So with all this Armstrong stuff in the news and Bertie "where's the beef" winning the Giro I argued with my friend that the last clean winner of the tour may (and I use this loosely) be 1987 and Stephen Roche. His recovery after the stage to La Plange was a bit suspect. Any one else have any thoughs on this.
That's a good question, and I'd have to crack open the history book, but i suspect you'd have to go a lot farther back than that.
You have to remember riders in the Tour and some sort of PED go WAY back. Maybe not as sophisticated as todays, but stimulants or some sort of assistance has been standard operating procedure almost throughout the history of the race.
1985 Bernard Hinault
They were never clean. Before epo they were taking roids, before that they were taking amphetamines. It's doping all the way down.
unclean wrote:
They were never clean. Before epo they were taking roids, before that they were taking amphetamines. It's doping all the way down.
What do you expect, its a sport dominated by white people, the biggest cheaters of all time.
That would be Wooster High School (Reno Nevada) grad Greg LeMond.
I bought my first bicycle at the same shop where Greg bought his first bike, "Western Cycles" on 5th st. in Reno. (shop no longer exists).
tacomafan wrote:
That's a good question, and I'd have to crack open the history book
You moron. How is cracking open the history book going to help in answering a question of which you don't know the answer with or without the aid of a history book?
Stephen Roche was filthy, as much of a fraud as Lance. Count him in the doper category, and I'm Irish, and have no reason to make groundless accusations against one of the country's sporting 'greats'.
henny young man wrote:
tacomafan wrote:That's a good question, and I'd have to crack open the history book
You moron. How is cracking open the history book going to help in answering a question of which you don't know the answer with or without the aid of a history book?
Was that even English?
unclean wrote:
They were never clean. Before epo they were taking roids, before that they were taking amphetamines. It's doping all the way down.
Sadly, I believe this to be true. Several years ago there was a site that had a very detailed history of the Tour. They had old interviews with winners going all the way back to 1903, and even then the riders talked about using cocaine diluted in water and then using the solution as eye drops to help keep awake and going while doing stages that could last 20 hours.
what??? wrote:
1985 Bernard Hinault
Probably but I know his teammates were suspect. Fignon admitted it and LeMond has his doubters. On the flip side, a couple of his teammates, Mottet and Berard, were respected for not using. Considering Hinault was overtaken by Fignon and LeMond, his teammates doping, along with his knees, may have put him at a disadvantage.
Campy Record wrote:
So with all this Armstrong stuff in the news and Bertie "where's the beef" winning the Giro I argued with my friend that the last clean winner of the tour may (and I use this loosely) be 1987 and Stephen Roche. His recovery after the stage to La Plange was a bit suspect. Any one else have any thoughs on this.
this is what i assume as well. at least, certainly beginning with delgado there were no more clean winners.
couldn't really say who was systematically blood doping before then. maybe tom simpson was the last clean contender.
oh, wait...
What was the PED of choice in the '80s? I always thought Greg Lemond was clean. What are some accusations of him?
Lemond was almost certainly on the same uppers that all the other 80s cyclists were on. "A dog in a hat" spends a portion of the book talking about the drug culture in the late 80s, and to some extent, implicates lots of the guys who were successful in the 1970s.
I think there is probably going to be a spectrum of "clean", and it would be very rare if a winner of the TdF wasn't pushing the boundaries of what was permissible. My guess is that the last time there was a truly "clean" winner of the TdF, was whenever PEDs were so unrefined that they didn't really provide much of an advantage... so... maybe the 50s or 60s?
Amphetamines, cortisone, other steroids.... and if the Finns were blood doping in the 70's, it would stand to reason the cycling world was already neck deep in that as well.
Jan Ullrich FTW!!! Doing coke in your Porsche with a couple models isn't considered performance-enhancing, after all.
I agree Jason. I think Lemond was one of the few who wasn't brainwashed by the drug culture.
worduphomies wrote:
Stephen Roche was filthy, as much of a fraud as Lance. Count him in the doper category, and I'm Irish, and have no reason to make groundless accusations against one of the country's sporting 'greats'.
I thought I had read that Roche, knowing he would test positive, arranged for his mechanic to take a drug test for him. Problem was, his "mechanic", being a serious biker himself, was also dirty.
As cycling is a team sport you should only consider a clean performance if everyone on the team of the winning rider was clean, too. You'd have to go WAY back for this. The 70's were Eddy M. in his case is pretty obvious so I'd say look at the 60's.
If you don't think Ullrich was on EPO or was blood doping then you are living in a dream world. His DNA was matched to blood bags captured in the Spanish raid. He has more evidence against him than Armstrong.
CakeEater wrote:
Jan Ullrich FTW!!! Doing coke in your Porsche with a couple models isn't considered performance-enhancing, after all.