Who was the 1st true, through EPO and/or blood transfusion enhanced TdF-Winner

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Thing with Rooks and Theunisse is they couldnt time trial so they were never contenders.

Fair point. OTOH that would mean Herrera wasn´t a contender in your eyes too. In mine Herrera was a contender, so were Rooks and Theunisse of course.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Fair point. OTOH that would mean Herrera wasn´t a contender in your eyes too. In mine Herrera was a contender, so were Rooks and Theunisse of course.

Nah, in every team time trial Lucho and Parra lost minutes, plus the normal time trials: no contenders.

i rarely agree with taxus but this is one of those times.

sorry fearless, because big mig beat lemond on luz ardiden doesn't mean that he was on epo. do keep in mind that he climbed luz ardiden slower than trofimov did in 2011

1990---very slow cycling, nothing to do with 1993-2013 and beyond

lemond was a hell of a talent but it's not like he was the strongest rider in cycling history i'm sorry

It is not because he beat LeMond on Luz Ardiden it is how he won on Luz Ardiden. Effortless.

When you take a close look at Big Mig's carreer you will notice something happened around 1989. Yes he was good in time trialling, especially shorter ones like prologues but it is not strange this 1.88 metres colos

couldnt climb like climbers like Herrera and Delgado.

We know Mick started to work with Conconi in 1987 [Michele Ferrari was of the opinion Mick would never be better than a good domestique by the way] so I will use 1987 as a starting point for comparison.

So, who will I compare him with? I will take one of my favourite riders of that time: Charly 'big head' Mottet. When a rider wins GP des Nations on his 22nd [won it three times by the way, one might say he has some talent for TT's.

1987:

Indurain 23 years of age
Mottet 24 years of age

* Tour de France prologue
1. Jelle Nijdam en 7'06" (/Moy : 51.549 km/h/)
8. Indurain à 10"
48. Mottet à 26"

* Tour de France
10e etappe
87,5 km time trial
1. Stephen Roche en 1h58'11" (/Moy : 44.422 km/h/)
2. Mottet à 42"
6. Bernard à 1'24"
7. Stevenhaagen à 1'55"
10. Delgado à 2'29"
14. lndurain à 3'12"

* 18e etappe
36,5 km
Mont Ventoux time trial
1. Jean-François Bernard en 1h19'44" (/Moy : 27.466 km/h/) [cortisone rush]
2. Herrera à 1'39"
3. Delgado à 1'51"
9. Mottet à 3'58"
147. lndurain à 15'48"

1988:


* prologue, 1 km
1. Guido Bontempi en 1'14"11
11. lndurain à 6"56 seconds

* 6e etappe
52 km, time trial
1. Sean Yates en 1h03'22" (/Moy : 49.237 km/h/)
2. Visentini à 14"
3. Rominger à 23"
4. Nijdam à 41"
5. Solleveld à 49"
6. Bugno à 1'04"
7. Jurco à 1'06"
8. Mottet à 1'08"
9. Bernard à 1'14"
10. Marie à 1'16"
11. Bauer
12. Delgado à 1'18"
22. Herrera à 1'41"
38. lndurain à 2'13"
45. P.Simon à 2'29"
51. Boyer à 2'46"

Strange weather conditions that day.
starting list = GC previous day:
http://hemeroteca.mundodeportivo.com/preview/1988/07/08/pagina-35/1175831/pdf.html#&mode=fullScreen

129 Yates
119 Bugno
117 Herrera
96 Rominger
92 Pedro Delgado
66 Eric Boyer
65 Pascal Simon
62 Miguel Indurain
25 Charly Mottet
18 Jeff Bernard

bolded the interesting comparisons

Under samish conditions Indurain gains 16 seconds on Pascal Simon and 34 seconds on Boyer. Mmmh. Not impressive.

Mottet got sick further on in that Tour and abandoned later on.

* Mountain Time Trial on stage 13
1. Pedro Delgado en 1h02'24" (/Moy : 36.538 km/h/)
2. Bernard à 44"
3. Rooks à 1'09"
4. Breukink à 2'08"
5. Pino à 2'32"
6. Bauer à 2'37"
7. J.Simon à 2'46"
8. Wilson à 2'50"
9. Pensec à 2'54"
10. J.Pedersen à 2'55"
100. B.Richard à 8'06"
101. lndurain
147. Mottet à 10'32"

* 21e etappe
46 km TT, Santenay

1. Juan Martinez-Oliver en 1h02'37" (/Moy : 44.077 km/h/)
2. Rominger à 4"
3. Jurco à 5"
4. Delgado à 11"
5. Kuum à 58"
6. Visentini à 1'05"
7. Wilson à 1'27"
8. Yates à 1'29"
9. Breukink à 1'36"
10. Blanco-Villar à 1'44"
130. lndurain à 6'54''

Doesnt look like Mick go all out for those last two TT's, or was this his true level in a three week race?

1989:
Big Mick explodes in pre - season:
* wins Paris Nice
* wins Criterium International

Mottet doesnt bad either
* 3th in Tirreno
* wins Dauphinee
* wins Midi Libre

Tour de France:

* prologue
1. Erik Breukink en 9'54" (/Moy : 47.272 km/h/)
2. Fignon à 6"
3. Kelly
4. LeMond
5. Bauer à 8"
6. Mottet à 9"
7. Indurain à 10"
8. Pelier
9. Stevenhaagen
10. Müller
11. Marie

* 06-07-1989
5e etappe
79 km time trial

1. Greg LeMond en 1h38'12"(/Moy : 44.602 km/h/)
2. Delgado à 24"
3. Fignon à 56"
4. Marie à 1'51"
5. Yates à 2'06"
6. Breukink à 2'16"
12. Indurain à 3'32"
14. Mottet à 3'43"

* 16-07-1989
15e etappe
42km mountain time trial
1. Steven Rooks en 1h10'42" (/Moy : 33.097 km/h/)
2. Lejarreta à 24"
3. Indurain à 43"
14. Mottet à 2'24"

* 23-07-1989
21e etappe
27km time trial

1. Greg LeMond en 26'57" (/Moy : 54.545 km/h/)
2. Marie à 33"
3. Fignon à 58"
8. Mottet à 1'16"
12. Maassen à 1'27"
13. Van Hooydonck
17. Indurain à 1'39

Do note Indurain won a mountainstage in that Tour.

1990:
Mottet goes to win the Giro d'Italia for non epo driven coureurs, too bad they give the original trophy to Gianni Bugno.

I have compared Indurains time trial results of 1990 with LeMonds elsewhere in this topic, too much improvement over one year in my book. Climbing again better than the year before, if he didnt have to domestique for Perico who knows?

1991:

* prologue tour de france
1. Thierry Marie en 6'11" (/Moy : 52.398 km/h/)
2. Breukink à 2"
3. LeMond à 3"
4. F.Moreau à 7"
5. Mauri à 8"
6. Nijdam
7. Indurain à 9"
8. Ekimov
9. Bernard à 10"
24. Fondriest à 16"
25. Mottet

* 1st time trial

1. Miguel Indurain en 1h35'44" (/Moy : 45.752 km/h/)
2. LeMond à 8"
3. Bernard à 53"
4. Breukink à 1'14"
5. Bugno à 1'31"
6. Mauri à 1'33"
49. Mottet à 6'01"

Bad day for Mottet?

* 21. LUGNY - MÂCON (CLM, 57KM)LE 27 JUILLET 1991
CLASSEMENT DE L'ETAPE

Place Coureur Temps / Ecart
1 ESP M.INDURAIN 1h11'45''
2 ITA G.BUGNO à 27''
3 USA G.LEMOND à 48''
4 ITA C.CHIAPPUCCI à 1'08''
5 RUS V.EKIMOV à 1'49''
6 FRA J.BERNARD à 2'14''
7 ESP M.MAURI m.t.
8 UKR V.POULNIKOV à 2'27''
9 RUS D.ZHDANOV à 2'32''
10 FRA C.MOTTET à 2'40''

When I compare their carreerpaths I think it is fair to say they are quite good to compare. Mottet was a good TT'er and a good climber. Indurain was a good TT'er who 'became' also a climber. Of course, rider progression is to take into consideration but the amount of progression Mick made around 1989 and the presence of EPO in the peloton at that time can lead only to one conclusion.

 

[jens_attacks]

those kind of comparisons don't make any sense. not even in 1996 pro cyclists were robots.
you can't compare from race to race, as you feel that in every race they are top shape or maybe working for perico

freaking henri pelissier used to improve. bobet too. does this mean they had epo through the veins?


i also do believe that bugno's win had nothing to do with the three letters. not even chioccioli or mauri's

for me the starting point is 1992 tour de france with the performances i already mentioned

well i guess it would be nice that we will sometime in the future have a confirmation from the pioneers.

 

[pmcg76]

those kind of comparisons don't make any sense. not even in 1996 pro cyclists were robots.
you can't compare from race to race, as you feel that in every race they are top shape or maybe working for perico

freaking henri pelissier used to improve. bobet too. does this mean they had epo through the veins?


i also do believe that bugno's win had nothing to do with the three letters. not even chioccioli or mauri's

for me the starting point is 1992 tour de france with the performances i already mentioned

well i guess it would be nice that we will sometime in the future have a confirmation from the pioneers.

What do you think accounts for the performance jumps of those guys you listed. Chioccioli had numerous Top 10s in the Giro without lookong like a winner but then crushed the 91 race. Ditto Mauri had nothing to suggest he could win a GT, yes he struck lucky in 91 with a TT heavy race and the cancellation of the Queen stage but still.

Just as an aside, to compare the victories of Giovanetti(Vuelta 90) v Chioccioli(Giro 91). I would put both at the same level as riders results wise. Giovanetti was allowed to gain a 5 min lead in the Vuelta due to a break and then took advantage of the ONCE V Banesto battle. Chioccioli dominated the 91 Giro winning 3-4 stages(mountain and TT at age 32).

I think Giovanetti was more down to the race situation whilst Chioccioli was more likely on EPO.

 

[Benotti69]

PDM were using epo in the 1991 TdF, if not 1990.

It was said Win Sanders (PDM Doctor) supplied anabolic steroids and EPO to the team and was responsible for the intralipid affair of the 1991 Tour de France.

According to cyclingnews.com, 1990 was the height of the drug taking in the team and two riders stopped with heart problems

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDM_(cycling_team)

 

[Taxus4a]

/QUOTE]

You can t compare Indurain performance when he was a domestique of Perico with a leader as Mottet, it has no sense. You lost energie doing another things, and your motivation in an ITT is lower.

For the rest, I agree with you.

 

[jens_attacks]

one is to use and one is to actually work

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

those kind of comparisons don't make any sense. not even in 1996 pro cyclists were robots.

When there appears to be a pattern comparising is usefull as hell.

Same goes for Bugno and his 'progress' over 1989.

When Dutch riders on Caja Rural state they used EPO in the 1989 Tour, do you think Reynolds or Chateau didnt have it?

you can't compare from race to race, as you feel that in every race they are top shape or maybe working for perico

Likewise for Mottet? Thats why I picked TT's. That was what the colos from Navarro was good at, before his 'weightloss' of course.

i also do believe that bugno's win had nothing to do with the three letters. not even chioccioli or mauri's

for me the starting point is 1992 tour de france with the performances i already mentioned

well i guess it would be nice that we will sometime in the future have a confirmation from the pioneers.

Let me show you a nice statistic:
http://www.dewielersite.net/db2/wielersite/ritfiche.php?ritid=119010
Vuelta a España 1990
ended: 15-05-1990

followed by:
http://www.dewielersite.net/db2/wielersite/voorloopfiche.php?wedstrijdvoorloopid=5644
18-05-1990 1e etappe - Bari (Puglia) - Bari (Puglia) Ind. tijdrit 13

Well, how did Marco Giovanetti do that?

He also was not a bad rider, his blood was prepared very well for that TTT at the 1984 Olympics by Conconi. The same Conconi who worked for years with Gianni B.

Its a small world.

Franco Chioccioli?
Also not a bad rider who did very well on the Yvan Vanmol special. Coppino they called him back in the day, laughable.

Mauri?
Please, a Fuentes baby.

On Indurain and 1992: I think he upped his game in 1992, he was not the only one I think. He was a good rider and thanks to EPO a legend, but still one of the biggest frauds of the sport.

 

[jens_attacks]

i don't base any of my beliefs on the sudden rise/dawn of any riders. things like that can occur in any aspect of life. maybe a guy like il diablo can suddenly start to be more proffesional as in actually training a lot who knows. also decline can happen suddenly without having as a cause, a doping regimen, see magnificent berzin starting to party after he made some good money, not giving a shiit no more about training


for me, cerler climbed in '90 and '91, around 5 MINUTES! slower than rincon '96 and 4 minutes slower than il trullo volante and the pope and all of them dying while pushing on the pedals tells me that jet fuel even if it was used, it didn't work. but that's just me of course

 

[Taxus4a]

i don't base any of my beliefs on the sudden rise/dawn of any riders. things like that can occur in any aspect of life. maybe a guy like il diablo can suddenly start to be more proffesional as in actually training a lot who knows. also decline can happen suddenly without having as a cause, a doping regimen, see magnificent berzin starting to party after he made some good money, not giving a shiit no more about training


for me, cerler climbed in '90 and '91, around 5 MINUTES! slower than rincon '96 and 4 minutes slower than il trullo volante and the pope and all of them dying while pushing on the pedals tells me that jet fuel even if it was used, it didn't work. but that's just me of course

We must think that the time on a climb tend to get down always in sport. Must be like this.

So, taken this into account, that is not important, but it is something, consider that just for 5 minutes in a climb it is just a proof of doping is not a good analisys.

If you take into consideration all the factors, and you say: both climbs, for the wind, for the developed the stage, for the weather conditions, for his situation in the Vuelta, for the work of the domestiques that day. etc.. for the name of the protagonist, etc... must be similar, and you say, it wanst, it was 5 minutes different, that way I could tell: yes, man, there is another factor into account, and must be doping.

but 5 minutes in a long climb as Cerler... just to be a windy day put that 5 minutes, and most considering is an open climb, with two rest.

You compared twoo climb, so that is another thing that just one, 90 and 91, if both were similar and 5 minutes slower than 96, it likely that means something.

But that is logical, in 96 blood doping was more developed than in 92

 

[GuyIncognito]

Michele Ferrari was of the opinion Mick would never be better than a good domestique by the way

Source plz

 

[pmcg76]

i don't base any of my beliefs on the sudden rise/dawn of any riders. things like that can occur in any aspect of life. maybe a guy like il diablo can suddenly start to be more proffesional as in actually training a lot who knows. also decline can happen suddenly without having as a cause, a doping regimen, see magnificent berzin starting to party after he made some good money, not giving a shiit no more about training


for me, cerler climbed in '90 and '91, around 5 MINUTES! slower than rincon '96 and 4 minutes slower than il trullo volante and the pope and all of them dying while pushing on the pedals tells me that jet fuel even if it was used, it didn't work. but that's just me of course

I think it is logical though to think the a peloton full of guys on EPO will go faster than a peloton with a handful of guys on EPO. Thus 96 will of course be a lot faster than 90/92.

I always think its the same difference between a Cat 3 rider in a race with just a handful of Cat 1s and a Cat 3 in a race with nearly all Cat 1s. No comparison.

 

[robow7]

It all boils down to "show me a man of Big Mig's size and weight that climbed that well without help" It didn't make sense then and doesn't now.

 

[D-Queued]

I think it is logical though to think the a peloton full of guys on EPO will go faster than a peloton with a handful of guys on EPO. Thus 96 will of course be a lot faster than 90/92.

I always think its the same difference between a Cat 3 rider in a race with just a handful of Cat 1s and a Cat 3 in a race with nearly all Cat 1s. No comparison.

Interesting analogy.

Not to argue, but my experience is as follows:

Cat 4 racing: Poorly choreographed where everyone is at or over AT, raising the likelihood of crashes considerably. Though Cat 4's will chase everything, like little kids running after a soccer ball, successful solo breakaways are possible (and recommended for safety) for very strong riders.

Cat 3 racing: Paceline knowledge and higher conditioning with some team tactics result in higher speeds that typically remain high throughout the race. Successful breakaways are unusual, but pack splits are common as there can be two tiers within the Cat 3 field: those who are fast and those who refuse to downgrade and return to Crash 4 status

Cat 1/2 racing: Strategy dominates the race, resulting in very uneven pacing that can actually be slower, on average, over the course of an entire race, than Cat 3 albeit infrequently at blistering speeds.

When Cat 1/2 and Cat 3 are on the course together with a a stagger start, sometimes it actually makes sense for the Cat 3's to go first given their predisposition for high constant speeds.

Dave.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Source plz

http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2844...07/22/De-architect-van-Indurains-succes.dhtml

In de ogen van José-Miguel Echavarri is Indurain een genie. Daar dacht de Italiaanse sportprofessor Ferrari ooit anders over. Elf jaar terug meldden zich in diens kantoor op de universiteit van Ferrara coach Echavarri en zijn toen nog onbekende pupil. De ploegleider wilde een uitgebreide analyse van de fysieke mogelijkheden van de negentienjarige Indurain.

Ferrari oordeelde dat het hier geen uitzonderlijk talent betrof en dichtte de tiener slechts modale kwaliteiten toe. Echavarri negeerde het oordeel van de wetenschapper en ziet zijn koppigheid de laatste vijf jaar beloond. 'Het bewijst voor mij dat genieën zich niet wetenschappelijk laten ontleden. Die hebben hun eigen wetten.'

=

In the eyes of José Echavarri Miguel Indurain is a genius. That thought the Italian sports professor Ferrari ever otherwise. Eleven years ago, volunteered in his office at the University of Ferrara and his coach Echavarri then unknown pupil. The team leader wanted a comprehensive analysis of the physical capabilities of the nineteen Indurain.

Ferrari ruled that this was not an exceptional talent and wrote poetry teen only modal qualities far. Echavarri ignored the opinion of the scientist sees his stubbornness and rewarded the last five years. "It proves to me that geniuses do not make scientific decompose. They have their own laws.

There y go.

edit:
and
http://resources3.kb.nl/010690000/pdf/DDD_010691825.pdf
scroll down to page 25

 

[Escarabajo]

Dutch newspaper article 1985, 12 januari.
http://kranten.kb.nl/view/article/id/ddd:010962170:mpeg21:p021:a0231/layout/fullscreen



Pretty ****tty translation but readable.
http://kranten.kb.nl/view/article/id/ddd:010959277:mpeg21:p018:a0252/layout/fullscreen
''ANOTHER TRANSFUSION FOR ZOETEMELK''

Two transfusions for Zoetemelk in 1976, at least.

Looks like the technology was there already. No epo needed there.

1976:
http://kranten.kb.nl/view/article/id/ddd:010460592:mpeg21:p006:a0067/layout/fullscreen


1972:

http://kranten.kb.nl/view/article/id/ddd:010570432:mpeg21:p017:a0283/layout/fullscreen

1980:
http://kranten.kb.nl/view/article/id/ddd:010593757:mpeg21:p008:a0361/layout/fullscreen

He did it only once

I thought he was referring to transfusions with your own blood which will be evry hard to accomplish in those days. That's all. Transfusions with family blood we know it has happened in the past many times.

 

[86TDFWinner]

I'd say Indurain and 1992. If he already used EPO in 1991 (which is very possible), then by 1992 he was certainly following a more scientific program.

I went with Big Miggy too. I'm still scratching my head though at how Greg's name is even mentioned here as a choice. Not to mention, who were/are the 17 people who voted for him?

 

[Samson777]

"it's been proven that a guy can win clean, multiple times, but he still can't and won't admit that. It's almost as if he has to take everyone else down with him, in order to feel some sort of satisfaction." 86TDF winner

Hey 86 tour winner, I just answer here, since it apparently don't fit in the wonder boy tread. I would just like to know, how have it been proven, that you can win the tour clean, multiple times? Where is the proof Lemond was clean? I don't say it is a lie, but where is the proof?

Second, we do not need to discuss if wonderboy could have won without he's big fraud. No point in that. But going from there, to saying; that it would have been possible, to win any of the tours 99-2005 clean( wich is relevant in Wonderboys case), is not straight forward to me. Again, where is the proof supporting that?

 

[StyrbjornSterki]

...Not to mention, who were/are the 17 people who voted for him?

Not people, Lancebots.

 

[Le breton]

"it's been proven that a guy can win clean, multiple times, but he still can't and won't admit that. It's almost as if he has to take everyone else down with him, in order to feel some sort of satisfaction." 86TDF winner

Hey 86 tour winner, I just answer here, since it apparently don't fit in the wonder boy tread. I would just like to know, how have it been proven, that you can win the tour clean, multiple times? Where is the proof Lemond was clean? I don't say it is a lie, but where is the proof?

Second, we do not need to discuss if wonderboy could have won without he's big fraud. No point in that. But going from there, to saying; that it would have been possible, to win any of the tours 99-2005 clean( wich is relevant in Wonderboys case), is not straight forward to me. Again, where is the proof supporting that?

In my opinion Alex Zulle could have won clean in 1999 if the texan thug had not been there ( few EPO positives in 1999 besides the crook from Austin).

 

[Arnout]

I went with Big Miggy too. I'm still scratching my head though at how Greg's name is even mentioned here as a choice. Not to mention, who were/are the 17 people who voted for him?

According to Michael Boogerd, in the peloton at the time he was riding, it was rumored LeMond brought EPO in the peloton. Dunno if it's true or not, but I always find it a bit puzzling to see the clinic always earmarking LeMond as off-limits, like some sort of saint.

 

[ChrisE]

I went with Big Miggy too. I'm still scratching my head though at how Greg's name is even mentioned here as a choice. Not to mention, who were/are the 17 people who voted for him?

Yes, that is baffling. The only thing I can conclude is that there are 17 people in the world that don't wear Greg Lemond Hero PJ's with matching thong to bed every night. Make that 18 because I don't own any either, but I vote for Indurain.

It must be shocking to you that some people in this world may look at the history of cycling, the lack of OOC and lax testing, and all of the doped competition and find it incredulous that the lone shining beacon with silky white robe in the sport is GL. Different opinions and people drawing different conclusions than you are things you will have to deal with in life. Good luck.

 

[86TDFWinner]

"it's been proven that a guy can win clean, multiple times, but he still can't and won't admit that. It's almost as if he has to take everyone else down with him, in order to feel some sort of satisfaction." [/I] 86TDF winner

Hey 86 tour winner, I just answer here, since it apparently don't fit in the wonder boy tread. I would just like to know, how have it been proven, that you can win the tour clean, multiple times? Where is the proof Lemond was clean? I don't say it is a lie, but where is the proof?

Where is the proof he did dope? We're all ears if you'd care to share any info you may have. If $300K offered up to ANYONE by Wonderboy to say they saw LeMond cheat(dope) didn't work, nothing will.

Second, we do not need to discuss if wonderboy could have won without he's big fraud. No point in that. But going from there, to saying; that it would have been possible, to win any of the tours 99-2005 clean( wich is relevant in Wonderboys case), is not straight forward to me. Again, where is the proof supporting that?

Greg LeMond.........(who last we checked, won 3 TDF's clean)

Doubt it? just post ANY credible proof you have that he's doped? a former: rider/teammate/dr, along with dates, times, who administered said drugs to him, what they were, etc? Has to be verifiable and credible, not something your dog told you,

 

[86TDFWinner]

According to Michael Boogerd, in the peloton at the time he was riding, it was rumored LeMond brought EPO in the peloton. Dunno if it's true or not, but I always find it a bit puzzling to see the clinic always earmarking LeMond as off-limits, like some sort of saint.

A "rumor" yet ZERO proof. I bet if we asked Boogerd now, the story would change? Or, if you happen to know Michael, ask him to post said proof or "rumor" he has, for all of us here to read.

 

[86TDFWinner]

It must be shocking to you that some people in this world may look at the history of cycling, the lack of OOC and lax testing, and all of the doped competition and find it incredulous that the lone shining beacon with silky white robe in the sport is GL. Different opinions and people drawing different conclusions than you are things you will have to deal with in life. Good luck.

It must really bug you that people such as yourself still believe in Cancer Jesus as their savior and white knight, incapable of doing such heinous things. I've offered many many times(as other posters have as well) the open challenge of sorts for ANYONE, to post any proof they have about GL being a doper...doors still open, challenge is still there, and crickets.