Abt interview with Armstrong

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Look at the declines of both Indurain and Lemond. Sudden.

But not unexpected. They were aging, new guys getting better, and...

Indurain , b. 16 July 1964 (age 31-32)

1. Bjarne Riis, b. 3 April 1964 (32)
2. Jan Ullrich
3. Richard Virenque
4. Laurent Dufaux
5. Peter Luttenberger
6. Luc Leblanc, b. 4 August 1966 (29)
7. Piotre Ugrumov, b. 21 January 1961 (35)
8. Fernando Escartin, b. 24 January 1968 (28)
9. Abraham Olano
10. Tony Rominger, 27 March 1961 (35)

11. Miguel Indurain

In article <[email hidden]>, Carl Sundquist

Quoted message said:

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Look at the declines of both Indurain and Lemond. Sudden.

But not unexpected. They were aging, new guys getting better, and...

Indurain , b. 16 July 1964 (age 31-32)

1. Bjarne Riis, b. 3 April 1964 (32)

EPO.

Quoted message said:

2. Jan Ullrich
3. Richard Virenque
4. Laurent Dufaux
5. Peter Luttenberger
6. Luc Leblanc, b. 4 August 1966 (29)

New guys getting better.

Quoted message said:

7. Piotre Ugrumov, b. 21 January 1961 (35)
8. Fernando Escartin, b. 24 January 1968 (28)
9. Abraham Olano

Quoted message said:

10. Tony Rominger, 27 March 1961 (35)

EPO.

Quoted message said:

11. Miguel Indurain

Couldn't climb with the best guys. After 5 wins, no longer motivated.

-WG

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

>
> Look at the declines of both Indurain and Lemond. Sudden.

But not unexpected. They were aging, new guys getting better, and...

Indurain , b. 16 July 1964 (age 31-32)

1. Bjarne Riis, b. 3 April 1964 (32)

EPO.

Quoted message said:

2. Jan Ullrich
3. Richard Virenque
4. Laurent Dufaux
5. Peter Luttenberger
6. Luc Leblanc, b. 4 August 1966 (29)

New guys getting better.

Quoted message said:

7. Piotre Ugrumov, b. 21 January 1961 (35)
8. Fernando Escartin, b. 24 January 1968 (28)
9. Abraham Olano

Quoted message said:

10. Tony Rominger, 27 March 1961 (35)

EPO.

Quoted message said:

11. Miguel Indurain

Couldn't climb with the best guys. After 5 wins, no longer motivated.

Dumbass.

Ya he could. Won the Dauphine in 1996 going away.

1996 TdF. The big stage of that race finished in Miguel Indurain's hometown. He was motiivated. All
Indurain had to do to cap his career was win that race then retire. He couldn't do it. Day to day
recovery took a nosedive. His dominance in the Dauphine a few weeks before proved that he still had
the power. He just didn't have the recovery.

Since you've never done a stage race, it's not surprising that you wouldn't realize how big a deal
recovery is.

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>
> Look at the declines of both Indurain and Lemond. Sudden.

But not unexpected. They were aging, new guys getting better, and...

Indurain , b. 16 July 1964 (age 31-32)

1. Bjarne Riis, b. 3 April 1964 (32)

EPO.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

2. Jan Ullrich

New guy getting better

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

3. Richard Virenque

Doper, never did any better in TdF

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

4. Laurent Dufaux
5. Peter Luttenberger
6. Luc Leblanc, b. 4 August 1966 (29)

New guys getting better.

New guy? At 29? He had already been world champion (1994) and had been riding the TdF since at
least 1990.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

7. Piotre Ugrumov, b. 21 January 1961 (35)
8. Fernando Escartin, b. 24 January 1968 (28)
9. Abraham Olano

Quoted message said:

10. Tony Rominger, 27 March 1961 (35)

EPO.

If Rominger took EPO (and since his doctor was Ferrari, the same one who advises LANCE, that is a
possible assumption), then why did he come to train for several summers in Vail, CO before the TdF?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

11. Miguel Indurain

Couldn't climb with the best guys. After 5 wins, no longer motivated.

-WG

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>
> Look at the declines of both Indurain and Lemond. Sudden.

But not unexpected. They were aging, new guys getting better, and...

Indurain , b. 16 July 1964 (age 31-32)

1. Bjarne Riis, b. 3 April 1964 (32)

EPO.

What is there to make us believe that the 1996 TdF was the first time Riis EPO'd or EPO'd to
that extent?

Carl Sundquist said:

If Rominger took EPO (and since his doctor was Ferrari, the same one who advises LANCE, that is
a possible assumption), then why did he come to train for several summers in Vail, CO before
the TdF?

Obvious. He was trying to throw off suspicion.

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Dumbass -

Look at the declines of both Indurain and Lemond. Sudden.

In 1996 Indurain won the Dauphine, convincingly. Then he couldn't do it in the Tour.

Pre-Tour power tests don't mean [censored]. No one can simulate the TdF in training.

Apples and another brand of apples. Lance and his team of technicians have made huge advancements in
developing, measuring and testing his various fitness levels. LANCE is a borg compared to those two.

Although no one can simulate the TdF in training, or even in early season races, LANCE and his team
will know better than Miguel and Greg did when the end is near. Bruyneel will still try to build a
team that will drag LANCE's ass through the tour for a win any way.

Carl Sundquist said:

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Look at the declines of both Indurain and Lemond. Sudden.

But not unexpected. They were aging, new guys getting better, and...

Indurain , b. 16 July 1964 (age 31-32)

1. Bjarne Riis, b. 3 April 1964 (32)

Asterisk.

Quoted message said:

2. Jan Ullrich

Quoted message said:

3. Richard Virenque

Asterisk.

Quoted message said:

4. Laurent Dufaux

Asterisk.

Quoted message said:

5. Peter Luttenberger
6. Luc Leblanc, b. 4 August 1966 (29)
7. Piotre Ugrumov, b. 21 January 1961 (35)

Asterisk.

Quoted message said:

8. Fernando Escartin, b. 24 January 1968 (28)
9. Abraham Olano
10. Tony Rominger, 27 March 1961 (35)

11. Miguel Indurain

In article <[email hidden]>, Carl Sundquist

Quoted message said:

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

10. Tony Rominger, 27 March 1961 (35)

EPO.

If Rominger took EPO (and since his doctor was Ferrari, the same one who advises LANCE, that is
a possible assumption), then why did he come to train for several summers in Vail, CO before
the TdF?

I'm not sure why, but EPO and altitude could have some different benefits, and/or Rominger wanted to
come to America to train like some others have done in the past.

-WG

In article <[email hidden]>, Carl Sundquist

Quoted message said:

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >
> > Look at the declines of both Indurain and Lemond. Sudden.
>
> But not unexpected. They were aging, new guys getting better, and...

Indurain , b. 16 July 1964 (age 31-32)

1. Bjarne Riis, b. 3 April 1964 (32)

EPO.

What is there to make us believe that the 1996 TdF was the first time Riis EPO'd or EPO'd to
that extent?

Why does this matter? From the beginning Ferrari and others knew EPO was not 100% safe, so perhaps
you only take the risks when it really matters.

-WG

warren <[email hidden]> wrote in message news

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >
> > But not unexpected. They were aging, new guys getting better, and...
>
>
> Indurain , b. 16 July 1964 (age 31-32)
>
> 1. Bjarne Riis, b. 3 April 1964 (32)
EPO.

What is there to make us believe that the 1996 TdF was the first time Riis EPO'd or EPO'd to
that extent?

Why does this matter? From the beginning Ferrari and others knew EPO was not 100% safe, so perhaps
you only take the risks when it really matters.

In the context of "they were aging, new guys getting better", Riis would fall under the aging, not
new category; if you are attributing his success to EPO, I'm saying that unless '96 was the first
time Riis doped or unless he significantly increased his dosage/'crit in '96, what do you attribute
his 'victory' (betterness) to? And with the vampires not yet in existence plus being under the
purview of Ferrari and his philosophy on EPO, why should we think '96 would be any different than
'95 or '94? Do you think the previous editions of the Tour mattered any less to Riis than '96?

In article <[email hidden]>, Carl

Sundquist said:

warren <[email hidden]> wrote in message news

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > >
> > > But not unexpected. They were aging, new guys getting better, and...
> >
> >
> > Indurain , b. 16 July 1964 (age 31-32)
> >
> > 1. Bjarne Riis, b. 3 April 1964 (32)
> EPO.

What is there to make us believe that the 1996 TdF was the first time Riis EPO'd or EPO'd to
that extent?

Why does this matter? From the beginning Ferrari and others knew EPO was not 100% safe, so
perhaps you only take the risks when it really matters.

In the context of "they were aging, new guys getting better", Riis would fall under the aging, not
new category; if you are attributing his success to EPO, I'm saying that unless '96 was the first
time Riis doped or unless he significantly increased his dosage/'crit in '96, what do you
attribute his 'victory' (betterness) to?

Yes, some of Ferrari's guys were using EPO long before '96 but that doesn't mean that Riis was using
it earlier. It was the riders' choice, even though Ferrari was/is sympathetic to the reasons the
riders would give for using EPO and he facilitated its use.

"New guys getting better" doesn't necessarily mean young guys. It's more that there are
new/different guys getting better via experience and tactics, better training, drugs, increased
focus on the Tour, etc.. It's also in contrast to the "aging" guys who have done the work and
sacrifice to be at the top for awhile and now they're getting tired and/or less motivated, like
Indurain. If a guy who's been at the top for several years like LeMond or Indurain finds that they
can't win the race anymore it doesn't surprise me that they just fold the tents and cruise to a
relatively easy 10th place or withdraw from the race with a "sickness" even though their power may
have only declined a small amount (but still enough to keep them off the top step of the podium).

-WG

In article <[email hidden]>, Carl

Sundquist said:

warren <[email hidden]> wrote in message news

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > >
> > > But not unexpected. They were aging, new guys getting better, and...
> >
> >
> > Indurain , b. 16 July 1964 (age 31-32)
> >
> > 1. Bjarne Riis, b. 3 April 1964 (32)
> EPO.

What is there to make us believe that the 1996 TdF was the first time Riis EPO'd or EPO'd to
that extent?

Why does this matter? From the beginning Ferrari and others knew EPO was not 100% safe, so
perhaps you only take the risks when it really matters.

In the context of "they were aging, new guys getting better", Riis would fall under the aging, not
new category; if you are attributing his success to EPO, I'm saying that unless '96 was the first
time Riis doped or unless he significantly increased his dosage/'crit in '96, what do you
attribute his 'victory' (betterness) to?

Yes, some of Ferrari's guys were using EPO long before '96 but that doesn't mean that Riis was using
it earlier. It was the riders' choice, even though Ferrari was/is sympathetic to the reasons the
riders would give for using EPO and he facilitated its use.

"New guys getting better" doesn't necessarily mean young guys. It's more that there are
new/different guys getting better via experience and tactics, better training, drugs, increased
focus on the Tour, etc.. It's also in contrast to the "aging" guys who have done the work and
sacrifice to be at the top for awhile and now they're getting tired and/or less motivated, like
Indurain. If a guy who's been at the top for several years like LeMond or Indurain finds that they
can't win the race anymore it doesn't surprise me that they just fold the tents and cruise to a
relatively easy 10th place or withdraw from the race with a "sickness" even though their power may
have only declined a small amount (but still enough to keep them off the top step of the podium).

-WG

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Carl Sundquist) said:

In the context of "they were aging, new guys getting better", Riis would fall under the aging, not
new category; if you are attributing his success to EPO, I'm saying that unless '96 was the first
time Riis doped or unless he significantly increased his dosage/'crit in '96, what do you
attribute his 'victory' (betterness) to? And with the vampires not yet in existence plus being
under the purview of Ferrari and his philosophy on EPO, why should we think '96 would be any
different than '95 or '94? Do you think the previous editions of the Tour mattered any less to
Riis than '96?

I thought of Riis as a high level domestique until about the '95 season. I remember he was a very
loyal worker, too, as in when his team leader was suffering and -not- winning the race, he would
stick with the guy, even if he might have had a chance to do ok himself. '95 was the first year
Riis was able to convince the Gewiss team management to take a chance at him being a protected
rider (though not at the Tour - that was Berzin's gig). That carried over when he moved to
Telekom. The Gewiss team in '94-'95 had some big successes and, while I don't recall them with
any positive dope test results during that period, I do recall some talk of suspicions. Remember
Fleche' Wallone ('94), with the three Gewiss guys on the podium (Argentin, Berzin and Furlan)?
Ugrumov and Gotti were also part of the squad those years. Just so you know (and to put what I
said above into perspective), I'm an "innocent until proven guilty" guy when it comes to dope -
there are certainly times when I've seen results that gave pause for thought. But I try not to
assume too often about this issue.

--
tanx, Howard

"Girls won't touch me 'cuz I got a misdirection..."
Pere Ubu

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

In article <[email hidden]>,

warren said:

If a guy who's been at the top for several years like LeMond or Indurain finds that they can't win
the race anymore it doesn't surprise me that they just fold the tents and cruise to a relatively
easy 10th place or withdraw from the race with a "sickness" even though their power may have only
declined a small amount (but still enough to keep them off the top step of the podium).

Maybe I'm misinterpreting you here, Warren, but I thought Indurain was as motivated to win that
year as he ever had been. At least until he got thrashed on the way through the mountains into
Spain (stage 17) - then it really did look like (as you so aptly decribed it) he folded the
tents. Of course, he was many minutes down at that point. From then on, he seemed to have no
interest in the race, and only sort of held on to the position he was in at the end of that
stage. He had been steadily losing time (about
7:30 or so through the 16 previous stages) throughout the race, but stage 17 was devastating: an
8:30 loss.

--
tanx, Howard

"Girls won't touch me 'cuz I got a misdirection..."
Pere Ubu

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

"Howard Kveck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Carl

Sundquist) said:

In the context of "they were aging, new guys getting better", Riis would fall under the aging,
not new category; if you are attributing his success to EPO, I'm saying that unless '96 was the
first time Riis doped or unless he significantly increased his dosage/'crit in '96, what do you
attribute his 'victory' (betterness) to? And with the vampires not yet in existence plus being
under the purview of Ferrari and his philosophy on EPO, why should we think '96 would be any
different than '95 or '94? Do you think the previous editions of the Tour mattered any less to
Riis than '96?

I thought of Riis as a high level domestique until about the '95 season. I remember he was a
very loyal worker, too, as in when his team leader was suffering and -not- winning the race, he
would stick with the guy, even if he might have had a chance to do ok himself. '95 was the
first year Riis was able to convince the Gewiss team management to take a chance at him being a
protected rider (though not at the Tour - that was Berzin's gig). That carried over when he
moved to Telekom. The Gewiss team in '94-'95 had some big successes and, while I don't recall
them with any positive dope test results during that period, I do recall some talk of
suspicions. Remember Fleche' Wallone ('94), with the three Gewiss guys on the podium (Argentin,
Berzin and Furlan)? Ugrumov and Gotti were also part of the squad those years. Just so you know
(and to put what I said above into perspective), I'm an "innocent until proven guilty" guy when
it comes to dope - there are certainly times when I've seen results that gave pause for
thought. But I try not to assume too often about this issue.

However, it was Warren who (in this thread) associated Riis with EPO. As above "if you are
attributing his success to EPO," I pointed out that if he did it in '96, why not before then also
which would make his change in performance less significant.

I referred to Virenque as a doper because he has admitted it.

In article <[email hidden]>, Carl Sundquist

Quoted message said:

"Howard Kveck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:YOURhoward-
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Carl

Sundquist) said:

In the context of "they were aging, new guys getting better", Riis would fall under the aging,
not new category; if you are attributing his success to EPO, I'm saying that unless '96 was
the first time Riis doped or unless he significantly increased his dosage/'crit in '96, what
do you attribute his 'victory' (betterness) to? And with the vampires not yet in existence
plus being under the purview of Ferrari and his philosophy on EPO, why should we think '96
would be any different than '95 or '94? Do you think the previous editions of the Tour
mattered any less to Riis than '96?

I thought of Riis as a high level domestique until about the '95 season. I remember he was a
very loyal worker, too, as in when his team leader was suffering and -not- winning the race,
he would stick with the guy, even if he might have had a chance to do ok himself. '95 was the
first year Riis was able to convince the Gewiss team management to take a chance at him being
a protected rider (though not at the Tour - that was Berzin's gig). That carried over when he
moved to Telekom. The Gewiss team in '94-'95 had some big successes and, while I don't recall
them with any positive dope test results during that period, I do recall some talk of
suspicions. Remember Fleche' Wallone ('94), with the three Gewiss guys on the podium
(Argentin, Berzin and Furlan)? Ugrumov and Gotti were also part of the squad those years.
Just so you know (and to put what I said above into perspective), I'm an "innocent until
proven guilty" guy when it comes to dope - there are certainly times when I've seen results
that gave pause for thought. But I try not to assume too often about this issue.

However, it was Warren who (in this thread) associated Riis with EPO.

Howard has pinpointed the event where Gewiss's EPO use was first divulged by Ferrari.

-WG

In article <[email hidden]>,

Carl Sundquist said:

However, it was Warren who (in this thread) associated Riis with EPO. As above "if you are
attributing his success to EPO," I pointed out that if he did it in '96, why not before then also
which would make his change in performance less significant.

That's exactly what I was thinking when I started typing (cough, shuffle) and before I started
blathering about Gewiss. Let me try again here (heh...). I think Riis was a strong rider during
the years leading up to his TdF win, though his results didn't always show it. The reason for
this was he was very good at doing the job he was assigned: strong domestique. Anyway, look at
his results in the Tour over the years: fifth in '93 for Ceramiche Ariostea, 14th in '94 and
third in '95 for Gewiss. That progression doesn't seem all that implausible, or to have
significant leaps (the drop to 14th is, imo, explained by the domestique duties for Berzin that
year). Source on results: trap-friis.dkdanmark.Riis.htmOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

I referred to Virenque as a doper because he has admitted it.

Too bad it took the guy so long to admit it. After all the tearful bulshit he spewed about it, he
gets up in court and finally says, "Well, maybe just a little..." And blubs. Again. I never could
stand him.

--
tanx, Howard

"Girls won't touch me 'cuz I got a misdirection..."
Pere Ubu

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

In article <[email hidden]>,

warren said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Carl Sundquist <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

However, it was Warren who (in this thread) associated Riis with EPO.

Howard has pinpointed the event where Gewiss's EPO use was first divulged by Ferrari.

Did he actually divulge that info? I really don't recall that happening (note that I'm not saying
it didn't - I simply don't remember it).

--
tanx, Howard

"Girls won't touch me 'cuz I got a misdirection..."
Pere Ubu

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

In article <[email hidden]>, Howard

Kveck said:

In article said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Carl Sundquist <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

However, it was Warren who (in this thread) associated Riis with EPO.

Howard has pinpointed the event where Gewiss's EPO use was first divulged by Ferrari.

Did he actually divulge that info?

Yes.

Quoted message said:

I really don't recall that happening

It wasn't in public.

-WG