggest Fraud who is also backed up by Eddy 'I sent my own son to alchemist Ferrari and he still couldn't win sh@t'?

Classic case of inbreed behaviour.
At his peak, Eddy weighed around 74 KG.
If it wasn't EPO, I wonder what it was that made Eddy sprint over the mountains like a goat with that weight?
 
JRTinMA said:
I don't really know the difference so i guess you have me there. You do sound a little like the Postal fans though. Unbelievable performances and first hand reports are not good enough. The good news is nobody is going to bring Indurain down, his legacy is safe.
To be fair, Hampsten rode for Banesto too, and no one questions his integrity (rightly so).

Edit: now reading further I see that this point has already been discussed.
 
Jun 20, 2009
81
0
0
safe?

perico said:
To be fair, Hampsten rode for Banesto too, and no one questions his integrity (rightly so).

Edit: now reading further I see that this point has already been discussed.
The one hting that this affair has brought home to me is how deeply ingrained the doping culture was in the peloton. It also shows us clearly that to win at the top you had to dope. When you have the entire peloton doping its not like someone is using an unfair advantage if they all do it...what that shakes down to though is thta if everyone was doing it then we should nullify all results form merckx on. Merckx doped we know that becuase he failed tests. Hinault didnt get caught but he was famous for his steroidal road rage..Fignon tested positive and Lemond beat him several times and set a course record for time trilaing while kicking fignons doped ***.so in spite of lemoinds assertions that unlike everyone else he was a boy scout but that wouldnt and couldnt have happened unless he played the game as well. he has saif as much himself. .Lemond showed up overweight and out of shape for his later tours and even his "medicine" couldnt help that...methinks he was a little overconfident in the dosage perhaps...the big fig sails in and breezily snatches up five in a row. Then armstrong...sigh this is my last visit to cycling news ...i might come back next spring and see if gilbert is still kicking *** but i am completley disillusioned and disgusted about my heroes...merckx hinault lemond and armstrong...they all competed and won in the very same arena. it has been now proven without a doubt that you didnt win the tour from merckx on without doping since as everyone says a clean rider cannot beat dopers.....they should wipe the slate clean for the entire batch of tours from 69 on..cycling is now a joke as a sport with ZERO integrity. **** the tour ill watch baseball instead..
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
roadfreak44 said:
The one hting that this affair has brought home to me is how deeply ingrained the doping culture was in the peloton. It also shows us clearly that to win at the top you had to dope. When you have the entire peloton doping its not like someone is using an unfair advantage if they all do it...what that shakes down to though is thta if everyone was doing it then we should nullify all results form merckx on. Merckx doped we know that becuase he failed tests. Hinault didnt get caught but he was famous for his steroidal road rage..Fignon tested positive and Lemond beat him several times and set a course record for time trilaing while kicking fignons doped ***.so in spite of lemoinds assertions that unlike everyone else he was a boy scout but that wouldnt and couldnt have happened unless he played the game as well. he has saif as much himself. .Lemond showed up overweight and out of shape for his later tours and even his "medicine" couldnt help that...methinks he was a little overconfident in the dosage perhaps...the big fig sails in and breezily snatches up five in a row. Then armstrong...sigh this is my last visit to cycling news ...i might come back next spring and see if gilbert is still kicking *** but i am completley disillusioned and disgusted about my heroes...merckx hinault lemond and armstrong...they all competed and won in the very same arena. it has been now proven without a doubt that you didnt win the tour from merckx on without doping since as everyone says a clean rider cannot beat dopers.....they should wipe the slate clean for the entire batch of tours from 69 on..cycling is now a joke as a sport with ZERO integrity. **** the tour ill watch baseball instead..

FAIL.

You are not understanding how doping worked during the different eras.

To compare the modern epo era with the eras that proceeded it is wrong.

That doping was commonplace is not debatable. That is a given. But riders were able to compete clean. Stephen Swart's testimony of his time in the pelotons of Europe and USA then back to Europe testify to this.

So you do a big disservice to those riders who most beleive raced clean, LeMond and Bassons to name 2.

If you cannot distinguish between the various methods of doping down the years then the clinic is not for you.
 
Jun 20, 2009
81
0
0
Benotti69 said:
FAIL.

You are not understanding how doping worked during the different eras.

To compare the modern epo era with the eras that proceeded it is wrong.

That doping was commonplace is not debatable. That is a given. But riders were able to compete clean. Stephen Swart's testimony of his time in the pelotons of Europe and USA then back to Europe testify to this.

So you do a big disservice to those riders who most beleive raced clean, LeMond and Bassons to name 2.

If you cannot distinguish between the various methods of doping down the years then the clinic is not for you.
apparently the clinic is the pl;ace of teary eyed believers...bassons and swart???who won WHAT ? at the to[p there was only one way to get there...fignon was a proven doper even confessed ;later and lemond beat him setting a time trial record...clean...uh huh...another boy scout true believer ...sorry pal its you who has failed to see the simple truth. The toip step ofd the toeur had a price...those that didnt pay didnt get there.thats obviosu to everybody now...so what you are saying is oh the doping was "cleaner" back then...can you hear me laughing from there???..I dont remember seeing swart or bassons on the podium or have i missed something? Blood transfusions wer prevalenmt in the 80s...remember eddie B...he was a proponent of them. Insulin injections steroids corticosoids...amphetamines all prevalent and easily gotten giving a huge boost in performance. Cycling is in the s**t can my friend all the way back...this much crap gets everybody dirty...pull your head out of the sand cycling now and all its previous champions back to merckx have ZERO credibility. Tygart took down the house all the way to the foundation...good job there ;-)
 
Mar 19, 2011
334
0
0
Benotti69 said:
FAIL.

You are not understanding how doping worked during the different eras.

To compare the modern epo era with the eras that proceeded it is wrong.

That doping was commonplace is not debatable. That is a given. But riders were able to compete clean. Stephen Swart's testimony of his time in the pelotons of Europe and USA then back to Europe testify to this.

So you do a big disservice to those riders who most beleive raced clean, LeMond and Bassons to name 2.

If you cannot distinguish between the various methods of doping down the years then the clinic is not for you.
That is why so many have confessed that you can't climb the Tourmalet on mineral water. :rolleyes:

We all know doping has been widespread in all eras, and what great champions such as Anquetil, Coppy, Merckx and Lemond have told us about the benefits of doping. It is just a matter of being selective and choose the worst case scenario to understand the capital importance of doping for a professional cyclist. You have to understand that it is not easy to confess, to completely open the Pandora box even by the most honest of them.
It is not coincidence that the most honest accounts by cyclist regarding doping were from the time when it was not forbidden.

If Coppi, Anquetil, Merckx, Hinault, Fignon or Delgado needed it to win or even complete the race (if not why take it?) anyone who wants to believe that (insert your childhood hero here) did it clean is either an hypocrite or really naive.

You have confessions from guys saying that everyone doped, or 90%, which is the percentage people use when they don't want to disclose that everyone is doing it. Then you get the tremendous benefits IN ALL ERAS that doping provided, that told by ex cyclists, doctors and masseurs.
And then you get confessions from some of these people who at the same time of telling you that doping was brilliant performance wise, open the door for a possibility that our hero might have done it without it (we still have to give the sport a little bit of credibility or protect some people for some unknown reasons).

"You could win without doping" can be read from the very same guy who 20 pages before tells you how by using PEDs he could compete with cyclists who were well superior. Contradictory? Isn't it? When it comes to beliefs who cares about contradictions.

Even when the hero of heroes of clean riding, Greg Lemond, tell us that steroids would help his rivals TREMENDOUSLY (and this is literal) we want to believe him that he beat them fair and square.

In a way we never leave childhood.
 
Mar 19, 2011
334
0
0
roadfreak44 said:
apparently the clinic is the pl;ace of teary eyed believers...bassons and swart???who won WHAT ? at the to[p there was only one way to get there...fignon was a proven doper even confessed ;later and lemond beat him setting a time trial record...clean...uh huh...another boy scout true believer ...sorry pal its you who has failed to see the simple truth. The toip step ofd the toeur had a price...those that didnt pay didnt get there.thats obviosu to everybody now...so what you are saying is oh the doping was "cleaner" back then...can you hear me laughing from there???..I dont remember seeing swart or bassons on the podium or have i missed something? Blood transfusions wer prevalenmt in the 80s...remember eddie B...he was a proponent of them. Insulin injections steroids corticosoids...amphetamines all prevalent and easily gotten giving a huge boost in performance. Cycling is in the s**t can my friend all the way back...this much crap gets everybody dirty...pull your head out of the sand cycling now and all its previous champions back to merckx have ZERO credibility. Tygart took down the house all the way to the foundation...good job there ;-)
It is comforting that some people can still use the rational part of their brain, but I am afraid expect from now on to be called a troll over here by some.....and other niceties.

Belivers do not want their beliefs to be questioned.
 
Jul 28, 2009
898
0
0
What is this? Troll central? If you can't distinguish between oxygen vector doping and run of the muck doping then you know nothing about the subject. Accusing one of the most cynical posters here, Benotti, of naivety shows you know nothing of the clinic or are just trolling. The general incoherence suggests the latter.
 
Jun 20, 2009
81
0
0
Albatros said:
It is comforting that some people can still use the rational part of their brain, but I am afraid expect from now on to be called a troll over here by some.....and other niceties.

Belivers do not want their beliefs to be questioned.
no ytrolss here but maybe billy goat gruff:D
 
pmcg76 said:
It is so funny, the Lance fanboy's have been in hiding for the last week but now re-appearing and trying to deflect attention away from the fraud and by trying to desperately implicate LeMond.
The last batch ran out the door when they read the 200 page summary of the Reasoned Decision.

The latest crew offers insight that PS is now scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Dave.
 
Nov 8, 2010
16
0
0
No_Balls said:
No. His win 1989 was a display of power and promise for the future. Much like what have been the case earlier years.



No, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. It was an order from Echavarri/Unzue to wait for the struggling Perico and haul him to the finish. They knew what was at stake.



This confirms what i already suspected. You are an idiot. A biased idiot.

the DS said many times that Indurain's '89 move was designed for Perico to bridge up. the favorites did not pursue Mig -- they waited for the Delgado counter. to call it a display of power and panache is accurate in one sense, but also a bit of rose-colored glassing.


and Echavarri later said in interviews that the decision was a mistake, that in retrospect, Indurain was stronger and (in his view) could have won had they not instructed him to sit up.


let's pass on the name-calling. we have drawn different conclusions.

best.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
roadfreak44 said:
apparently the clinic is the pl;ace of teary eyed believers...bassons and swart???who won WHAT ? at the to[p there was only one way to get there...fignon was a proven doper even confessed ;later and lemond beat him setting a time trial record...clean...uh huh...another boy scout true believer ...sorry pal its you who has failed to see the simple truth. The toip step ofd the toeur had a price...those that didnt pay didnt get there.thats obviosu to everybody now...so what you are saying is oh the doping was "cleaner" back then...can you hear me laughing from there???..I dont remember seeing swart or bassons on the podium or have i missed something? Blood transfusions wer prevalenmt in the 80s...remember eddie B...he was a proponent of them. Insulin injections steroids corticosoids...amphetamines all prevalent and easily gotten giving a huge boost in performance. Cycling is in the s**t can my friend all the way back...this much crap gets everybody dirty...pull your head out of the sand cycling now and all its previous champions back to merckx have ZERO credibility. Tygart took down the house all the way to the foundation...good job there ;-)
Not all the way. But he exposed its dirty underside that honest cycling fans always knew about from reading Kimmage, Walsh and Ballester.

Now the world knows about Armstrong. If they has destroyed the sport it wa worth destroying to do that in the hope that the sport will take a different path.

IMO LeMond has credibility. I am sorry that you cannot see it.

Merckx would have had some credibility if he didn't hitch his wagon to Armstrong, but early dementia is a problem for dopers it seems ;)
 
May 21, 2010
581
0
0
JRTinMA said:
I don't really know the difference so i guess you have me there. You do sound a little like the Postal fans though. Unbelievable performances and first hand reports are not good enough. The good news is nobody is going to bring Indurain down, his legacy is safe.

Postal was like Banesto on steriods :D
 
Aug 11, 2012
416
0
0
roadfreak44 said:
The one hting that this affair has brought home to me is how deeply ingrained the doping culture was in the peloton. It also shows us clearly that to win at the top you had to dope. When you have the entire peloton doping its not like someone is using an unfair advantage if they all do it...what that shakes down to though is thta if everyone was doing it then we should nullify all results form merckx on. Merckx doped we know that becuase he failed tests. Hinault didnt get caught but he was famous for his steroidal road rage..Fignon tested positive and Lemond beat him several times and set a course record for time trilaing while kicking fignons doped ***.so in spite of lemoinds assertions that unlike everyone else he was a boy scout but that wouldnt and couldnt have happened unless he played the game as well. he has saif as much himself. .Lemond showed up overweight and out of shape for his later tours and even his "medicine" couldnt help that...methinks he was a little overconfident in the dosage perhaps...the big fig sails in and breezily snatches up five in a row. Then armstrong...sigh this is my last visit to cycling news ...i might come back next spring and see if gilbert is still kicking *** but i am completley disillusioned and disgusted about my heroes...merckx hinault lemond and armstrong...they all competed and won in the very same arena. it has been now proven without a doubt that you didnt win the tour from merckx on without doping since as everyone says a clean rider cannot beat dopers.....they should wipe the slate clean for the entire batch of tours from 69 on..cycling is now a joke as a sport with ZERO integrity. **** the tour ill watch baseball instead..
Yeah, watching grass grow is nice.
 
Mar 19, 2011
334
0
0
hrotha said:
Tygart has merely breached the enemy shieldwall. Now it's up to the cavalry to charge into the gap before the window of opportunity closes.
In the long term it won't matter. At the end of the day it is humans who are behind and they will cheat again. Unless we make it materially impossible to cheat, and I don't know if that can be possible.

Read el Mundo Deportivo Hemeroteca and you will see the same issues being raised again and again over the years. One mafia will supplant another one.


Besides, all is not bad, out of this cheating we can achieve artificially enhanced physical performance. Athletes at the end of the day are our guinea pigs for athletic development. :D
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 77
Similar threads
Indurain in the '96 Tour

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS