Who won if Indurain didn't?

dave_1

in keeping with the atmosphere Armstrong's situation has created and the mountain evidence against Miguel Indurain..consulted 2 doping drs and had team mate under oath say team wide doping happened at Banesto the tour de France podiums are now as follows.

1991 1st Greg Lemond
2nd Charly Mottet
3rd Andy Hampsten

1992 1st Andy Hampsten
2nd Charly Mottet

1993 1st Alvaro Meijia
2nd Andy Hampsten

1994 No winner.

1995 No winner

Gazzetta67

Dave_1 wrote:

in keeping with the atmosphere Armstrong's situation has created and the mountain evidence against Miguel Indurain..consulted 2 doping drs and had team mate under oath say team wide doping happened at Banesto the tour de France podiums are now as follows.

1991 1st Greg Lemond
2nd Charly Mottet
3rd Andy Hampsten

1992 1st Andy Hampsten
2nd Charly Mottet

1993 1st Alvaro Meijia
2nd Andy Hampsten


1993 Alvarjo Meijia ?????? - He of Armstrongs team ??????

1994 No winner.

1995 No winner

takethehighroad

Who won if Merckx didn't? Shall we just give them all to Carlos Sastre?

No_Ta_Doctor

I've never quite understood the "pass TdF titles down to the next rider" train of thought.
So Lance gets his titles stripped (or Indurain, whatever). We really have no idea who should have them.

See also Tyler Hamilton's 2004 Olympic TT gold, now in the possession of Ekimov, shortly to be sent on to...?

Anull the result and be done with imo.

MrTapir

Does this mean that Chris Boardman might have won a tour?

dave_1

Gazzetta67 wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

in keeping with the atmosphere Armstrong's situation has created and the mountain evidence against Miguel Indurain..consulted 2 doping drs and had team mate under oath say team wide doping happened at Banesto the tour de France podiums are now as follows.

1991 1st Greg Lemond
2nd Charly Mottet
3rd Andy Hampsten

1992 1st Andy Hampsten
2nd Charly Mottet

1993 1st Alvaro Meijia
2nd Andy Hampsten


1993 Alvarjo Meijia ?????? - He of Armstrongs team ??????

1994 No winner.

1995 No winner

Ok Gazetta right enough, I forgot that. 1993 is a tough one. Take your pick sir. I would like announce Charly Mottet is now the winner of the 1993 TDF. I think Edwig Van Hooydonk should be in second place. I dunno about 3rd. Any ideas?

1993 Tour de France complete final General Classification: http://www.bikeraceinfo.com/tdf/tdf1993.html#gc

dave_1

MrTapir wrote:

Does this mean that Chris Boardman might have won a tour?

Interesting. To be fair he DNFd 2 TDFs in a row when finishing them would have been good for his development/transition. He should have persevered like Wiggo and I do wonder if he regrets it now Wiggo has shown it can be done.

takethehighroad

Am I right in thinking there's a question mark over Roche? My 80s early 90s knowledge isn't great.

dave_1

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

Who won if Merckx didn't? Shall we just give them all to Carlos Sastre?

Give some to Mottet as Willy Voet said Charly was clean. Also, give some to Cadel Evans. 2005 should defo be Evans. Who else? Maybe give one to gotheteeshirt2? Andy Hampsten 1 TDF and I think Steve Bauer was clean so he should get one too

dave_1

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

Am I right in thinking there's a question mark over Roche? My 80s early 90s knowledge isn't great.

He didn't fail any dope controls in the 1980s. So i think he can keep 1987 wins.

MrTapir

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

Am I right in thinking there's a question mark over Roche? My 80s early 90s knowledge isn't great.

I believe BikingBernie would be the man to talk to about this

dave_1

MrTapir wrote:

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

Am I right in thinking there's a question mark over Roche? My 80s early 90s knowledge isn't great.

I believe BikingBernie would be the man to talk to about this

Yes, biking bernie , who should get the wins? Maybe Mottet would get the 1987 TDF with Andy Hampsten in 2nd place..

timoid.

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

Am I right in thinking there's a question mark over Roche? My 80s early 90s knowledge isn't great.

There is evidence that Roche was part of an EPO programme at Carrera in 92/93.

People have extended this to mean that he was also on EPO in 87 when it hadn't reached the peloton.

takethehighroad

Ah I understand now. Carerra were dodgy weren't they? Some of the evidence of Pantani in Rendell's book is from when he was at Carrera isn't it?

Monty Dog

Conconi was Roche's preparatore and charges against him were dismissed on a technicality. In 2000, an Italian judge declared that EPO had been administered to Roche in 1993 but formal charges were dropped due to the statute of limitations

frenchfighter

They all drafted Big Mig? So they all got a benefit from doping, so no one wins. There comes a point where I think this debate can be pushed too far even if it can be interesting to see the possibilities.

dougzz

frenchfighter wrote:

They all drafted Big Mig? So they all got a benefit from doping, so no one wins. There comes a point where I think this debate can be pushed too far even if it can be interesting to see the possibilities.

I'd like to see the DQ's and leave it at that, who really has any idea who would have won. But playing the game, who won the 2007 and 2009 TdF's

Rule74Please

who cares?

If they don't get caught then they get away with it....


Cheating has been in sport since the year dot. Linford Christie still has his medals Carl Lewis. Footballers dive (cheat) Ian Bell didn't walk yesterday in the cricket. Should we award that game to the west indies as a result?

Really get over it it is almost 20 years ago and those watching thought the show was magnificent.

No_Ta_Doctor

Rule74Please wrote:

who cares?

If they don't get caught then they get away with it....


Cheating has been in sport since the year dot. Linford Christie still has his medals Carl Lewis. Footballers dive (cheat) Ian Bell didn't walk yesterday in the cricket. Should we award that game to the west indies as a result?

Really get over it it is almost 20 years ago and those watching thought the show was magnificent.

What about those who turned off because they thought the show had become ridiculous? I didn't watch a single minute's cycling from 1998 - 2010.

Rule74Please

so you turned off when they got caught?

Odd you watched it when the show was at its height. Big lead out trains attacks in the hills etc. Yet when it apparently became clean (what we were told in '99 you weren't interested. Now we are 'told' it is clean again you are interested. Next you'll tell me there was nothing suss about Sastre's win!

No_Ta_Doctor

Rule74Please wrote:

so you turned off when they got caught?

Odd you watched it when the show was at its height. Big lead out trains attacks in the hills etc. Yet when it apparently became clean (what we were told in '99 you weren't interested. Now we are 'told' it is clean again you are interested. Next you'll tell me there was nothing suss about Sastre's win!

I was naive up to 98. Many were.
Didn't believe it was clean after that, didn't see enough being done, and seeing riders staging protests about it in the TdF just sickened me. That wasn't a sport that was going to become clean any point in the near future.

There are plenty of indications now that the sport is getting cleaner. Not clean yet, but heading in the right direction.

I've already told you I didnt see Sastre's win. I doubt any tour winner of that era.

BikingBernie

Dave_1 wrote:

MrTapir wrote:

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

Am I right in thinking there's a question mark over Roche? My 80s early 90s knowledge isn't great.

I believe BikingBernie would be the man to talk to about this

Yes, biking bernie , who should get the wins? Maybe Mottet would get the 1987 TDF with Andy Hampsten in 2nd place..

Even if Roche admitted that he doped he should keep his wins, just as Armstrong should keep his 'wins'. All that would be needed would be for it to go down on record that these results were achieved by doping in an era of rampant doping.

morstar

I presume one of the Boqrdman back to back dnf's was following his lying in a crumpled heap in yellow on an Irish road!?

Re Sastres 2008 win. My clear recollection was of that tour being noticeably different from previous ones and I would think it was a clean win. Although this lends no weight to previous behaviour.

I think riders and teams were genuinely cleaning up and it showed in the riding. Puerto had ended careers previously, Vino had been found out and the team uninvited. Riders no longer rode up mountains like they were minor undulations. I would accept 2008 as a pretty clean GC.

ratsbeyfus

Rule74Please wrote:

who cares?

If they don't get caught then they get away with it....

Really get over it it is almost 20 years ago and those watching thought the show was magnificent.

I thought the Indurain years were deathly dull myself... but I take your point.

ratsbeyfus

BikingBernie wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

MrTapir wrote:

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

Am I right in thinking there's a question mark over Roche? My 80s early 90s knowledge isn't great.

I believe BikingBernie would be the man to talk to about this

Yes, biking bernie , who should get the wins? Maybe Mottet would get the 1987 TDF with Andy Hampsten in 2nd place..

Even if Roche admitted that he doped he should keep his wins, just as Armstrong should keep his 'wins'. All that would be needed would be for it to go down on record that these results were achieved by doping in an era of rampant doping.

Gotta agree with this... they should all be presented with a giant 'asterix'.

mroli

Didn't Boardman have problems with recovery which was why he was DNF in TdFs - it was a medical condition rather than a lack of wanting to finish.

Think it may have been an underactive thyroid?

*Edit - Wikipedia tells me it was a lack of testosterone and Osteoporosis

mididoctors

Timoid. wrote:

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

Am I right in thinking there's a question mark over Roche? My 80s early 90s knowledge isn't great.

There is evidence that Roche was part of an EPO programme at Carrera in 92/93.

People have extended this to mean that he was also on EPO in 87 when it hadn't reached the peloton.

everyone was on that weird gear that wasn't banned yet in the tour but was at the olympics

I kinda think the way they used to do when you tested positive was actually smarter... you got a time penalty

that way the dopers don't win the GC

rick_chasey

Dave_1 wrote:

MrTapir wrote:

Does this mean that Chris Boardman might have won a tour?

Interesting. To be fair he DNFd 2 TDFs in a row when finishing them would have been good for his development/transition. He should have persevered like Wiggo and I do wonder if he regrets it now Wiggo has shown it can be done.

Didn't he suffer from a hormone problem that hurt him in races over a week, and, being a good bloke, wouldn't take something to sort it out?

inkyfingers

Rick Chasey wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

MrTapir wrote:

Does this mean that Chris Boardman might have won a tour?

Interesting. To be fair he DNFd 2 TDFs in a row when finishing them would have been good for his development/transition. He should have persevered like Wiggo and I do wonder if he regrets it now Wiggo has shown it can be done.

Didn't he suffer from a hormone problem that hurt him in races over a week, and, being a good bloke, wouldn't take something to sort it out?

Yup.

timoid.

mroli wrote:

Didn't Boardman have problems with recovery which was why he was DNF in TdFs - it was a medical condition rather than a lack of wanting to finish.

Think it may have been an underactive thyroid?

*Edit - Wikipedia tells me it was a lack of testosterone and Osteoporosis

This can be brought on by the strains of a 3 week race, which was why the Renault and then Vie Claire doctor (forget his name) thought medical doping for the riders health was a necessary step. Its still arguable that not doping in this manner (using synthetic testosterone) is actually worse for a riders health than replenishing what is taken out by hard racing.

Leads me to doubt any rider who is classed as a "great recoverer" is ever clean.

Rundfahrt

If Riis admitted his Tour was won with the help of doping and still has his title, then why should any be taken away retroactively?