Jon Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Depressing stuff. So the "winners" of the Tours for the years Armstrong "won" are 1999 Escartin (3rd) 2000 Escartin (8th) 2001 Kivilev (4th) 2002 Azevedo (6th) 2003 Zubeldia (6th) 2004 Azevedo (5th) 2005 Evans (8th) Depressing that in 2000 and 2008, you have to go to 8th place to find a rider who wasn't (well hasn't been caught or outed) as a drug user. Indeed. I'm sure the head of the UCI said he simply wanted all those TDF results wiped. Not a reallocation to a 'clean' rider, but just wiped from the record, so that nobody won the TDF for those years. I'd probably be inclined to agree with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 i know they say they won't re-award the victories retrospectively but you'd think some of those chaps might fancy claiming victory - especially escartin and azevedo - they're now double Tour winners, morally and technically! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I think it has to be wiped clean. You can't go to Cadel or Fernando.... congratulations chaps you came 8th - have a yellow jersey. It has no credibility at all. Makes me worry about Big Mig, my boyhood sporting hero - 5 consecutive tours. A timetrial monster that could destroy the field on the climbs if he felt like it. He absolutely smashed a pre-cancer Armstrong in 1995. He battered Virenque (another dope master)..... its starting to look a bit suss........ i know they say they won't re-award the victories retrospectively but you'd think some of those chaps might fancy claiming victory - especially escartin and azevedo - they're now double Tour winners, morally and technically! Evans too is a double winner now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 i know they say they won't re-award the victories retrospectively but you'd think some of those chaps might fancy claiming victory - especially escartin and azevedo - they're now double Tour winners, morally and technically! Both of whom have huge clouds over them. The results will be wiped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 oh fair enough, I confess to not knowing very much about the sport. I suppose it probably is for the best then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Depressing stuff. So the "winners" of the Tours for the years Armstrong "won" are 1999 Escartin (3rd) 2000 Escartin (8th) 2001 Kivilev (4th) 2002 Azevedo (6th) 2003 Zubeldia (6th) 2004 Azevedo (5th) 2005 Evans (8th) Depressing that in 2000 and 2008, you have to go to 8th place to find a rider who wasn't (well hasn't been caught or outed) as a drug user. I'd say there's more chance that Zulle was clean in 1999 than Escartin. Kelme (Escartin's team) was one of the filthiest of that era - Fuentes was actually their team doctor at one stage I think. Zulle had just been arrested, interrogated, strip searched, and jailed and then banned the year before. 1999 was supposedly pretty clean (with the obvious exception of USPS) who had motoman following them, as everyone was scared to death of being arrested. There's as good an argument that Zulle was clean for the race, as there is that Escartin was doped IMHO. But then as EPO gave a 15-20% increase in performance at the time, the strongest argument would suggest the top 30-40 riders could have been doped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I see Cadel finally admitted to working with Ferrari - for fitness training only.... A good day to bury some news! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Evans definitely on the juice if he meets up with Dr Ferrari. Same for Rogers. As for Indurain, no doubt he was on something. But worse of all Fat Pat still holding on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 The most amusing and lets face it obvious case had to be Pantani. A birdlike climber that could scamper up mountains turned rippling time trial beast after an injury layoff. Um........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted October 22, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted October 22, 2012 Ultimately, cycling is probably going to have to do what baseball's likely to end up doing: declare 199? - 20?? to be the EPO era, assume that anybody who won was doping and draw a line under it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 The most amusing and lets face it obvious case had to be Pantani. A birdlike climber that could scamper up mountains turned rippling time trial beast after an injury layoff. Um........ Pantani's biography is superb - it's anything but amusing; is very dark and very sad. Whilst both he and Lance were both dopers, Pantani is still incredibly likeable. Totally self-destructive though. He was in a crash in the mid-90's and when they took him to the hospital and took his blood his heamatocrit was 60%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 But let this be a lesson for all sports; doping is almost universal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Pantani's biography is superb - it's anything but amusing; is very dark and very sad. Whilst both he and Lance were both dopers, Pantani is still incredibly likeable. Totally self-destructive though. He was in a crash in the mid-90's and when they took him to the hospital and took his blood his heamatocrit was 60%. Mercatore Uno's turnover doubled as a result of sponsoring Pantani such was his charisma! RIP Il Parata. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted October 22, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 22, 2012 Given that virtually EVERYBODY was doping, I'd let the results stand. I still admire anybody who can do what Armstrong did on what was in effect a level playing field. How clean is Wiggins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Given that virtually EVERYBODY was doping, I'd let the results stand. I still admire anybody who can do what Armstrong did on what was in effect a level playing field. Not everybody was doping but a large number of teams were doing it. It would make a mockery of any sport that condoned drug use. It is dangerous for the competitors, some react very well to the drugs (like Armstrong apparently did) and for others they are lethal. It doesn't become a level playing field even if everyone was doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloBarnesi Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Given that virtually EVERYBODY was doping, I'd let the results stand. I still admire anybody who can do what Armstrong did on what was in effect a level playing field. Not everyone was doping. It was not a level playing field, as doping depends on your natural hematocrit. If it was say 49, and you doped, the improvement would be minimal as the test had to be lower than 50, else you would be banned. But say if it was 44 and you increased 5 points, your improvement would be 10%. Armstrong was known to be using the best products and stopping others getting it. Had it been a equal playing field and Telekom had had the same quality as USPS, Ullrich would have won the tour six or seven years time. Its also known that Armstrong had the most sophisticated avoidance of drug testing, and informed on his rivals. I find it baffling that there can be anything admirable about him. He was a bully and a simple cheat. If you read the USADA report you will see what a nasty person. He ruined people’s lives and their livelihoods. He had people threatening other people. He threatened people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Given that virtually EVERYBODY was doping, I'd let the results stand. I still admire anybody who can do what Armstrong did on what was in effect a level playing field. How clean is Wiggins? I also admire what Armstrong did. What's less admirable is the things he said, as though he was morally superior to those disgusting drug cheats. Wiggins is probably about as clean as everybody else (including Armstrong). As you say, the most sensible is probably to let the results stand - It seems very unlikely that a professional rider would allow so many of his competitors to have an edge by being drug free when there's so much at stake professionally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 How clean is Wiggins? Grenade tossed ;-) Differing opinions in here I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Reacho Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Pat McQuaid will be interviewed on RTE Radio 1 this morning (it's online). It's with Pat Kenny, with good reason as it would be the equivalent of him going on Lorraine Kelly in UK. Hopefully he will try and ask him some of the questions everyone wants answered but I wouldn't hold my breath. McQuaid has refused to go on any of the other radio shows where he'd be taken to pieces. Kimmage was on Matt Cooper last night: media.todayfm.com/podcast/68383 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunRickyRun Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Grenade tossed ;-) Differing opinions in here I think. His image among fans is definitely not helped by Sky. The differences between what they say and what they do is being picked apart on most of the forums I've read. When you see a team squirm as much as Sky have done recently, it gives you an uneasy feeling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts