Any Clean Tour winners in the last 20 years???? - except GL

13»

Comments

  • Bugly
    Bugly Posts: 520
    daviesee wrote:
    Bugly wrote:
    Mettan wrote:
    Did pro's in the 80's take performance enhancing agents ? (pre-EPO).

    Amphetamines were a drug of choice - cycling sadly has always been tarnished with drug use. Recently I was listening to Ron Clarke (ex middle distance runner and olymipic bronze medalist) and noted his comments about the cyclists as early as the begining of the sixties as being the go to guys to get performance enhancing drugs.

    A very sad indiciment on our sport

    Obviously a sad indiciment on all sports :evil:

    True BTW in no way did I suggest anything untoward about Ron Clarke - it was a aimed as a comment about cycling tawdry history with regard to doping. There is that quote attributed to Jacques Anquetil "Leave me in peace; everybody takes dope." and another "DO THEY expect us to ride on mineral water alone?"

    No cycling has always been a dirty sport the difference now is that the fans and administration are beginning to care and perhaps this will be enough to start cleaning up the sport.

    I dont think the peloton is clean - how can I? the riders are the same ones from the previous years, cultures dont change like that :x
  • AndyRubio
    AndyRubio Posts: 880
    I suspect the OP's legal representative might answer "Yes, all clean except Landis and Riis."
    My hour on the plinth
  • disquieting_museeuws
    disquieting_museeuws Posts: 601
    Eric Caritoux was claimed by Willy Voet to have won the 1984 Vuelta clean (if including all Grand Tours).
  • squired
    squired Posts: 1,153
    This thread reminds me of a friend who went to uni with a guy who worked on the Tour during the summer. This guy said that during the Indurain years they just threw the urine away because the doping tests were too expensive. They would collect the urine, then pour it out of the window minutes later!! He also said that Indurain was on so many drugs that if he tried to take any more it would probably either kill him or actually have a negative effect on performance.
  • Langman
    Langman Posts: 178
    That's interesting about Indurain. Looking back he was probably on all sorts of things, he was there at the boom years of epo.

    Its a shame though because I was around 12-15 watching him and looking up to him but when you think about it he was completly bogus.
  • mpd62
    mpd62 Posts: 71
    The early 90's were my favorite as was big mig. I am not in the know but I dont think EPO wast as influential as stated untill more mid 90's. when the Italian Teams mainly Gwiss seemed to be flying (123 in amstel) if I remember and the year that Barny stormed the Tour.I remember reading that phil anderson (motorola) noted that he had trained hard over that winter only to turn up at the first classics to get their ass kicked by the italians and only wondered what they were on(something new?). I remember Mig getting caught for the old hayfever medication then they all seemed to have hayfever back then perhaps to mask something else?
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    mpd62 wrote:
    The early 90's were my favorite as was big mig. I am not in the know but I dont think EPO wast as influential as stated untill more mid 90's.
    Epo was already being used by cyclists in 1987, by 1990 its use was widespread and by 1992 it's use was probably the norm!

    Historical aspects of human recombinant erythropoietin in sport

    1977 Purified EPO is isolated from human urine for the first time.

    1985 EPO gene is cloned.

    1987 Recombinant EPO is first available in Europe.

    1987-1990 A number of deaths of competitive Dutch and Belgian cyclists is linked to EPO use (see Gambrell/Lombardo, ch. 1; Rossi et al., ch. 1; Deacon/Gains, ch. 3).

    1988 Fédération Internationale de Ski (FIS) classifies EPO as a doping substance.

    http://www2.iaaf.org/TheSport/Science/N ... raphy.html
  • mpd62
    mpd62 Posts: 71
    as you state it was arround but it took a few years for atheletes and doctors to understand how to get the best out of it with out dying in their sleep as I said looking back as a fan mid 90's onwards there was a noticable jump in performances
    BikingBernie wrote:
    mpd62 wrote:
    The early 90's were my favorite as was big mig. I am not in the know but I dont think EPO wast as influential as stated untill more mid 90's.
    Epo was already being used by cyclists in 1987, by 1990 its use was widespread and by 1992 it's use was probably the norm!

    Historical aspects of human recombinant erythropoietin in sport

    1977 Purified EPO is isolated from human urine for the first time.

    1985 EPO gene is cloned.

    1987 Recombinant EPO is first available in Europe.

    1987-1990 A number of deaths of competitive Dutch and Belgian cyclists is linked to EPO use (see Gambrell/Lombardo, ch. 1; Rossi et al., ch. 1; Deacon/Gains, ch. 3).

    1988 Fédération Internationale de Ski (FIS) classifies EPO as a doping substance.

    http://www2.iaaf.org/TheSport/Science/N ... raphy.html
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Langman wrote:
    After watching The Tour this year, I was left with the usual feeling that the winner was not clean. It was all to easy. But it got me thinking - has there been a 'clean' winner in the last 20 years except Greg Lemond? I can't think of anyone?

    Anybody care to put forward any candidates?

    So you get "the usual feeling that the winner was not clean"? This is enough for you to accuse all of the last 20 tour winners of doping( except Greg L.)? Whew, your mind works in strange ways. Why bother watching if you feel this way? Forget about it and get on with YOUR life, not someone else's.
    And what makes Greg so pure? Oops, sorry, he said he was. That settles it.
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    dennisn wrote:
    Langman wrote:
    After watching The Tour this year, I was left with the usual feeling that the winner was not clean. It was all to easy. But it got me thinking - has there been a 'clean' winner in the last 20 years except Greg Lemond? I can't think of anyone?

    Anybody care to put forward any candidates?

    So you get "the usual feeling that the winner was not clean"? This is enough for you to accuse all of the last 20 tour winners of doping( except Greg L.)? Whew, your mind works in strange ways. Why bother watching if you feel this way? Forget about it and get on with YOUR life, not someone else's.
    And what makes Greg so pure? Oops, sorry, he said he was. That settles it.

    Here's the thing: it is very easy in cycling NOT to talk about doping. Contador, Armstrong, Indurain, the list goes on, would rather avoid broaching the subject. When a cyclist acknowledges it is a problem and is vocal about the issue they are stepping outside the pack. They are setting themselves up for criticism or a mighty big fall if they are revealed as a doper. Given this, you might reasonably ask why lift your head above the parapit unless you genuinely making a stand or you are genuinely clean?
  • xraymtb
    xraymtb Posts: 121
    Am I the only one that likes to believe that the current champions of our sport are clean until proven otherwise?

    Where is the enjoyment in watching a sport, believing (and it is only a belief without evidence) that every rider is doped? I can see how pro riders get frustrated at being consistently accused of doping without any real evidence.

    There are some (Armstrong is an example) who may not have been 'caught' but have tested positive - in that case suspicion has to arise. For others (Contador for example), with no positive tests I have to believe that he is a clean natural talent who has worked extremely hard to get where he is today. And belittling his achievements without any evidence is a poor show...
    exercise.png
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Paulie W wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Langman wrote:
    After watching The Tour this year, I was left with the usual feeling that the winner was not clean. It was all to easy. But it got me thinking - has there been a 'clean' winner in the last 20 years except Greg Lemond? I can't think of anyone?

    Anybody care to put forward any candidates?

    So you get "the usual feeling that the winner was not clean"? This is enough for you to accuse all of the last 20 tour winners of doping( except Greg L.)? Whew, your mind works in strange ways. Why bother watching if you feel this way? Forget about it and get on with YOUR life, not someone else's.
    And what makes Greg so pure? Oops, sorry, he said he was. That settles it.

    Here's the thing: it is very easy in cycling NOT to talk about doping. Contador, Armstrong, Indurain, the list goes on, would rather avoid broaching the subject. When a cyclist acknowledges it is a problem and is vocal about the issue they are stepping outside the pack. They are setting themselves up for criticism or a mighty big fall if they are revealed as a doper. Given this, you might reasonably ask why lift your head above the parapit unless you genuinely making a stand or you are genuinely clean?

    You may ask anything you want. The racers are under no obligation to you or I to answer anything. Just like you and I.
    Let's say there was a murder and before anyone says anything you jump up and say "It wasn't me, it wasn't me". Hmmmmmmm, it's not too normal of a thing to do, to proclaim you're innocent of something you didn't do.
    As for you, you can stick your head above the parapit if you wish but you'd better wear a helmet. When bullets are flying, trust me, keep your head down. There is no glory in being destroyed.
  • avoidingmyphd
    avoidingmyphd Posts: 1,154
    dennisn wrote:
    Let's say there was a murder and before anyone says anything you jump up and say "It wasn't me, it wasn't me". Hmmmmmmm, it's not too normal of a thing to do, to proclaim you're innocent of something you didn't do.
    true, Dennis. But we should at least acknowledge that every cyclist who succeeds is immediately accused of doping by someone somewhere. No denial by a cyclist can be construed as unprovoked. The choice cyclists face is whether to react or not to the questions which are constantly thrown at them. They are no longer, perhaps unfortunately, in the same position as your non-murderer...
    The choice we face as fans is how we interpret their decision.
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    dennisn wrote:
    Let's say there was a murder and before anyone says anything you jump up and say "It wasn't me, it wasn't me". Hmmmmmmm, it's not too normal of a thing to do, to proclaim you're innocent of something you didn't do.
    Quite right, it isn't normal. Most people would just think 'Nothing to do with me' and say nothing. Unless there was evidence implicating them in the crime of course...

    What would really raise suspicions is if someone started going around threatening people and telling them to keep quiet about what they know. :wink:
  • The Prodigy
    The Prodigy Posts: 832
    BikingBernie wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Let's say there was a murder and before anyone says anything you jump up and say "It wasn't me, it wasn't me". Hmmmmmmm, it's not too normal of a thing to do, to proclaim you're innocent of something you didn't do.
    Quite right, it isn't normal. Most people would just think 'Nothing to do with me' and say nothing. Unless there was evidence implicating them in the crime of course...

    What would really raise suspicions is if someone started going around threatening people and telling them to keep quiet about what they know. :wink:

    Tony Soprano?
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    avoidingmyphd wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Let's say there was a murder and before anyone says anything you jump up and say "It wasn't me, it wasn't me". Hmmmmmmm, it's not too normal of a thing to do, to proclaim you're innocent of something you didn't do.
    true, Dennis. But we should at least acknowledge that every cyclist who succeeds is immediately accused of doping by someone somewhere. No denial by a cyclist can be construed as unprovoked. The choice cyclists face is whether to react or not to the questions which are constantly thrown at them. They are no longer, perhaps unfortunately, in the same position as your non-murderer...
    The choice we face as fans is how we interpret their decision.

    And how many times must they deny this? Every time ANYONE accuses them? I see the riders point. They know that if they respond to everything and anything, all the time, that
    eventually they will be spending half their lives defending themselves for things they have not done. People will start to demand details of your private life. They will go after your kids / your wife/ your friends/ to see what they will say. I don't blame them a bit for not talking to people. It's none of your(or mine) damn business. You take their silence as guilt. I take it as leave me alone. I'll talk to whomever I please, when I please, and not before. YOU have that right. Right? Why not them?
  • shinyhelmut
    shinyhelmut Posts: 1,364
    xraymtb wrote:
    . For others (Contador for example), with no positive tests I have to believe that he is a clean natural talent who has worked extremely hard to get where he is today. And belittling his achievements without any evidence is a poor show...

    ever heard of operation puerto?

    Personally it's not just cycling, any sport I watch I watch with a large dose of cynicism. There is a very short list indeed of sportsmen/women who I am totally confident are clean. Sadly that's the way sport is nowadays.

    As soon as you start playing for money there is too much at stake. Bring back amateurism, I'm pretty certain Roger Bannister was clean :wink:
  • turkeytickler
    turkeytickler Posts: 640
    not doubting the claim but out of interest - why does everyone assume GL was clean? Because he said so? Isnt that what they all say anyway - if there is some material evidence that he was clean - could it not be applied to others?
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    dennisn wrote:
    ...eventually they will be spending half their lives defending themselves for things they have not done. People will start to demand details of your private life. They will go after your kids / your wife/ your friends/ to see what they will say...
    Still a fan of Ayn Rand I see. :wink:
  • avoidingmyphd
    avoidingmyphd Posts: 1,154
    dennisn wrote:
    You take their silence as guilt.

    I never said that Dennis. And incidentally, I don't.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    BikingBernie wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    ...eventually they will be spending half their lives defending themselves for things they have not done. People will start to demand details of your private life. They will go after your kids / your wife/ your friends/ to see what they will say...
    Still a fan of Ayn Rand I see. :wink:

    Don't think Ayn has much to do with it. Just keep saying to yourself "it was ONLY a book, it was only a book, .....only a book"
    I don't know about you, but I sure don't want to spend a whole lot of time explaining myself or defending my actions(although I do enjoy this forum) to anyone, including the government. Maybe that's where Ayn comes in? What do ya think? I don't have to go around proclaiming my innocence on a daily basis and neither do you, for that matter.
    I wouldn't want to and neither would you. So, if you and I don't have to, why should anyone else? Wow, that was almost a rant.
  • xraymtb
    xraymtb Posts: 121
    ShinyHelmut wrote:
    ever heard of operation puerto?

    Wasn't Contador officially cleared of any involvement?

    It's the perfect example of how riders find themselves being called cheats without any positive tests or proof.
    exercise.png
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    dennisn wrote:
    Paulie W wrote:

    Here's the thing: it is very easy in cycling NOT to talk about doping. Contador, Armstrong, Indurain, the list goes on, would rather avoid broaching the subject. When a cyclist acknowledges it is a problem and is vocal about the issue they are stepping outside the pack. They are setting themselves up for criticism or a mighty big fall if they are revealed as a doper. Given this, you might reasonably ask why lift your head above the parapit unless you genuinely making a stand or you are genuinely clean?

    You may ask anything you want. The racers are under no obligation to you or I to answer anything. Just like you and I.
    Let's say there was a murder and before anyone says anything you jump up and say "It wasn't me, it wasn't me". Hmmmmmmm, it's not too normal of a thing to do, to proclaim you're innocent of something you didn't do.
    As for you, you can stick your head above the parapit if you wish but you'd better wear a helmet. When bullets are flying, trust me, keep your head down. There is no glory in being destroyed.

    You clearly havent been paying much attention to what's been happening in the world of cycling for the last20 years or more. Oh well, carry on!
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Paulie W wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Paulie W wrote:

    Here's the thing: it is very easy in cycling NOT to talk about doping. Contador, Armstrong, Indurain, the list goes on, would rather avoid broaching the subject. When a cyclist acknowledges it is a problem and is vocal about the issue they are stepping outside the pack. They are setting themselves up for criticism or a mighty big fall if they are revealed as a doper. Given this, you might reasonably ask why lift your head above the parapit unless you genuinely making a stand or you are genuinely clean?

    You may ask anything you want. The racers are under no obligation to you or I to answer anything. Just like you and I.
    Let's say there was a murder and before anyone says anything you jump up and say "It wasn't me, it wasn't me". Hmmmmmmm, it's not too normal of a thing to do, to proclaim you're innocent of something you didn't do.
    As for you, you can stick your head above the parapit if you wish but you'd better wear a helmet. When bullets are flying, trust me, keep your head down. There is no glory in being destroyed.

    You clearly havent been paying much attention to what's been happening in the world of cycling for the last20 years or more. Oh well, carry on!

    Ya know, all of a sudden, maybe, I've come to the realization that I don't give a d*mn
    whats happened in the last 20 years. More important things to worry about. You guys keep up the worrying though. You're doing a great job. Enough worrying for all of us.

Categories