And I thought I was jaded.BroDeal said:As far as GTs go, I vote for non-blood doping wins since 1990. The advantages of that sort of doping is so large that I don't see how anyone could win clean.
Ah well, use your discretion, I guess.....as you did. Thanks. I suppose I mean the 'major' races, or what you may consider such, like (obviously) the Grand Tours, the World Champs, the major Classics, maybe TDF stages, etc. Take your pic. And as far as the time frame goes.....I dunno..... say, since the '50s, maybe?Alpe d'Huez said:What do you mean by "winners...over the years"? All of history? And I assume you mean completely clean their entire career. ........
No the real knobheads are those who assume that the controls always work and that effective confounding methods don't exist and have never been used by cyclists before....that's what's up yo!golancego said:So the a & b samples was positive in -99?
Was this latest "french scandal" some kind of positive dopingtest for Lance?
You knobheads had tried to get him for almost 10 years in trouble without anykind of success.
Dont you have anykind of idea why he has not given any positive dopingtests EVER?
Think about that!
Nice call. His Tour stage 7 win in 92 is a textbook example of how to win a bike race and what pure class looks like. It's a fuxing tragedy what happened to his career. van Hooydonck too.Alpe d'Huez said:Giles Delion was very health conscious and refused to dope in the 1990s as well. Willy Voet apologized to him and said if everyone were clean, Delion would have won the Tour. He won the Maillot Blanc in 1991. His career ended about three years later when he couldn't keep up with the peloton anymore and he was forced to retire, at the age of 27.
ditto...tifosa said:Even if Evans is clean, I can't stand his personality or his public persona. .
Unlikely. It's pretty well assumed he had a few cortisone shots during his years. Having said that, I don't think Hinault was a big time doper, at all. And as noted by others before, drugs in the 70's and 80's were about one one-hundredth as effective as EPO and other blood boosters that appeared in the early 90's, and easier to detect.What about Hinault?
Indurain is what first clued me into that something was seriously wrong with pro cycling. I had never even heard of EPO at the time. The exact moment was that time trial where he beat all the other contenders by four minutes. The closest was Armand de las Cuevas at three minutes. That combined with his climbing and with some other anomalies like Chiapucci made me realize that something was rotten.Alpe d'Huez said:You're kidding, right? His gains were amazing between 1990 and 1991, and he was the "best" rider in the world during an era of mega doping and uninhibited EPO use. Plus he was a client to noted doping doctor Francesco Conconi.
Yep, I agree (by the way, thanks for your relpy on Hinault). I loved Indy, but........not to mention other expamples, he smashed an amazing estimated average output during his hour record attempt in the early '90s (477 -- second only to Mercks, at 485: http://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html ); and Kimmage mentioned in the Velocity Nation interview than he amazingly 'occasionally' dropped pure climbers during the Tour.Alpe d'Huez said:You're kidding, right? His gains were amazing between 1990 and 1991, and he was the "best" rider in the world during an era of mega doping and uninhibited EPO use. Plus he was a client to noted doping doctor Francesco Conconi.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|Was this year's tour harder than the Giro ?||Professional Road Racing||33|
|Who will be in the top spots of Grand Tour GCs in the upcoming years||Professional Road Racing||11|
|Over- and underachievers during the last 20 years||Professional Road Racing||282|
|Winning a major cobbled classic and a GT in one year?||Professional Road Racing||95|