While the talk of the week has been on the Fraud Landis Chronicles, whether he cheated (of course he did), whether or not he's telling the truth (he is, this time) and whether or not Pharmstrong is a doping, fraudulent COTHO (he always has been), my head has exploded trying to make sense of the naivety of those still duped by the belief that one man, and one man only, is the sole clean rider of the last twenty years. For the sport that we love is a dirty, corrupt one. And I really don't give a flying fuck. I've known for a long time that our heroes are flawed human beings, just like you and I, yet I still love it.
So I got to thinking back to the early days of my love affair with pro racing and Le Tour in particular, and the July evenings rushing home from work to catch the half-hour highlights package on SBS TV. How enthralled I was watching the classic battles in the heat of the French Alps, as these giants of the road repeatedly attacked each other, in huge gears at speeds that seemed superhuman. Because they were.
And while I was recalling these great memories, some names were dragged from the recesses of my mind, pushed back there by the fact that they weren't big names of the peloton, but nonetheless were elevated among those legends whom we still revere. For a fleeting moment, three weeks to be exact, these transients became superstars, transformed somehow magically from nobodies and elevated to the highest level in one of the toughest races in the world, then disappeared just as quickly. Miracles do not happen, no matter how much some shamen try to make you believe they do.
The 1993 Tour stands out in my mind for some of the best racing I've witnessed in the race to this day. I still have the VHS tapes of the race and love to revisit them occasionally, marvelling at the pure diesel power of Big Mig, the accelerations of Rominger, the Lazarus-esque rides of Chiappucci, the long, failed solo escape of Robert Millar over the Bonette. Classic stuff.
But it was the performances of some previously undistinguished riders that stood out. One Bjarne Riis, 107th two years earlier, suddenly 5th. One Johan Bruyneel, who finished 7th and set the fastest ever winning average speed in stage 6 (since bettered only twice, once in 1999 by coincidence). Two days later, one Lance Armstrong took his first Tour stage win, before abandoning while in 97th place. One Alvaro Mejia, a Colombian grimpeur who was ever-present in the mountains. And one Zenon Jaskula, a Pole who'd had some solid results, but never anything to match his remarkable 3rd place in the 93 Tour.
So who the hell was he? Apart from success as an amateur in Polish national time trials, and also in the Sun Tour in Australia, his biggest result was 2nd in Tirreno-Adriatico behind one Tony Rominger in 1992. He rode for Team MG-GB in 92 and 93, alongside the likes of Tchmil, Cipo, Ballerini and later-proven dopers like Rebellin and Museeuw. He was in good company, at the right time as EPO was flooding the peloton and the racing was becoming supercharged.
Every night as I watched, his name would be mentioned more and more by Phil and Paul. They had no idea who this guy was either, but were equally as impressed/surprised/baffled by his performance as I was. With Indurain and Rominger doing their best to annihilate each other over the big Cols, there'd always be the same faces hanging on to them like barnacles on a ships hull. Riis, Mejia, Jaskula. They were revelations. They were riding like men possessed. They were juiced to the gills.
Rather than just hanging on, defending his GC position of third, not making too many waves, Jaskula must've been thinking it was all too good to be true, and with the magic potion coursing through his veins probably making him feel like Superman, he took his chance for ultimate glory. Stage 16 to Saint-Loury-Soulon saw him outsprint Rominger and Mig after they decimated the field on the last climb. The speeds and ferocity of the attacks were incredible.
Jaskula looked somewhat sheepish on the podium in Paris, and Indurain and Rominger had a look of “who the hell is this guy?” as they shared the steps with the unheralded Pole. Perhaps he knew that he would never reach such heights again, that this performance couldn't possibly be repeated, and that he would rest on his laurels and fade into obscurity with a huge question mark over the validity of its credibility.
And then, he was gone. Other riders would emulate his ephemeral performance in years to come, products of the influx of doping programs masterminded by the new breed of team management and sports 'doctors'. And of course, the wonder drugs they administered. I didn't really know what was going on back then, but I knew the racing was enthralling, and in hindsight it's easy to see why.
[dmalbum path=”/velominati.com/content/Photo Galleries/brettok@velominati.com/Zenon/”/]
I know as well as any of you that I've been checked out lately, kind…
Peter Sagan has undergone quite the transformation over the years; starting as a brash and…
The Women's road race has to be my favorite one-day road race after Paris-Roubaix and…
Holy fuckballs. I've never been this late ever on a VSP. I mean, I've missed…
This week we are currently in is the most boring week of the year. After…
I have memories of my life before Cycling, but as the years wear slowly on…
View Comments
Nothing more to add to that. Brett has comprehensively covered my experience of the early 90's in a swipe of the keyboard. Looking at the results now makes me feel cold, much like looking at most of the results until last year and even that doesn't make for great reading.
@brett, @Jarvis
Amazing post. The racing was jet-fueled, but I'm with Brett on this, the racing was incredible, too. These were also some of my most formative years of watching bike racing; at that time I had been doing it long enough to understand how amazing the sport was, but was too young to understand what they were doing and how they were doing it.
Knowing how many drugs were in the field does little to diminish how much I loved it. Bottom line is that none of them are clean and the competition is still on a level playing field. The only real difference is that it's hard to compare my own times on a climb or a ride to see how I compare, but I can live with that, so long as I get to ride my bike and watch some incredible racing - like today's Giro stage, incidentally.
Agreed Brett, well written.
It does little to my memories of the greats of that time, in fact one of mine is Pantani. Sure, he doped, but he was the quintessential Italian and cyclist all in one. He was magical, classic and troubled, but so are all the greatest.
The question is where do we go from here?
Great post. My fascination with the Tour started during the Greg LeMond era during the '80s. For you kids, that's pre Internet, cable coverage, or anything approaching real time. Only thing close to real time was weekend highlights on CBS. I was glued to the set and recorded them to VHS tapes. In a move of massive stupidity, I threw all the tapes out about 15 years ago. Would have been cool to watch those again - even the ancient commercials would have been a goof.
Only other coverage was via magazines, months after the Tour was over. I remember a local book store carrying French cycle magazines, with an English translation supplement included. I'd bring 'em to work to read at lunch. Coworkers thought I was insane.
Were riders juiced in the '80s? Sure - on whatever was available at the time. When it comes down to it though, none of that crap really did much, until EPO came along in the '90s.
With Floyd finally confessing, and the countless other pros caught or suspected of doping - it seems Greg LeMond is proving to be correct with what he's been saying for years - doping is widespread - even more then we suspected. Andy Hampsten tells a similar story.
Floyd's method of finally confessing may be awkward at best. His public front of fighting the doping charges - book and related tour, defense fund funded by donations, etc - a huge sham. But, maybe he just carried his sham out a little longer then most pros did - or continue to do so.
I do give Floyd credit for finally coming clean - no matter what his motive is.
+1 to Brett
But Souleur, while I was in awe of Pantani, just one word in reply to that last sentence "Eddy"?
OK sprewing forth...
@frank @Dan O
we're probably all the same age, give or take a year. First time I watched the Tour on TV was '84, but the first year I followed it all the way through, in detail (so I can remember all the details of the race) was '88.
Until EPO came along the arguments were that doping was "merely" recovery, but to say it didn't do much is a bit disparaging for those who wouldn't submit to the needle even then. Equally to say that EPO didn't turn up until the 90's is a little way off the mark. There are reports of it first being used in the late 80's - although I have recently read something to counter this claim. Around '89 or '90 Italian cycling suddenly had a revival and they started winning everything, the history is well documented on the web and I think I've got a copy if it all as well.
The claim that it was all a level playing field is also bollocks. One, by taking the drugs they've immediately created an un-level playing playing field. Two, using the 50% hct "limit" as an example: Christophe Moreau had a hct of 39% (true), A N Other has a hct of 47%. Obviously Moreau is going to benefit far more from boosting up to 50%. Some of the best riders choose not to take drugs and were made outcasts. How was any of this fair on them?
Maybe it was because my favourite rider in the late 80's and early 90's was Gilles Delion, who rode clean, won clean and then got fucked over by dopers and Hein Verbruggen and the UCI (what, you say, another one?)
Flangis doesn't hold the record for carrying out the sham the longest, I think Armstrong has that with Vlav.Piti nudging Flangis into third.
I'm glad he dropped the bomb. Where we go from here is wait for the Federal Investigators to follow the trail and see where it leads. None of this is going to be pretty. Fucking loving it.
@Rob: agreed...I should have known:-) Enough said by me on that.
@Jarvis: Your right on the timing of EPO. I first tuned into the same era, actually it was the Lemond winning Tour that captured my attention and cycling has had it ever since, whether it was eclipsing a mtn top or cutting through the darker valleys....I still love it.
We can say what we want, but as I have always held: even if its an impotent effort, at least cycling gives a rats arse about it, looks into it and deals with dope...all arguements of fairness/logic/rational aside. The major leagues DO NOT, NFL DO NOT, NBA DO NOT, Boxing does not, other sports are too worried about the money impact and at least I can hold my head up and say we at least try.
@All
Finally, some words of sense on the whole Landis confession. Yeah, he went about it all wrong, I never believed he didn't do it, and he's ripped people off for sure (which is the worst part of it, not the actual doping). But did he have a choice? No, in fact I believe he was probably being paid off or even threatened to keep his mouth shut by a certain egotesticle bully. (Cool, I just came up with a new Lexicon entry!)
In the end, he's been left out to dry, and it's a bold move to come out with the allegations in the face of possibly being fucked up the ass by The Ego-testicle. I admire the guy for his balls (and he has two, which probably pisses Lance off too).
Uhm. I feel like I just walked into the middle of another family's long-running, bitter dispute. And, just like the temptation to step in and become a party in another family's dispute would be too great . . .
. . . It seems brett's ravings were sparked by what Geoff wrote originally about Landis, or what Geof wrote and then what I wrote then wrote in agreement with Geof. If I recall correctly--and I have no desire at all to read past postings to find out--I don't believe that either Geof or I were unhappy with this latest Landis episode because he confessed to doping. What made me unhappy is the tawdry, bizarre, and pathetic way he forced himself into a fantastic month of bicycle racing, and hence into my consciousness. The dude is so loose and unhinged that if his doctor were doing his job he'd prescribe Floyd a heavy dose of Rule 5.
@david (the poster formerly known as SGW)
I agree totally; he was an asshole in the way he denied, lied, made Hamilton-esque bizarre excuses, slandered, extorted and embezzled. I never believed a word he said.
But just because of that, there is no need not to believe him now. If you didn't believe him the first time around, that he was clean, then surely by saying 'I doped' now he must be telling the truth. And anyone with half a brain would have already known before last week that Armstrong was a doper, because many, many others have said the same things.
I think Landis has taken a dose of Rule 5 by standing up to Pharmstrong and the Omerta. Now SHamilton, Heras, Vaughters etc need to do the same and do their bit to help restore some credibility to the sport.