Who has Not Doped?

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":2jni1k6e]
This is something I notice with a lot of here. A lot of ''research'' on the internet and via books but very little live expierence. If you would have watched it or followed his career path, than there's a lot more behind it, than just repeating what the internet says.

If you like I can share a real life experience with this great guy : Bonette, TdF '93, I was at the top with a young 15yo cycling fan friend of mine who shouted "this is Jeff, allez Jeff, allez Jeff". Bernard replied "Ta gueule petit con !".

I'm sure you know enough of french to get how despicable this guy is, doped or not, and to understand I don't rely on internet to have an opinion on a rider[/quote]Now this is what I mean. I know for a fact the guy was terribly ill for almost this whole TDF and didnt even want to start. He finished just before the time limit and was one of the first ones who couldnt follow on the first climb of the day, the Col d'Izoard. Like I said, dont judge until you know the true story.

I dont know what your point is anyway but at least you have watched one of the best TDF stages ever.

 

[jens_attacks]

He still seems to have fanboys though

Even if he was as infamous as killer di luca lol

 

[pastronef]

Matthew Cooke?

 

["Jeff"]

Re:

He still seems to have fanboys though

Even if he was as infamous as killer di luca lol

Not sure if this is against me, but I wanted to send you a reminder anyway.

Please show all of us, this well known fact of abuse of cortisone. This cant be too difficult.

 

[brokebiker]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":3ig5bkb8]This is so simple. Indurain, doped, so the whole Banesto team was. Marie, Gayant, doped, just ask Kimmage and RIP Claveyrolat. Nijdam, doped because he rode for the dirtiest dutch team behind PDM. Fuerte, Chozas, doped, because they rode for ONCE, a team that just started. Laughable. You dont need to agree with it, but this is such a bull.

Please come up with your list of names. I can do the same about any rider. Every rider somehow has a link with doping/bad management/suspicious director, EVERY rider.

At least, Bernard took so much Synacten for Ventoux '87 that he was blocked for the next week, that's pretty well documented (Roche's soigneurs fooled him, saying Roche would take a crazy amount of corticos, which was false - maybe Roche had a blood bag instead). I don't exactly know what he was on in 1991 at Banesto, but it was an impressive "renaissance", and in 1992 he was flying during the whole spring (including LBL). And it's a chance he's still alive, given his post retirement addictions, related or not what he took as a pro rider.[/quote]This is something I notice with a lot of here. A lot of ''research'' on the internet and via books but very little live expierence. If you would have watched it or followed his career path, than there's a lot more behind it, than just repeating what the internet says.[/quote]
In other words, the only people qualified to speak about a rider are people that physically watched said rider in person, followed their career path by watching every race in person, for that 4 second time frame where rider would ride by at 45kph. Only then would a member of this forum be qualified to make an educated determination as to a riders guilt or innocence. If by chance any member of this forum were to look up information in books or (god forbid) research online they would most definitely not be qualified to make a comment.

Chris Froome has never doped. I know this because I watched him ride by one day really fast, and have also said his name a lot over the past couple years.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

In other words, the only people qualified to speak about a rider are people that physically watched said rider in person, followed their career path by watching every race in person, for that 4 second time frame where rider would ride by at 45kph. Only then would a member of this forum be qualified to make an educated determination as to a riders guilt or innocence. If by chance any member of this forum were to look up information in books or (god forbid) research online they would most definitely not be qualified to make a comment.

Chris Froome has never doped. I know this because I watched him ride by one day really fast, and have also said his name a lot over the past couple years.

The rabbit hole is pretty deep. Just a heads up.

 

[brokebiker]

Re: Re:

In other words, the only people qualified to speak about a rider are people that physically watched said rider in person, followed their career path by watching every race in person, for that 4 second time frame where rider would ride by at 45kph. Only then would a member of this forum be qualified to make an educated determination as to a riders guilt or innocence. If by chance any member of this forum were to look up information in books or (god forbid) research online they would most definitely not be qualified to make a comment.

Chris Froome has never doped. I know this because I watched him ride by one day really fast, and have also said his name a lot over the past couple years.

The rabbit hole is pretty deep. Just a heads up.

Thanks for the heads up. Did I pass you on the way down?

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

In other words, the only people qualified to speak about a rider are people that physically watched said rider in person, followed their career path by watching every race in person, for that 4 second time frame where rider would ride by at 45kph. Only then would a member of this forum be qualified to make an educated determination as to a riders guilt or innocence. If by chance any member of this forum were to look up information in books or (god forbid) research online they would most definitely not be qualified to make a comment.

Not not necessarily live, along the road, could also be televsion or the newspapers back than. Than there's sometimes a lot more to tell/say. Everybody is qualified to comment but calling somebody a doper by repeating the results via wikipedia is not an educated determination for why a rider is doped or not. Some just throw everything on the internet but rarely back it up. If they do, they refer to a result or because person A or person B wrote this in his book. Give me a ******* break.

Some also ''remember'' a lot of things but actually remember squat, they read about it or watched it via YT and than I have to read that crap. Good example has been shown in this topic already. At least he had the guts to correct himself but I see it a lot. Some things are explainable if you had watched the race back than, they are NOT explainable if you have watched some highlights or read about it. I have had discussions with people who didnt even know a bike existed 15 years ago. They were watching crickett and rugby and these quackers are now telling me how it is.

Its remarkable you have become a friend of my biggest friend here in the clinic as well. Very remarkable. In soccer we call this one-two.

 

[brokebiker]

Re: Re:

In other words, the only people qualified to speak about a rider are people that physically watched said rider in person, followed their career path by watching every race in person, for that 4 second time frame where rider would ride by at 45kph. Only then would a member of this forum be qualified to make an educated determination as to a riders guilt or innocence. If by chance any member of this forum were to look up information in books or (god forbid) research online they would most definitely not be qualified to make a comment.

Not not necessarily live, along the road, could also be televsion or the newspapers back than. Than there's sometimes a lot more to tell/say. Everybody is qualified to comment but calling somebody a doper by repeating the results via wikipedia is not an educated determination for why a rider is doped or not. Some just throw everything on the internet but rarely back it up. If they do, they refer to a result or because person A or person B wrote this in his book. Give me a ******* break.

Some also ''remember'' a lot of things but actually remember squat, they read about it or watched it via YT and than I have to read that crap. Good example has been shown in this topic already. At least he had the guts to correct himself but I see it a lot. Some things are explainable if you had watched the race back than, they are NOT explainable if you have watched some highlights or read about it.[/quote]
It's hilarious that anybody would dismiss an opinion based on the fact that said opinion was formed through a study of history, rather than viewing in person watching it on TV or reading it in the newspaper. The person that was called out earlier that "corrected" themselves never said that they were wrong because they watched a highlight on youtube. All they said was they "remembered". That could mean a lot of things including all the above. Give me a fuckin break.

 

[Billie]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":2mbmn0tc]This is so simple. Indurain, doped, so the whole Banesto team was. Marie, Gayant, doped, just ask Kimmage and RIP Claveyrolat. Nijdam, doped because he rode for the dirtiest dutch team behind PDM. Fuerte, Chozas, doped, because they rode for ONCE, a team that just started. Laughable. You dont need to agree with it, but this is such a bull.

Please come up with your list of names. I can do the same about any rider. Every rider somehow has a link with doping/bad management/suspicious director, EVERY rider.

At least, Bernard took so much Synacten for Ventoux '87 that he was blocked for the next week[/quote]

blocked is the right word. But not in that sense

The whole peloton blocked him on a small bridge. This was a plan by Roche and Mottet made before that stage knowing they would never beat Jeff straight on. Bernard got very unlucky when he flatted right before that narrow bridge. Roche, Mottet and Delgado attacked and took many minutes.

Jeff was flying rest of the Tour even dominating the flat timetrial against Roche later on.

 

["Jeff"]

Re: Re:

[quote=""Jeff"":2ipy75ay]This is so simple. Indurain, doped, so the whole Banesto team was. Marie, Gayant, doped, just ask Kimmage and RIP Claveyrolat. Nijdam, doped because he rode for the dirtiest dutch team behind PDM. Fuerte, Chozas, doped, because they rode for ONCE, a team that just started. Laughable. You dont need to agree with it, but this is such a bull.

Please come up with your list of names. I can do the same about any rider. Every rider somehow has a link with doping/bad management/suspicious director, EVERY rider.

At least, Bernard took so much Synacten for Ventoux '87 that he was blocked for the next week

blocked is the right word. But not in that sense

The whole peloton blocked him on a small bridge. This was a plan by Roche and Mottet made before that stage asking the knowing they would never beat Jeff straight on. Bernard got very unlucky when he flatted right before that narrow bridge.

Jeff was flying rest of the Tour even dominating the flat timetrial against Roche later on.[/quote]Amen brother.

Now this is somebody who knows his stuff.

Bernard also got a flat tire and no team mates to help him. He had to chase for 30 kilometres all by himself, with 25 wheelsuckers behind him. Well I certainly wont say for 100% that Bernard never doped, but like I said, there's a lot more to say why he didnt win the TDF after that great performance on the Ventoux. One of the best TT wins in the TDF. Luis Herrera came in second at almost 2 minutes. At the end, he was over 2 minutes behind Roche while he lost 4 minutes that particular stage. He should have won.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

In other words, the only people qualified to speak about a rider are people that physically watched said rider in person, followed their career path by watching every race in person, for that 4 second time frame where rider would ride by at 45kph. Only then would a member of this forum be qualified to make an educated determination as to a riders guilt or innocence. If by chance any member of this forum were to look up information in books or (god forbid) research online they would most definitely not be qualified to make a comment.

Chris Froome has never doped. I know this because I watched him ride by one day really fast, and have also said his name a lot over the past couple years.

The rabbit hole is pretty deep. Just a heads up.

Thanks for the heads up. Did I pass you on the way down?

Also be mindful of fans of riders. They can defend their rider rationally as well as irrationally. Not sure if you've seen this elsewhere, but it takes a special fan (there are some here) to admit, yes, their rider was human and probably made mistakes.

You are always battling that bias when entering discussions here.

 

[brokebiker]

I love how you move the goal posts here:
[quote=""Jeff"":2yv8owx2]Difficult to say who did dope or didnt dope but I am convinced these people didnt make a living of it.

Thierry Marie, Martial Gayant, Charly Mottet, Luis Herrera, Urs Zimmermann, Frans Maasen, Niki Ruttimann, Eduardo Chozas, Jean-Francois Bernard, Steve Bauer, Anselmo Fuerte, Martin Earley, Eric Boyer, Laudelino Cubino, Eddy Bouwmans, Edwig van Hooydonck, Jelle Nijdam, Luc Roosen, Thierry Claveyrolat etc etc

Just check out how many cyclists of the 80s, retired in the early 90s or regressed considerably.

I would have said Eddy Bouwmans too but he admitted to have used EPO once.[/quote]
But here you say every rider has a link with doping:
[quote=""Jeff"":2yv8owx2]
Please come up with your list of names. I can do the same about any rider. Every rider somehow has a link with doping/bad management/suspicious director, EVERY rider.[/quote]
This is just arrogant:
[quote=""Jeff"":2yv8owx2]1991 was not EPO fuelled and Marie once was +20 minutus up front. So now we know you have remembered nothing.[/quote]
Give me a ****** break.

 

[gooner]

Re:

I'm interested in what others regard as convincing evidence that an athlete never used banned performance enhancing drugs at any point. For those that give serious answers, please don't just state names, also give the reason as to why you think an athlete was/is clean.

Regarding Bergkamp, he wouldn't even take minerals and vitamins when Yann Rougier, the nutritionist at Arsenal offered it. Told the club he didn't want to take any supplements. Gary Lewin, who was club doctor has spoken about this. Bergkamp also refused to take Creatine when Arsenal were using it in Wenger's earlier years. Lee Dixon has backed that up.

His motto was if you eat well, you wouldn't need any of that stuff.

 

[IzzyStradlin]

Matthew Cooke?

Only his roommates

 

[beowulf]

Yuki Kawauchi: http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/06/yuki_kawauchi_meet_the_marathon_running_government_clerk_who_s_a_national.html

Basically he just runs until he drops. The marathon is about mental toughness and this guy is as tough as they come.

I would like to think that most of the Japanese distance runners are not doping. I believe this for a number of reasons, but the main one is that they would be a doing a lot better if they doped. They have tremendous depth in the marathon and most distance events, but very seldom do they ever run ridiculous times; Takaoka holds their marathon record at 2 hrs 6 mins, which is three minutes slower than the WR. That time came at the end of the EPO era, but still is only two minutes faster than what Seko was running in the 80's.

Like I say if they are doping they must not be doing it very well. The women are perhaps a little more suspicious than the men, but they have not done anything out of the ordinary. The great ones like Noguchi and Takahashi pretty much regressed once they hit their early 30's, which for me is natural for a clean athlete.

 

[pastronef]

Matthew Cooke?

Only his roommates

uh?

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Re:

Yuki Kawauchi: http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/06/yuki_kawauchi_meet_the_marathon_running_government_clerk_who_s_a_national.html

Basically he just runs until he drops. The marathon is about mental toughness and this guy is as tough as they come.

I would like to think that most of the Japanese distance runners are not doping. I believe this for a number of reasons, but the main one is that they would be a doing a lot better if they doped. They have tremendous depth in the marathon and most distance events, but very seldom do they ever run ridiculous times; Takaoka holds their marathon record at 2 hrs 6 mins, which is three minutes slower than the WR. That time came at the end of the EPO era, but still is only two minutes faster than what Seko was running in the 80's.

Like I say if they are doping they must not be doing it very well. The women are perhaps a little more suspicious than the men, but they have not done anything out of the ordinary. The great ones like Noguchi and Takahashi pretty much regressed once they hit their early 30's, which for me is natural for a clean athlete.

The Japanese have a real interesting system. Few, if any, doping violations, news or revelations. Their corporate system is like the NCAA for adults: structured, financed, and competitive for an age where the athletes aren't also learning how to live by themselves and not get drunk 5 times a week.

Huge marathon depth, at a believable level. No stand-out performers, especially not on the track. I've gleened a little bit here and there, but I'm always trying to wrap my head around the characteristics that make the Japanese athletic culture seemingly clean, and relatively (not at a world level, but quality of depth) high performing.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I wonder if their reduced testosterone has any effect?

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Re:

I wonder if their reduced testosterone has any effect?

Reduced testosterone of the Japanese? As in, genetics for less testosterone?

 

[del1962]

I reckon George Best didn't dope, except recreational drugs

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

I wonder if their reduced testosterone has any effect?

Reduced testosterone of the Japanese? As in, genetics for less testosterone?

Asian, yes. When I was research test it turned out caucasian had 1:1 ratio, asians slightly less and african (?) slightly more. I was thinking if the natural asian ratio was < 1:1 and they can dope to 4:1 that gives them more headroom.

 

[proffate]

chris boardman? quit cycling because of low T, supposedly.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re:

chris boardman? quit cycling because of low T, supposedly.

By now if someone (Boardman) makes a claim with out corroborating evidence I am incapable of going any further in terms of belief -- particularly if said person performed well and that performance could have been dope-fuelled and that doping could have lead to the malady they now claim is their reason for stopping.

I don't know for sure but if you had legitimate hypogonadism, I would have thought it would be genetic and thus present at all times, not suddenly flair up later in life.

It's particularly troubling given he was a trackie and last I heard they all did weights.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Re: Re:

I wonder if their reduced testosterone has any effect?

Reduced testosterone of the Japanese? As in, genetics for less testosterone?

Asian, yes. When I was research test it turned out caucasian had 1:1 ratio, asians slightly less and african (?) slightly more. I was thinking if the natural asian ratio was < 1:1 and they can dope to 4:1 that gives them more headroom.

Didn't know that.

I doubt they're, as general a word that is to use here, taking advantage of it. National records of 10.00, 20.03 in 100m and 200m, 13:08, 27:35 in 5k and 10k. Speaking of testosterone though, the 3k and 5k record holder is a Salazar athlete. Also, many Kenyans and other East Africans are (were...) based in Japan. Japan based Kenyans were the only ones to medal in Olympic marathons until 2012.

So my confidence in Japan's cleanliness as a whole has exceptions, obviously. But if I had to bet on the fewest number of dopers in a successful athletic culture, I'd go with Japan.