Pantani

[Pro Tour Punditry]

A tragic waste of a life.

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

He was a guy, he rode a bike exceptionally well, he won several grand tours and challenged some of the best at the time. He maybe doped, he maybe partied too much, he perhaps made choices that were not as honest as ours, even though we may have lacked the pressure of a competitive cyclist. He maybe even went so far as to disregard his own health and safety when he succumbed to drugs and as part of his lifestyle put fame before his wellbeing. Or maybe he used drugs as an escape from the fame, the pressure, the Omerta. Maybe he just didn't have the choice that everyone thinks.

Either way the guy done what he done. As did the majority of the Peloton of that era! Are we just to forget ALL heroes of the 90's and eaarly 2000's? In fact why would any decade be different? They all doped at some point! Not every rider but at least one or two heros of every decade.

We don't see, to berate Mercx, Hinault or Coppi? All failed a primitive test of their time! Imagine their test rate today!

They, mostly, ALL doped!

 

[SS Retro]

R.I.P 'The Pirate' doped as was everyone else a class rider.

 

[montage]

The class riders were the guys with the DNFs who made the choice to stay clean. The rest practically brought the sport to it's knees.

As did the majority of the Peloton of that era! Are we just to forget ALL heroes of the 90's and eaarly 2000's? In fact why would any decade be different? They all doped at some point! Not every rider but at least one or two heros of every decade.

We don't see, to berate Mercx, Hinault or Coppi? All failed a primitive test of their time! Imagine their test rate today!

They, mostly, ALL doped!

To be honest, yes, it is extremely embarrassing for the sport. The sport without question would have been better without a single one of these cheaters.
The doping histories of Merckx Hinault and Coppi are not as widely reported. My response to them is the same - dopers should be obliterated from memory - Merckx et al are just as scummy at the rest of them for cheating. You ride a race doped, your results do not count. It is as simple as that no matter who the opposition is or what they are also on.

Giving these ex dopers any kind of leeway is just letting apathy rule - it is easier to accept they were all doping than to accept that every minute spent watching these performances was a waste of time and that the audience was well and truly made a fool of. People by nature do not like to be wrong, but in supporting these performances over the years we were all so very wrong - and it is not easy to admit that. To deny this is to allow the culture of doping a small victory, and hence my view that any sympathy from a spectator of the sport towards the use of PEDS puts that spectator in the same boat as the doper.

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

There are some riders from that era that I foolishly thought were not juiced, and also riders beyond who I had some belief in that has proved unfounded. But I never thought Pantani was clean, so I never took any pleasure in his riding.

I think his death is a tragedy, and find it difficult to work through in my mind the damage I know he bought into to make him the rider he became (let's be honest, he was an average rider before EPO) and which sustained the illusion with what I know about his personal struggles.

I also find it hard with pre-EPO riders, as I know they doped and I don't buy into the EPO was THE game-changer...but I still think it might have been. There is no doubt that pre-EPO that riders doped. I just hope that the riders I still believe in then and now have not duped me - the numbers are low.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

We've done all this before several times. There's no contradiction between being opposed to doping and remembering the life and death of Marco Pantani with some both sadness and respect. He'll always be a part of why I love cycling as a sport and why it frustrates me. That's all.

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

That "history" is what makes cycling today! To wish it away, or to wish it was different, is to forget some of the biggest names in cycling over the past 50+ years - some of the same heroes that persuaded many of us to get on our bike in the first place.

 

[thom]

The class riders were the guys with the DNFs who made the choice to stay clean. The rest practically brought the sport to it's knees.




To be honest, yes, it is extremely embarrassing for the sport. The sport without question would have been better without a single one of these cheaters.
The doping histories of Merckx Hinault and Coppi are not as widely reported. My response to them is the same - dopers should be obliterated from memory - Merckx et al are just as scummy at the rest of them for cheating. You ride a race doped, your results do not count. It is as simple as that no matter who the opposition is or what they are also on.

Giving these ex dopers any kind of leeway is just letting apathy rule - it is easier to accept they were all doping than to accept that every minute spent watching these performances was a waste of time and that the audience was well and truly made a fool of. People by nature do not like to be wrong, but in supporting these performances over the years we were all so very wrong - and it is not easy to admit that. To deny this is to allow the culture of doping a small victory, and hence my view that any sympathy from a spectator of the sport towards the use of PEDS puts that spectator in the same boat as the doper.

Coppi's time was actually different though - he was definitely a guy who tried to innovate in terms of preparation, things we'd see as basic food science today, like not eating steak on the morning of a race.
In terms of his use of amphetamine, well it was not banned until 1965 after he stopped racing. I myself believe it is important to see usage at the time within the context of amphetamine use during WWII, which young men like Coppi would have been widely exposed to. The purpose then was to make men invincible warriors, capable of daring deeds of killing. The subsequent usage was to give the public invincible cycling champions - I don't know how the state tells men one minute to take a drug and then in peace time expects them not to touch it.

 

[thom]

That "history" is what makes cycling today! To wish it away, or to wish it was different, is to forget some of the biggest names in cycling over the past 50+ years - some of the same heroes that persuaded many of us to get on our bike in the first place.

In my opinion…. cycling is such an amazing sport that I do not doubt it would have had history, spectacle, heroes and plenty of inspirational stories had pro-cycling been clean. I actually believe the stories would have been more human and indeed better.

 

[LutherB]

I'm not sure there would have been many riders able to compete in and finish GT's if it had been 'pan y agua' from the beginning. Was it Degrange who said something like the best race would be one where only one rider finishes? That has probably been the root of the trouble, humans trying to perform inhuman feats.

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

In my opinion…. cycling is such an amazing sport that I do not doubt it would have had history, spectacle, heroes and plenty of inspirational stories had pro-cycling been clean. I actually believe the stories would have been more human and indeed better.

It's easy to say Thom and we have heard all about the cheats who doped to win but what about the dopers who did so merely to survive day to day in a sport riddled with drugs. People seem to forget that riding clean in that era wasn't really a viable option except for the seriously gifted.

To stand back and judge from afar seems, to me, detached from a reality that was then considered normal.

 

[thom]

It's easy to say Thom and we have heard all about the cheats who doped to win but what about the dopers who did so merely to survive day to day in a sport riddled with drugs. People seem to forget that riding clean in that era wasn't really a viable option except for the seriously gifted.

To stand back and judge from afar seems, to me, detached from a reality that was then considered normal.

What about them ? You weren't talking about them and neither was I - the point is irrelevant if you were trying to answer my post.

We were talking about the guys who gained the glory and attention. I clearly made a point that the drama and spectacle people hark back to with reverence would have happened without the drugs.

I can well believe Pantani would have contributed his share to that but I am certain that others would have stood out too.

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

What about them ? You weren't talking about them and neither was I - the point is irrelevant if you were trying to answer my post.

We were talking about the guys who gained the glory and attention. I clearly made a point that the drama and spectacle people hark back to with reverence would have happened without the drugs.

I can well believe Pantani would have contributed his share to that but I am certain that others would have stood out too.

Sure the sport would be brighter without the mirky past that is doping, but doping, along with many other factors, has played a role in the foundation from the start of the very first Tour. No one could predict what professional cycling would be like now without past dopers but to say it would be better is tittering with the naive. People are tending to focus on certain individuals who are known dopers, primarily from the 90's and slightly beyond. Ethically speaking EPO is no more cheating than taking any other banned substance. So is Pantani any worse than Merckx, Coppi, Bartali, Millar, Riis?? etc etc?? We can't just wipe the slate clean, it's more complicated than that. More grey.

We live in the present and learn from past mistakes, to judge a man in such black and white terms pretty much damns the whole of mankind let alone cycling.

 

[thom]

Sure the sport would be brighter without the mirky past that is doping, but doping, along with many other factors, has played a role in the foundation from the start of the very first Tour. No one could predict what professional cycling would be like now without past dopers but to say it would be better is tittering with the naive. People are tending to focus on certain individuals who are known dopers, primarily from the 90's and slightly beyond. Ethically speaking EPO is no more cheating than taking any other banned substance. So is Pantani any worse than Merckx, Coppi, Bartali, Millar, Riis?? etc etc?? We can't just wipe the slate clean, it's more complicated than that. More grey.

We live in the present and learn from past mistakes, to judge a man in such black and white terms pretty much damns the whole of mankind let alone cycling.

@Pedrosanchezo I'm not getting drawn into arguing about something different to what I was posting about

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

@thom fair enough but you were the one who brought it up by replying to my post. FWIW i thought what i posted was very much relevant.