The Missing Link

[rustychisel]

not the only Missing Link, but one strong one...

when I get to thinking about cyclists caught doping in the last few years I always seem to come back to one name, a former pro, a Swiss rider of the 90s who now acts as agent and manager for about half the European peloton, apparently. Name's not unlike Karl Wallinger...

discuss

 

[Keith Oates]

Don't know who you mean unless you like roaming around instead of cycling in a straight line!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Tetedelacourse]

ha yes, if anyone ever had reason to dope it was he. Also his riding style (brilliant one minute, on his chinstrap the next) was I think suspicious.

Don't know what Ant's up to these days but I can't recall him ever coming to the fore in the anti-doping fight!!!!

 

[rustychisel]

Sorry Keith, obtuse, I know.

Tony

 

[rustychisel]

Sorry Keith, obtuse, I know.

Rominger

 

[girofan]

Rominger was leader of the Ariostia team in the early nineties and were winning so often that there were suspicions even at the time.
He ought to be re-christened Teflon Tony!!!!!

 

[Keith Oates]

Sorry Keith, obtuse, I know.

Rominger

Don't know who you mean unless you like roaming around instead of cycling in a straight line!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Chuffy]

Didn't Rominger get fingered by Willy Voet (so to speak) in his book?

 

[rustychisel]

sorry K, bit slow.

'Breaking The Chain', don't recall but not surprising at all. That's my point, really...

 

[Dave5N]

It's history. Like Garin and Simpson.

I'm more interested in Cav and Wiggins

 

[rustychisel]

Huh? Garin & Simpson are both dead, and neither are agent to riders at the peak of the sport. So are you like the policeman who says "move along folks, nothing to see here"? If so, you're self-appointed and in the wrong, because my consideration was of riders still very much active, not history, and your particularly narrow 'interests' are not the topic here, though they may be included in the broader question.

 

[Dave5N]

Huh? Garin & Simpson are both dead, and neither are agent to riders at the peak of the sport. So are you like the policeman who says "move along folks, nothing to see here"? If so, you're self-appointed and in the wrong, because my consideration was of riders still very much active, not history, and your particularly narrow 'interests' are not the topic here, though they may be included in the broader question.

Do wot?

 

[rustychisel]

Argue/debate the topic at hand, goddamit! Is that too much to ask? [obviously it is].

 

[zimzum42]

I know it's naive, but I prefer to turn a blind eye, cos all those guys, especially Indurain, gave me so much joy when i was watching them, and it was the excitement of those tours which gave me the interest in cycling.

I'd rather use the rose-tinted and continue thinking they're all great

 

[Tetedelacourse]

I know it's naive, but I prefer to turn a blind eye, cos all those guys, especially Indurain, gave me so much joy when i was watching them, and it was the excitement of those tours which gave me the interest in cycling.

I'd rather use the rose-tinted and continue thinking they're all great

That's an interesting point. I don't defend doping; it's unsporting, unfair, dishonest and dangerous in certain circumstances. However, I find that it doesn't detract from the sporting spectacle, the epic effort and the ability of the majority of the pros in the peloton either now or in the past 20 years.

Let's face it if they were all at it for years then there were still those who rose above the others, and they still performed incredible feats of endurance and strength that I could never dream of. If eg EPO adds 20% in effort then the majority of the effort was still their own.

In fact, I can't see how anyone can be a fan of pro cycling and NOT hold this view. Look back at tapes of past tours. What do you see? Just cheats? Or phenomenal athletes who doped to win?

What do you think?