Jump to content

Come clean young (old) man


rodger
 Share

Recommended Posts

Is it a disgrace and on the other side a good thing all these admissions

Lets face it.... Riis went from being a no-one to winning the tour in two years, I remember he was out of a contract with a certain Italian team "Ariostia" Remember  Gergio Furlan" 1 SEASON WONDER! the year they got a 1-2-3 in Liege? Made everyone look like they were Juniors... well Riis obviously got hold of the magic and promptly lifted his preformances....funny how all his old team mates before he went to Telkom have all been positive... Laurent Dufaux, Pascal Richard Probably the two most well known..

What sucks most, is that RIIS stated he trained harder was more dedicated and sacrificed more than anyone else... this may be true and is probably how he got his name "Mister 60%"

 

Clean Riis= average to good domestique, which he was at SystemU

Dirty Riis= Tour de France Champion

 

Looking at the results from the 90's here are a few of our hero's!!!

 

Richard Virenque

Theirry Claveyrolat

Uwe Ampler

Gert Jan Thuneiss

Djamolidine Abdujaparov (abdu)

Marco Pantini

Franscisco Casagrande

Bjet Zberg

Oscar Camizined

Laurent Jalebert

Johann Museeue

Bjarn Riis

Jan Ulrich

 

So the question is who tells Miguel Indurain he would have won 6 Tours had Bjarne not been going as fast?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rodger

You make a very good point, if you read the book "Breaking the chain" by Willie Voet it shows that just about all the riders mentioned in your list doped. Richard Vironque was so juiced up that on one occasion he was injected with water just to satisfy his need for a performance enhancer.

Those guys did not do EPO but other things.

So back to Miguel hey?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was called "Mister 60%" because of his Haemocrytic value.

 

while I don't condone what he did in any matter I think it's worth remembering that you don't just become invincible....

 

I DO believe that Riis worked his  arse off as he seems to be that type of person. The EPO gave him the extra edge to win but he still HAD to put the work in.

 

-------------------

Clean Riis= average to good domestique, which he was at SystemU

Dirty Riis= Tour de France Champion

--------------------

 

You forget the Ariosta + Gewiss days...

 

Again, I'd rather see the slowest Giro / Tour in history becasue the guys are racing on talent + training alone,  than a lie like Riis' win BUT all cyclists should know that it takes a LOT of hard work to get into any type of racing shape.  

 

 
gianni2007-05-31 15:19:16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stood on the side of the road on Sestrierre the day that Riis shattered Indurain, who was my hero, kind of wonder now about how the whole thing was really unfolding. Then in Paris it seemed like half of Denmark had decended on Paris to welcome their national hero.

 

Even at the time it was evident that riders like Berzin, Virenque, Brochard were achieving surprising results.

 

I cant help but feel that in the absence of a full confession these guys should be prosecuted (remember how quickly the patsy David Millar howled when faced with the loss of his playstation and some jail time), essentially they committed public fraud from which they benefitted enormously financially. It is one thing to say you can come and get my jersey (too snoep to courier it back?), how about rather saying I will repay my prize money, if my employer requests it I will repay my salary or better still donate it to a worthy cause and then tell the whole story.

 

The problem for me is that these guys have given the impression that they no longer are dopers, in most cases that is a fact - seeing that they are retired, so then all they have really done is tried to clear their conciences.

 

What they need to do is break the 'omerta', until that happens pro cycling has zero credibility.

 

I for one support Riis' exclusion from the tour, his resignation as a team manager and his exclusion from the sport until such time as he has demonstrated that his weepy confession is more than just a cathartic

conscience clearing exercise, but that he actually does something for the future of the sport he so hansomly benefits from and has so badly tarnished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

He was called "Mister 60%" because of his Haemocrytic value.

 

 

you will be dead at 60%....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah i read that book as well, what an eye opener, i mean i had my suspicisions and kinda knew all along but the depth of it and what they used was a shock.

 

I heard stories about JAJA being on HGH, and that his shoe size changed during the year because of it. I mean a man older than 25 should have stopped growing a long time ago so whats the deal?????

 

Yeah it's hard to ignore the facts, they were all mediocre riders and then suddenly..... BAM!!!!!!! World champions

 

 

I have to admit it, this doping ring is so deeply rooted into the sport, it's gonna be impossible to unvocer it.

 

Indurain, i am not sure about though, i think he might well have been clean or at least the cleanest. I mean he was by far the most gifted athlete of all of them, lowest resting heart rate in history and his lung capacity - URIVALLED!!!!

 

He was already showing glimpses of being a true champion way back in 1990 against Lemond. Remember he won the stage to Luz Ardiden beating Lemond and Herrera. I think Banesto instructed him to work for delgado and if it was not for that, i personally think he would have won that tour knocking Lemond into second.

 

I dont wanna go out on a limb and say he didn't dope, i just think he had less reason to, but still not sure.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Armstrong???????

 

News paper article:

 

STEELKANT OM: Nagrus nie genoeg om ryers oor Alpe te kry:


EK kry al hoe meer die indruk dat fietsry meer as enige ander sport ter w?reld eerder ?n wetenskap as ?n sport is.

Dit is om di? rede wat ek ook nou begin wonder hoekom dit ons nog verbaas as ons hoor internasionale ryers gebruik verbode middels of dokter hul bloed. In alle eerlikheid, moet ons nie eerder verbaas wees as ons hoor niemand gebruik opkikkers nie?

Dis dalk ?n omstrede stelling, maar kyk net wat verwag ons van die jaers in die Tour de France.

N? ?n week van byna elke dag 200 km jaag oor nie noodwendig plat roetes nie, sit ons vasgenael om te sien hoe klim die mense ? moet tog asseblief nie vergeet hulle is net mense nie ? die Alpe en Pirenie? op hul fietse uit.

Dag n? dag ontvou die drama en dan voel ons verneuk as ons hoor Bjarne Riis het EPO gebruik . . .

Jaers soos Riis, Jan Ullrich, Ivan Basso en die res wie se name verbind word met opkikkers, is mense met ?n besondere talent, maar van wanneer moet hulle bomenslik wees om die boonste trappie van hul sport te bereik?

Want d?t is presies wat van hulle verwag word. Ek kan nie sien hoe dit van ?n ryer verwag kan word om die Alpe ?n die Pirenie? binne ?n week uit te klim nie.

Jean-Marie Leblanc, ?n voormalige Tour-direkteur, het in 2002 opgemerk dat die Tour nie te moeilik moet wees nie, want as dit te moeilik is, verhoog dit die kanse dat jaers verbode middels gaan gebruik.

Wel mnr. Leblanc, hoe moeilik is te moeilik in jou o??

Ek wil nie so ver gaan deur te s? dit is die jaer wat die beste opkikkers het, wat die beste op sy fiets gaan wees nie.

Wat ek wel wil s?, is dat die jaer wat sy liggaam die beste ken, die een is wat bo gaan uitkom.

Elkeen van ons weet waartoe ons liggaam in staat is. En elkeen van ons weet wat om ons liggame te gee ?n hoeveel daarvan om ons liggame te gee om die skynbare onmoontlike moontlik te maak.

En dit is hierin waarin die geheim opgesluit l?. Oor die algemeen word verbode middels opgespoor as daar ?n ongewone hoeveelheid in die sisteem is. Met ander woorde, solank jy die betrokke opkikker binne perke gebruik ? net vir daardie ekstra hupstoot wat die liggaam nodig het om die buitengewone te vermag ? kan dit nie opgespoor word nie.

Dit is hier waar die wetenskap ter sprake kom. Persentasies, milligramme en milliliters beteken die verskil tussen wettig en onwettig.

?n Verdere feit wat ek wil uitlig in my ?betoog?, is dat fietsryers nie opkikkers gebruik om fikser of sterker te word nie. Vir fietsryers gaan alles oor vinnige herstel.

Die een dag n? die volgende is ?n wedloop teen tyd vir die liggaam. Dis na?ef van ondersteuners om te dink ?n goeie nagrus is genoeg om n? L?Alpe du Huez die volgende Col uit te klim.

Terwyl Riis, Erik Zabel en die manne nou erken hulle het EPO gebruik, wonder almal nog oor Lance Armstrong.

Ek dink nie enige van ons hou asem op vir ?n bekentenis van di? sewemalige Tour-wenner nie. En my persoonlike mening is dat di? fenomeen van Texas nie nodig het om enige bekentenisse te maak nie.

As fietsry wel ?n wetenskap is, is Armstrong jou ?ber-wetenskaplike. Daaroor is daar geen twyfel nie.

Dalk, net dalk, was Armstrong se ongelooflike kennis van sy eie liggaam ? en nie oorvloedige verbode middels nie ? sy ?opkikker?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Difficult to say if Indurain doped. (I have already said I am biased.)

My impression is that the only time he would have had to have doped or as was his preference - quit the sport,  would have been if the others via dope came close to his immense natural ability, it appears to be scientific fact that he was close to superhuman.

Interesting Indurain always had a air about him that he was at odds with his DS (who to my mind are the persons responsible for the institutionalsing of doping), one always got the impression at his press conferences and via his contract negotiations that he was committed to the sport but that he was always about to leave/  bow out, ie his committment was conditional. Was there perhaps a boundary that he was not prepared to cross?

Likewise he really did suffer in the mountains and this was where his rivals always had the drop on him (Chiappucci, Pantani, Virenque, Riis, Berzin etc). Maybe he knew that that despite the drug aided climbing ability, his natural (huge) engine would decimate their gains in the time trials.

Apparently same could said of Ullrich (and has been said by D'Hondt), that he only doped because the drugs used by others were so effective that his natural abilities , (which under normal circumstances would have allowed him to dominate), were overshadowed by a bunch of talented but  very normal cyclists who were prepared at all costs to win. 

 

So I choose to believe for now that Indurain did not dope that Riis and Co. did. 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole haemocrit 50 % thing is a thumb suck figure by the UCI. Not sure if it is Cunego, but I recall reading an article that his natural haemocrit level is about 56% and is genetic as his father also has a high level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole haemocrit 50 % thing is a thumb suck figure by the UCI. Not sure if it is Cunego' date=' but I recall reading an article that his natural haemocrit level is about 56% and is genetic as his father also has a high level.[/quote']

 

and people living at high altitute as well, I'm pretty sure the Kenyan athletes all come in with abnormal high haemocrit levels
Link to comment
Share on other sites


you will be dead at 60%....

 

dead or not that is why he got the nickname

 

 it could have been 58 (and there are many cases of riders with that value)

 

....jees talk about pedantic
gianni2007-06-01 05:25:15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole haemocrit 50 % thing is a thumb suck figure by the UCI.

 

which of course is a licence to dope for those who'se numbers don't come close to 50
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 ... 

I for one support Riis' exclusion from the tour' date=' his resignation as a team manager and his exclusion from the sport until such time as he has demonstrated that his weepy confession is more than just a cathartic

conscience clearing exercise, but that he actually does something for the future of the sport he so hansomly benefits from and has so badly tarnished.

[/quote']

 

So I take it that you don't see Riis's fight against doping in the past few years, in his position as CSC DS,  as "actually does something for the future of the sport"? I believe Riis HAS done a lot for cycling. Maybe not as a cyclist, but definitely as the DS of CSC.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to disagree pokerface, but he only partially confessed when he knew he had no other option.

 

ie he has been holier than though preaching about Basso 'betraying' him etc, when all along he knew that he had been guilty of what Basso only 'intended to do'. Putting in place measures and preaching about anti doping is fine after you have fully confessed, up until then he was a hipocrit of the worst order.

 

Still now his confession is guarded, he did it all on his own, he refuses to name names of who was complicit in it with him, probably for fear of retribution, although it seems Ullrichs threats are quite menaingless.

 

This would make me have some faith in him:

yes I did dope,

yes I doped with my other teammates

yes Ullrich doped with me

I got me EPO from this Dr

I was introduced by

I beat the controls by doing this

I have until now kept silent because it was convenient to do so 

 

If he really wants to do something useful then confess fully to everything he knows then and now.

So I still think he cleared his conscience, held on to his team and job and partially perpetuated the vow of silence.

 

Remember I saw this oke on the top step of the podium hands held up high in victory when he had knowingly and scheming cheated others out of a famous victory.

 

My hero? not!

 

 

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

My Profile My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Settings Help Logout