Rooks admits Epo

intothe12

so...according to cyclingnews Rooks admits using EPO in 1989.

he must have been one of the early adapters to EPO, but does that put the results of people who raced against him and beat him into question? Or (as I hope) the EPO may not have been as potent or effective as the later generations. Or maybe his "medical programme" may not have been as advanced as later generations of riders meaning the benefit of EPO may not have as great, hence clean(er) riders could beat him.

drenkrom

yeah, maybe he just cheated a little bit. maybe EPO, a natural product found in human bodies for the last few hundred thousand years, was different 20 years ago. maybe they took less in those days when they didn't really know how to use the drug and no one checked anyone's haematocrit. :roll:

While it is true that techniques have evolved and refined, the argument is moot. At any one point in time, most dopers dope the exact same way.

It hurts when one of our heroes is exposed, but it's just as bad for them to dope as it is for the riders we despise.

FJS

intothe12 wrote:

so...according to cyclingnews Rooks admits using EPO in 1989.

See other thread: http://www.bikeradar.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12631391

BTW, Rooks' confession is about EPO use after 1989, so basically after his most succesful years.

deejay

FJS wrote:

BTW, Rooks' confession is about EPO use after 1989, so basically after his most succesful years.

Seems to me that a lot of riders have used the stuff in their declining years as they found it hard to loose the money and prestige.
I like to think that I saw them at their best and so I shall stick my head back in the sand.