Remembering Marco Pantani

rick_chasey

TailWindHome wrote:

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Hypocrisy of the highest order in pro-race on here. I like rider A because he had panache and was EPO'd to the gills. But I don't like rider B because he was a prolific doper and was EPO'd to the gills.

You're assuming that the reason for disliking rider B is solely due to the doping.

If every rider for the past 30 years was a doper then from a pure 'which rider do you like' point of view then there is a 'level playing field'.

So if rider A has panache and rider B is a c*nt, then the fact they both doped is irrelevant.

a dog's got personality. Personality goes a long way.

Indeed. Doping is no differentiator for '90s cycling.

No_Ta_Doctor

durhamwasp wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

For me, Pantani's doping was unforgiveable, precisely because he seemed a likeable bloke and was an exciting rider. It's because the panache we all loved was fuelled by drugs. Panache is at the heart of cycling's romance, it needs to be authentic or the romance is dead. Pantani's doping was a bigger betrayal of cycling than LA's was.

Serious?

(have u read his book then?)

Yes, and no.

rodgers73

Blazing Saddles wrote:

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

mike6 wrote:

As I said, Its not hypocrisy, its human nature. Also, Pantani is dead, in awful circumstances, so I for one, refuse to bad mouth him in his absence. Get over it.

You being serious ? Bad mouth him in his absence.... just stating facts matey, he doped, got caught doping and was kicked out of racing for doping, facts that I cannot do anything about.

Take a chill-pill and lighten up if not get out of this forum before you get all bitter and twisted

Well, you would be, if your facts were actually...................facts.

He was expelled from the 1999 Giro for high Heamocrit levels which along with other results showed long term EPO use. I can't change that, that is what happened in 1999. Am I wrong ?

Now, don't get me wrong, there is no doubt that Pantani was a heavy user.
However, it was standard protocol to pull riders out of races, if their haematocrit level went above 50%.
Two weeks on the sidelines. "Health reasons" being the official term given by the UCI.
The same thing that Rob Hayles fell foul to before the 2008 Olympics.

http://www.cyclingscience.org/hematocrit.htm

So, no. He wasn't caught for doping, or kicked out of racing for doping.

As for other results showing long term epo use. His haemo instability after his accident in the Milan -Turin race eventually came to light and MR dug up some high numbers for his "late" book.

Not sue I understand this answer. Are you suggesting MP did not dope or just that his expulsion from the '99 Giro was based on something other than a positive dope test?

On_What

Rick Chasey wrote:

He got me into cycling with his 98 Les Deux Alp ride when I was 10.

In return, I wear a replica Mercatone Uno jersey.

This, except I am not worthy of the jersey. The very reason I ride, as a lad it is quite something to watch a chap sail up a mountain at the top of his game even if you don't quite understand the sport.

Garry H

On_What wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

He got me into cycling with his 98 Les Deux Alp ride when I was 10.

In return, I wear a replica Mercatone Uno jersey.

This, except I am not worthy of the jersey. The very reason I ride, as a lad it is quite something to watch a chap sail up a mountain at the top of his game even if you don't quite understand the sport.

Same here, i have a mercatone uno casquette instead!

mike6

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

mike6 wrote:

As I said, Its not hypocrisy, its human nature. Also, Pantani is dead, in awful circumstances, so I for one, refuse to bad mouth him in his absence. Get over it.

You being serious ? Bad mouth him in his absence.... just stating facts matey, he doped, got caught doping and was kicked out of racing for doping, facts that I cannot do anything about.

Take a chill-pill and lighten up if not get out of this forum before you get all bitter and twisted

Ermmm....I think someone needs to take there own advice here. I am not bitter, twisted or indeed even angry, merely stating my opinion.
If you read my first post I said I dont have time for dopers, but because of Pantani's personality I find it difficult to feel bitter about his cheating.
I liked the guy, his personality and frailties appealed to me. Not glossing over his cheating just stating his lasting appeal to quite a few cycling fans.

dolan_driver

There seems to be two trains of thought on Marco Pantani's place in the history of cycling and whether it is acceptable to hold any admiration for him, knowing what we now know about the state of cycling in the years when Pantani was competing. We seem to broadly fall into one of the following groups;

1. Those who accept that Pantani used EPO to win races BUT admired the way he went about winning races on the road, admired his style on the bike and his demeanour off the bike.

2. Those who view Pantani as being as big a sinner against cycling as Lance Armstrong and being someone who deserves nothing but our contempt.

Both arguments are valid. In the period when Pantani competed, I believed the sport was generally clean and I certainly believed the sport's biggest stars were clean. On that basis, Pantani was a great rider to watch and he was the type of rider we thought at the time we'd never see again, an out-and-out pure climber. After the grinding Tour wins of Indurain, Pantani's attacking style was refreshing. Now, in the cold light of day, after the revelations about what truly went on within our sport in those dark days, Pantani's wins and athletic performance are revealed for what they were; fuelled by the same drugs that propelled Lance Armstrong to his Tour wins.

The problem for all longtime fans of professional cycling is this; Pre-2012, how do we view all those race results and all those race winners? Sastre and Evans are generally believed to be clean riders but how do we assess all our other cycling heros from the 2000's, 1990's, 1980's and so on all the way back to the foundation of the sport? Coppi is one of the greats of our sport yet we all know he used drugs at times. So too Merckx. Do we write-off the complete history of the sport up until the point where we know absolutely that the riders are all clean?

Those amazing, four-col, solo attacks by the likes of Theunisse, Virenque, Pantani et al were amazing spectacles to watch and are some of my fondest memories of the sport's past. I naively believed at the time that these were clean performances. I now know differently but I recall the enjoyment those performances gave at the time, and maybe this is the reason why many still have affection and admiration for Pantani, despite all his flaws.

We cannot change what has happened in the past but we should do our best to ensure that the wrongs of the past are never repeated again and our sport gets cleaner and cleaner.

DD.

Macaloon

It's posts like this, and the photos earlier, that make this forum such a rewarding read. Thanks, DD.

Garry H

Dolan Driver wrote:

Those amazing, four-col, solo attacks by the likes of Theunisse, Virenque, Pantani et al were amazing spectacles to watch and are some of my fondest memories of the sport's past. I naively believed at the time that these were clean performances. I now know differently but I recall the enjoyment those performances gave at the time, and maybe this the reason why many still have affection and admiration for Pantani, despite all his flaws.

DD.

Good post, particularly the above paragraph. Sums up my thoughts very well, pre 1998 anyway.

mididoctors

what no Oropa posts yet?

yeah he was fun too watch but I think he sucked us all into his tragedy by willing him on.

I feel responsible in some small way rather than peeved with lance who I never liked irrespective of the doping

the notion of hypocrisy is not without merit... in hindsight he was a bit of a dick.

Le Commentateur

When asked to reconcile how I felt at the time with what we now know about the truth behind their exploits, I simply think of all the friends from round the world I have met, all the amazing places I have been thanks to being inspired by the racing going on at that time. They cheated, yes, but I'm still the richer for it. And nothing captured on video quite equals my memory of being at Oropa, the sheer noise of the crowd as we watched him passing his rivals one by one on the big screen at the finish.

dmclite-3.0

Dolan Driver wrote:

There seems to be two trains of thought on Marco Pantani's place in the history of cycling and whether it is acceptable to hold any admiration for him, knowing what we now know about the state of cycling in the years when Pantani was competing. We seem to broadly fall into one of the following groups;

1. Those who accept that Pantani used EPO to win races BUT admired the way he went about winning races on the road, admired his style on the bike and his demeanour off the bike.

2. Those who view Pantani as being as big a sinner against cycling as Lance Armstrong and being someone who deserves nothing but our contempt.

Both arguments are valid. In the period when Pantani competed, I believed the sport was generally clean and I certainly believed the sport's biggest stars were clean. On that basis, Pantani was a great rider to watch and he was the type of rider we thought at the time we'd never see again, an out-and-out pure climber. After the grinding Tour wins of Indurain, Pantani's attacking style was refreshing. Now, in the cold light of day, after the revelations about what truly went on within our sport in those dark days, Pantani's wins and athletic performance are revealed for what they were; fuelled by the same drugs that propelled Lance Armstrong to his Tour wins.

The problem for all longtime fans of professional cycling is this; Pre-2012, how do we view all those race results and all those race winners? Sastre and Evans are generally believed to be clean riders but how do we assess all our other cycling heros from the 2000's, 1990's, 1980's and so on all the way back to the foundation of the sport? Coppi is one of the greats of our sport yet we all know he used drugs at times. So too Merckx. Do we write-off the complete history of the sport up until the point where we know absolutely that the riders are all clean?

Those amazing, four-col, solo attacks by the likes of Theunisse, Virenque, Pantani et al were amazing spectacles to watch and are some of my fondest memories of the sport's past. I naively believed at the time that these were clean performances. I now know differently but I recall the enjoyment those performances gave at the time, and maybe this is the reason why many still have affection and admiration for Pantani, despite all his flaws.

We cannot change what has happened in the past but we should do our best to ensure that the wrongs of the past are never repeated again and our sport gets cleaner and cleaner.

DD.

I felt the same way watching LA attack on the Hautacam, against Ulrich on Alpe d'huez and others. Like you say it doesn't dilute what you felt at the time and the legacy you personally took from it. I like watching the Pantani vids on youtube, he was a very exciting rider to watch, I get it. I suppose we could drill all the way way back in time, look at the doping that champions took part in and just pull it apart but there is no point to that. Like DD said, time to move on and hope the sport we love cleans up properly.