Why does Pantani get a pass (in general)

[firerescuefin]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-says-that-pantani-cannot-be-stripped-of-1998-tour-de-france-title

I started following the sport in 98...this guy reminds me more of Ricco than a rider worth waxing poetically about. :no:

Enlighten me.

[laupsi]

I think the main player involved, (the one making the decision) says everything

[echelon_john]

'Cuz he's f-ing dead?

[firerescuefin]

I think the main player involved, (the one making the decision) says everything

I mean more than that...fans, including folks here, are still fans...I don't get it.

[R2D2]

I mean more than that...fans, including folks here, are still fans...I don't get it.

Panache I guess. He wasn't afraid to call anyone out. I guess a high hemocrit level gives you courage. Plus he is a tragic figure. From lofty heights to OD'ing on coke in lonely hotel room.

[xjoex]

Since he died, people are not jealous of him.

-Joe

[Lewis Moon]

I mean more than that...fans, including folks here, are still fans...I don't get it.

If Paganini was on crystal meth, wouldn't the music still sound sweet? Some of Miles Davis' best work was when he was on junk. Ditto 'Trane and Evans.

There was something beautiful about how MP just rode away from folks on the high passes.
...but he did NOT win ANY of those races. He was a cheater.

[T.J.]

How many times did Eddy get popped?

[Auk]

'Cuz he's f-ing dead?

Hurry, lets dig up Coppi, Bartali, et al and do DNA testing on the bones to see if peds are present. Gotta vilify em before it's too late. . .

Leave the dead and the actions while alive alone. Otherwise, you just end up sharting all over their family and loved ones that still wake to mornings with that person missing.

[christian]

Those of us who were long-time fans were never not fans because they doped. We knew they doped.

The only reason I didn't like he who shall not be named so much is because he couldn't shut up and ride his f*cking bike. He was forever going on about how clean he was and miracles and duping Americans who hadn't ridden a bike since they fell off their Huffies in 8th grade.

Hell, I'd still go out for fish n chips with Indurain and hoon around in his Camaro. I bet we'd have a hell of a time. (I don't think the big Mig was clean...)

[cmg]

why would anyone care? He's dead. The 8 year statue of limitations has expired. why make the effort? He would have to recieve a lifetime ban for the 1999 infraction first, then his former teamates would have to give tesitmony, then be stripped by WADA, then his countries board would have to strip him. a lot of work/expense for a deadman.......... even a deadman is do due process.

Worry about catching the current crop of racers while they're still riding and alive.

[christian]

how many times did eddy get popped?3

[firerescuefin]

Hurry, lets dig up Coppi, Bartali, et al and do DNA testing on the bones to see if peds are present. Gotta vilify em before it's too late. . .

Leave the dead and the actions while alive alone. Otherwise, you just end up sharting all over their family and loved ones that still wake to mornings with that person missing.

You can respect the dead without being a fan. I'm not asking historians to trash him. You're missing the point of the question.

R2D2's response was more along the lines of my question.

[Auk]

You can respect the dead without being a fan. I'm not asking historians to trash him. You're missing the point of the question.

No I'm not. I'm missing the point of ··· we should care this far down the line.

[T.J.]

3

Knew it was few. He is still considered cycling royalty.

[jr59]

If Paganini was on crystal meth, wouldn't the music still sound sweet? Some of Miles Davis' best work was when he was on junk. Ditto 'Trane and Evans.

There was something beautiful about how MP just rode away from folks on the high passes.
...but he did NOT win ANY of those races. He was a cheater.

Who wasn't At the pro level multi stage race level? And how can you be sure of those claims?

History has shown that it is a dirty sport, and why everyone is up in arms about it these days is the question.

[firerescuefin]

No I'm not. I'm missing the point of ··· we should care this far down the line.

Let me S P E L L it out for you. People wax poetically about the guy. He's Ricardo Ricco IMO. Others will completely disagree. I want to know why folks give him a pass. If you think the question is past the statute of limitations on a bike forum, then feel free to move on to another post.

[bicycletricycle]

he was a really great climber and had some "epic battles" on the slopes that were just super amazing.

[firerescuefin]

he was a really great climber and had some "epic battles" on the slopes that were just super amazing.

Thank you.

[texbike]

It's already been stated across a couple of different responses, but here's the summary from my perspective:

1. Panache,
2. Tragic Figure,
3. He wasn't the overpowering prick that LA was, and
4. He's dead.

But I get what you're saying about the adoration. This video speaks volumes:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=66iXTQio7wk .

It's only one of several on Youtube.

Texbike

[christian]

He was nicknamed the Pirate. He wore a bandana. He climbed like no one else. You know the old Phil-ism "dancing on the pedals"? That was il pirata. (I was never really a fan, but thinking back, I might be becoming one!)

[christian]

He's Ricardo Ricco IMO.I think you slightly overestimate the palmares of Riccardo Ricco.

[texbike]

I think you slightly overestimate the palmares of Riccardo Ricco.

Not many Ricco tribute videos out there....

Texbike

[tiretrax]

I think you slightly overestimate the palmares of Riccardo Ricco.

That's because Ricco has been caught twice and early in his career.

Am I cynical because I assume they're all on something or cheating somehow. History certainly proves that - dating back to the second TdF. It doesn't stop me from enjoying the show, as I do with our homegrown professional sports (i.e. football, baseball, basketball). What pro football player, for example, wasn't grown in a lab?

[PQJ]

Who wasn't At the pro level multi stage race level? And how can you be sure of those claims?

History has shown that it is a dirty sport, and why everyone is up in arms about it these days is the question.

Not up in arms, just not buying what they're selling anymore, is all.

Personally, I think there is a very meaninful difference in the efficacy of what they were on 'then' and 'now.'

Sure, cheating has been part of the sport since its beginnings. But I think there was a time when (I) it was a few - or some number - and not all or the vast majority and (ii) those that did were rogues doing it on their own and hoping for the best rather than it being a well funded scientific top to bottom conspiracy. I've followed pro cycling since the early 80s and used to love it. Used to look so forward to the races, big and small. Used to care about and like some of the athletes, and not others. The magic has gone for me. I don't like any of them. I don't care about any of them. If I watch a stage or part of a stage, great; if I don't, I really don't care. If tomorrow's headline reads "all professional cycling everywhere canceled forever" my reaction would be "meh" and I'd go for a ride. I enjoyed the entertainment and that's completely gone. That's cool by me as there are plenty of other things I enjoy. But as a one time hardcore fan it's a little sad. Don't worry though for I'll be over it quite quick.

[goonster]

He was nicknamed the Pirate.

Well . . . he called himself The Pirate, and then wore earrings and a sculpted beard to match. Before that, he was nicknamed Elefantino, which wounded this insecure man terribly.

In Italy, you are tried, convicted, and then everything is reduced to a suspended sentence, or thrown out entirely, on appeal. What's being proposed here (accountability long after the fact) is anathema in the culture*.

Pantani was less Ricco than he was part Tony Montana (paranoiac, pile of coke) and part Floyd Landis (quixotic battle against a postivie PED test), but without the latter's ability to eventually come to terms with his fate.

(* = I will humbly accept a smackdown from Polyglot, or an Italian, on this, but that's what I've learned from calcio.)

[christian]

Not many Ricco tribute videos out there....PM'ed you. It appears we have our work cut out for us. I am downloading Eurosport highlights as we speak. I have 4kb so far.

[MattTuck]

He was nicknamed the Pirate. He wore a bandana. He climbed like no one else. You know the old Phil-ism "dancing on the pedals"? That was il pirata. (I was never really a fan, but thinking back, I might be becoming one!)

This. If you have a cool nickname, you're all good.

[FlashUNC]

Couple reasons:

1) He got booted for high hematocrit. Never tested positive, admittedly because no test existed for EPO at the time. Any retroactive testing now is beyond the eight year statute of limitations.
2) The guy's dead of particularly tragic circumstances.
3) He wasn't a prick who tried to ruin people's lives who accused him of the dopage.

Was he perfect? Nah. An idol? Probably not. But could ride a bike uphill like few people I've ever seen.

[fiamme red]

Pantani brought a breath of fresh air and spontaneity to the Grand Tours that had been dominated in the 1990's by powerful, calculating riders who won races mainly with time-trialling prowess (e.g., Indurain, Rominger, Riis, Ullrich). He was inspiring, mesmerizing, beautiful to watch on the mountain climbs.

[Lewis Moon]

Pantani brought a breath of fresh air and spontaneity to the Grand Tours that had been dominated in the 1990's by powerful, calculating riders who won races mainly with time-trialling prowess (e.g., Indurain, Rominger, Riis, Ullrich). He was inspiring, mesmerizing, beautiful to watch on the mountain climbs.

Yes and yes. I hate it when the robots win.

[christian]

Pantani brought a breath of fresh air and spontaneity to the Grand Tours that had been dominated in the 1990's by powerful, calculating riders who won races mainly with time-trialling prowess (e.g., Indurain, Rominger, Riis, Ullrich). He was inspiring, mesmerizing, beautiful to watch on the mountain climbs.

A lovely summation.

[goonster]

2) The guy's dead of particularly tragic circumstances.

This is what I don't really buy.

There's this trope (to which his family clings) that he was persecuted by dark and mysterious forces. I don't mean to dance on his grave, or to trivialize the afflictions from which he suffered, but he was not the victim of a conspiracy.

After he was booted from the '99 Giro, he could have sat out his two-week suspension and resumed his career. Instead, he went into a truly epic meltdown.

In November 2000, he drove the wrong way down a one-way street (to avoid traffic), hit five cars and walked away with a $50 fine (see what I mean about accountability?). The cop on the scene shook his hand. This was his fourth accident in just one year.

http://www.unc.edu/~hymas/images/pantani_accident.jpg

[jr59]

Not up in arms, just not buying what they're selling anymore, is all.

Personally, I think there is a very meaninful difference in the efficacy of what they were on 'then' and 'now.'



Of course there is, but at the time, they thought they were taking what gave them the biggest advantage. Looking back and saying, that didn't work as well as what there is today is hindsight. The riders of "then" would take what is out there today, because it gives them the best advantage!

All of this "pre EPO" is just that. Hindsight. Like they say is always 20/20.
There is no difference. Just the labs are better!

If pro racing doesn't entertain you, because you have figured out that it is a dirty sport, well ok. I would put to you that it ALWAYS has been a dirty sport! So what? Doing dope does not assure that you will win! In fact doing dope only means you are doing dope, does it help? Sure. Will it allow you to recover more quickly? Sure. Will doing a LOT of it make you win? No chance of that!

The riders still have to ride, and have a team that will support them! It's still the same bike race. Nothing has changed, except now everyone knows what they should have known all along. The field is doped!

[Rueda Tropical]

Maybe because he was a tragic figure who paid a higher price then any other doper of his time for his sins. His decline and death, alone, addicted to coke and completely broken was really sad. Tommy Simpson falls into the same category.

I guess to the general cycling public they look more like victims then perps. Being an king sized arrogant douche on the other hand tends to garner less sympathy.

[verticaldoug]

I mean more than that...fans, including folks here, are still fans...I don't get it.

Because he made watching the tour fun.

I think stripping the past winners is a bit ridiculous, even in Voldemort's case. The TDF is entertainment for July. As long as I am entertained, I am happy.
It's all about me.

[katematt]

I agree with the superlatives, but the definition of winner in cycling is a gray one.

He also still looked cool in the hideous Carrera Tasoni Denim kit

[firerescuefin]

Pantani brought a breath of fresh air and spontaneity to the Grand Tours that had been dominated in the 1990's by powerful, calculating riders who won races mainly with time-trialling prowess (e.g., Indurain, Rominger, Riis, Ullrich). He was inspiring, mesmerizing, beautiful to watch on the mountain climbs.

I can wrap my mind around this.

[FlashUNC]

This is what I don't really buy.

There's this trope (to which his family clings) that he was persecuted by dark and mysterious forces. I don't mean to dance on his grave, or to trivialize the afflictions from which he suffered, but he was not the victim of a conspiracy.

After he was booted from the '99 Giro, he could have sat out his two-week suspension and resumed his career. Instead, he went into a truly epic meltdown.

In November 2000, he drove the wrong way down a one-way street (to avoid traffic), hit five cars and walked away with a $50 fine (see what I mean about accountability?). The cop on the scene shook his hand. This was his fourth accident in just one year.

http://www.unc.edu/~hymas/images/pantani_accident.jpg

As someone who never knew the man, there's been a number of interviews that -- conspiracy or no -- he believed it happened, and whatever mental problems he struggled with in the last years of his life were exacerbated by what happened.

Rouleur had a particularly interesting interview with his mother which, conspiracy aside, she recounted that her son really never bounced back from getting tossed from the race that he viewed as an ultimate betrayal from the sport.

The tragedy, from where I sit, is this is a guy who appeared to totally lose his way and felt increasingly isolated, to the point he died alone in his hotel room, likely from a drug overdose.

I think he's more fondly remembered because of how his career and life ended than if he were still knocking around. It's a very Italian story in a lot of ways, not all that different from Coppi's.

[J.Greene]

I think the tortured and martyred artist thing is a big part and if her were alive it would be another story. I was not a fan of his when he was alive but ill be intelectually honest and say I've fallen for the legend too.

[54ny77]

because he rode up steep hills in the drops and in a big ring faster than most of us cruise along the flats.

;)

[John Price]

Was he also the last person to win both the Giro and Tour in the same year? If not, he's one of the rare few to do it anyway.

As others have stated he had a certain panache (self given nickname or not) and wasn't "robotic" in how he rode. The way he rode up mountains was amazing. He didn't seem calculating when he attacked - he just seemed to attack whenever he felt like it.

John

[bikingshearer]

Maybe because he was a tragic figure who paid a higher price then any other doper of his time for his sins. His decline and death, alone, addicted to coke and completely broken was really sad. Tommy Simpson falls into the same category.
I guess to the general cycling public they look more like victims then perps. Being an king sized arrogant douche on the other hand tends to garner less sympathy.

To me, Tom Simpson is a more tragic figure because he was struck down in mid-race playing by the rules as the existed at the time. I don't mean the rules that were written in a rule book that were enforced sporadicaly, if at all, and then grudgingly. I mean the actual 'facts of life" rules, the ones that the entire peloton, their managers, team owners and press knew were how the game was truly played. Everyone in that year's Tour had to have had at least "there but for the grace of God go I" moment.

That doesn't mean Pantani is not a tragic figure (and I think it is the combination of his panache as a rider and the facts of his downward spiral in life that make for his enduring fame). But whereas anyone in the peloton of 1967 could have suffered Tom Simpson's fate, almost no one else in the peloton of 1998 could have suffered Marco Pantani's fate. Not a slam on the man, just how my peculiar view of the world shakes out.

[bikingshearer]

Interesting discussion about Pantani. I can understand why he retains some popularity.

The case I don't understand at all is Richard Virenque. He was caught red-handed in what was at the time the biggest doping scandal in the history of the sport, l'Affaire Festina, one that came a lot closer to shutting down the Tour than anything LA ever did. Virenque lied about it, made accusations that he was being set up - and then acted like a hurt child when his lies quickly were exposed.

On top of that, he was a noted jerk in the peloton, had the tactical sense of a gnat, and displayed an arrogance far out of proportion to anything he actually accomplished (not that arrogance is ever attractive). And yet the French loved him and, apparently, continue to love him. He was welcomed back to racing with open arms, cheered wildly by TdF crowds. I don't get it.

[Bostic]

I've always liked this clip from the Ventoux stage. The announcers voice at 42 seconds in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx69vgRvZ84

[Clydesdale]

But I loved watching him because:
He attacked (over and over)
He rode angry like he had a chip on his small little shoulders
He embraced suffering

Maybe it's just that it feels funny to speak ill of the dead, especially the tragically so, but more than that I think the fans of that era just remain in awe of the way the guy rode (especially uphill). Not sure there was ever much doubt that he would/did take whatever he could get his hands on, but man could he turn the cranks!

[saab2000]

He was the most exciting rider between 1994 and 2000. By far. He suffered a terrible compound leg fracture and returned from that injury.

It was a flawed era in a flawed sport.

If we're going to start going after the dead and those who never tested positive (Pantani never tested positive) we should just give up on the sport and ride the trails. We may as well have DNA testing on every rider alive.

By saying he never tested positive, I'm not saying he was a saint who never 'prepared'. But we don't know, do we? There's only conjecture and speculation at this point.

Let the dead rest.

http://redkiteprayer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/PantaniGalibierSnow98-@PhSptsm.jpg

[deluxerider]

Leave the dead and the actions while alive alone. Otherwise, you just end up sharting all over their family and loved ones that still wake to mornings with that person missing.

To me; this is like saying we shouldn't speak ill of a deceased serial killer. An extreme example to be sure and Pantani's indiscretions were nothing like that, but his death does not excuse or change the fact that he committed those "crimes".

I think he's popular because he had style and personality. I still think Floyd Landis solo flyer in the 2006 tour was pretty bad ass.

[fiamme red]

Interesting discussion about Pantani. I can understand why he retains some popularity.

The case I don't understand at all is Richard Virenque. He was caught red-handed in what was at the time the biggest doping scandal in the history of the sport, l'Affaire Festina, one that came a lot closer to shutting down the Tour than anything LA ever did. Virenque lied about it, made accusations that he was being set up - and then acted like a hurt child when his lies quickly were exposed.

On top of that, he was a noted jerk in the peloton, had the tactical sense of a gnat, and displayed an arrogance far out of proportion to anything he actually accomplished (not that arrogance is ever attractive). And yet the French loved him and, apparently, continue to love him. He was welcomed back to racing with open arms, cheered wildly by TdF crowds. I don't get it.I like this quote by Vasseur:

In general, it was difficult to find support for Virenque among other riders, most of whom regard him as self-centered and obsessed with his popularity, especially among teenage girls.

Cedric Vasseur, a French rider for the Credit Agricole team, was one of the few willing to be quoted by name.

Vasseur showed his competitiveness and his feelings in the French championship last Sunday. Virenque had third place, and its bronze medal and place on the podium, sewn up but, as he neared the line, he began saluting his fans.

While Virenque showboated, Vasseur kept his head down and stormed to the finish, eating up the distance that separated the two riders. Alerted by the cries of his fans, Virenque suddenly stared to his left — just as Vasseur shot by on the right. The medal was his.

"Yeah, Virenque has a lot of fans cheering for him," Vasseur said after he took the Tour's physical examination. "And their IQ is no bigger than his."(From Sam Abt's column on 7/3/1999, http://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/03/sports/03iht-bike.2.t_0.html)

[thwart]

I've always liked this clip from the Ventoux stage. The announcers voice at 42 seconds in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx69vgRvZ84

Fun to watch, isn't it?

Yet, EPO use at its most obvious...

[cachagua]

Whatever else, there is one thing I like about Virenque. Some time after, they asked him in an interview if -- if he could win the Tour doped to the gills, and not get caught -- he would do so. He looked at them like they were a little crazy, and said of course he would.

If Vasseur gave any different answer from that, or any of the other guys Virenque raced against, if any of today's riders gave a different answer, if I did, or if you did, we were lying. Lying. Virenque spoke the truth, and the other thread (the one about whether folks like to watch racing irrespective of doping, or not) bears it out: it's not the doping that detracts from the excitement of the races, it's the doping hysteria that does. A bunch of opportunistic journalists and lawyers have stolen your fun, and you're mad at the guys who were providing it.

As for Pantani: as others have stated, he raced with passion, which not everyone at that time was doing. But if he doesn't get titles taken away from him, I sincerely hope it's because it's beginning to dawn on people how stupid that is!

[schneiderrd]

he was a really great climber and had some "epic battles" on the slopes that were just super amazing.

The same could be said for LA

[1centaur]

I never liked the way he climbed, but I did like the spontaneous seeming attacks that may have reflected more his character than his cunning.

Criminals who are characters always find a following more enthusiastic and jovial than do cool, calculating criminal enterprises. In cycling, doped or not we see something of the person as he struggles against his limitations. Ricco smirked and boasted; Pantani snarled and clawed with a bit of a twinkle in his eye for the joy of it all.

As for Merckx, he had enormous will to exceed his own expectations, a 99 to 1 ratio of grit and determination to joy at his accomplishments. How rarely he smiled, and how sincerely.

Part of sports is sharing the human spirit. We gravitate to real and shun pretense, even if real isn't the prettiest thing out there. The great disgust at he who shall not be named is how real and awesome the artifice appeared yet how deep and cynical the underlying truth.

[wc1934]

because he rode up steep hills in the drops and in a big ring faster than most of us cruise along the flats.

;)

+1
old school rider in modern times

[oldpotatoe]

I mean more than that...fans, including folks here, are still fans...I don't get it.

There are still Armstrong fans..I've met them. Altho not this guy.

[rnhood]

Armstrong was (and probably still is) a very elite cyclist, one of the best ever. Pantani was also an elite cyclist, one of the best. Neither one had character. Both drugged, both lied. There are a lot more like them.

[saab2000]

Armstrong was (and probably still is) a very elite cyclist, one of the best ever. Pantani was also an elite cyclist, one of the best. Neither one had character. Both drugged, both lied. There are a lot more like them.

And just out of curiosity, how can you say definitively that Pantani used drugs? He never failed a test. He's not around to admit anything. The 50% rule of the late 90s was a 'health limitation', not a positive test.

Internet speculation and conjecture prove nothing.

Everyone knows that it was a dirty era in a sport that's always been dirty. That said, I don't understand the pitchfork crowd who want to demonize everyone. If you don't like cheating, stay away from professional sports. Frankly, stay away from life in general. EVERYONE seeks an advantage and people are unethical every day in life.

Sometimes these conversations remind me of the absurdity of this scene from Monty Python... They were geniuses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTdDN_MRe64

[goonster]

And just out of curiosity, how can you say definitively that Pantani used drugs? He never failed a test.
Well, we just heard about the retroactive positive test, and that's really why we're talking him about him now.

He was never given a sporting sanction, and Italy did not have a sporting fraud law at the time, but because of various medical records (hematocrit values between 42% and 58%) and circumstantial info (insulin syringe alleged to be "planted"), we can say, with a very high degree of certainty that he used EPO. And not just because "everybody did it back then."

He shouldn't be stripped of the titles, but PED use is part of his legacy.

[joosttx]

To quote Neil Young, it's better to burn out than to fade away. The guy was epic, flawed, and paid the price. I think he gets a "pass" because he paid for his crime.

He got popped early compared to the others and never rebounded. Instead he tailed spun dying of cocaine toxicity during a three day solo binge. It's so f'ing tragic, only moral zealots and sociopaths would not give the fella a little slack.

[Climb01742]

Part of sports is sharing the human spirit. We gravitate to real and shun pretense, even if real isn't the prettiest thing out there. The great disgust at he who shall not be named is how real and awesome the artifice appeared yet how deep and cynical the underlying truth.

as omar of 'the wire' would say...true dat. true dat.

in 99% of lives, our human struggles are fought in private. in sports, we can get a glimpse of all sides of the human spirit, the noble and the flawed. it's a great human drama we can all tune in to. it's no accident that sport is the most valuable content that media companies vie to pay billions for. it's a drama and a show we can't get enough of.

[markie]

This is what I don't really buy.


After he was booted from the '99 Giro, he could have sat out his two-week suspension and resumed his career. Instead, he went into a truly epic meltdown.



He got booted on the penultimate day of the Giro that he ridden beautifully. He had a big lead in his countries biggest race. I can imagine wanting to throw my toys out of the pram if that happened to me.

(I was pretending to write my these at the time and I watched every stage live. I have not watched or followed the Giro since)

[firerescuefin]

It's so f'ing tragic only, moral zealots and sociopaths would not give the fella a little slack.

So, he was a victim:rolleyes:

[saab2000]

Well, we just heard about the retroactive positive test, and that's really why we're talking him about him now.

He was never given a sporting sanction, and Italy did not have a sporting fraud law at the time, but because of various medical records (hematocrit values between 42% and 58%) and circumstantial info (insulin syringe alleged to be "planted"), we can say, with a very high degree of certainty that he used EPO. And not just because "everybody did it back then."

He shouldn't be stripped of the titles, but PED use is part of his legacy.

I don't disagree with anything here except that we haven't yet heard of a retroactive positive test. What we've heard, if I understand correctly, is that French authorities are investigating that era and the Pat Mcquaid shot his mouth off, saying that if Pantani were found to have used prohibited substances that he might be stripped of his 1998 Tour title. He has since retracted that statement.

Anything else is speculation or circumstantial.

I'm not saying there isn't overwhelming evidence but to just say rider xxxxx is guilty, seemingly randomly and often because someone isn't a fan, is a stretch.

LA never tested positive either. But there was so much evidence against him, including testimony from eye witnesses, that he went down.

The evidence against Pantani is less strong and the feel is more of a witch hunt than a search for truth and justice. Bring them all down or none of them. We can't be selective. When will Indurain be brought to task? Chiappucci? Argentin? Tonkov? Simoni? Fignon? Why is Lemond given a totally clean bill? Just because he says so vehemently that he's clean?

Where does it start and where does it end? Rhetorical question....

[goonster]

The evidence against Pantani is less strong and the feel is more of a witch hunt than a search for truth and justice. Bring them all down or none of them.
Agreed. There is just nothing to be gained by now digging into this era in general, and Pantani in particular.

[Rueda Tropical]

Lets take all the palmares away from everyone in the 90's with a couple of exceptions - Cippo and Pantani get a special dispensation from the pope for displaying that uber-Italiano panache.

[crossjunkee]

Why does he get a pass? Because he's not here to defend himself.

He's still one of my favorite riders! He would attack like no other, over and over and over and over. Loved it!

[sante pollastri]

Because people still remember David,not Golia.
Pantani is a legend,he was alone against Indurain,Tonkov,Rominger,Ullrich,Armstrong,champio ns much strong than him....

[alessandro]

I never liked the way he climbed, but I did like the spontaneous seeming attacks that may have reflected more his character than his cunning.

Criminals who are characters always find a following more enthusiastic and jovial than do cool, calculating criminal enterprises. In cycling, doped or not we see something of the person as he struggles against his limitations. Ricco smirked and boasted; Pantani snarled and clawed with a bit of a twinkle in his eye for the joy of it all.

As for Merckx, he had enormous will to exceed his own expectations, a 99 to 1 ratio of grit and determination to joy at his accomplishments. How rarely he smiled, and how sincerely.

Part of sports is sharing the human spirit. We gravitate to real and shun pretense, even if real isn't the prettiest thing out there. The great disgust at he who shall not be named is how real and awesome the artifice appeared yet how deep and cynical the underlying truth.

+++1. Beautifully put.

[PQJ]

LA never tested positive either.

I think it's more correct to say that LA's positive test results, whether 1 or more, were never made public.

[bikingshearer]

And just out of curiosity, how can you say definitively that Pantani used drugs? He never failed a test.

True, he never failed a drug test. But when he busted his femur (ouch ouch ouch ouch ouch), at the hosptial his blood work showed a hematocrit level of something like 60%. That doesn't just happen. This all happened before there was an available EPO test. (Incidentally, one of Bjarne Riis' nicknames was "Mr. 60%." I'm guessing that was not a reference to his tax bracket.)

So it is pretty darn clear that Pantani doped. As they say, the race does not always go to the strong or the contest to the swift - but that is the way to bet.

[saab2000]

True, he never failed a drug test. But when he busted his femur (ouch ouch ouch ouch ouch), at the hosptial his blood work showed a hematocrit level of something like 60%. That doesn't just happen. This all happened before there was an available EPO test. (Incidentally, one of Bjarne Riis' nicknames was "Mr. 60%." I'm guessing that was not a reference to his tax bracket.)

So it is pretty darn clear that Pantani doped. As they say, the race does not always go to the strong or the contest to the swift - but that is the way to bet.

I don't disagree with any of this. My point in defending Pantani is simply that in singling him out it's a bit unfair as it would appear that virtually everyone in that era was well 'prepared'. Not only him.

[christian]

Talking ···· about Pantani while f@cking Bjarne Riis is an active DS is worse than stupid.

[savine]

Pantani was the dogs.........and thats why he gets and deserves a pass. Riders like him are few and far between and we all enjoyed to watch him race, in a shell he brought pleasure to many. Some things should just be left alone especially when the fella can't defend himself it's not as if he was a nounce or anything like that.

[BBB]

I don't disagree with anything here except that we haven't yet heard of a retroactive positive test. What we've heard, if I understand correctly, is that French authorities are investigating that era and the Pat Mcquaid shot his mouth off, saying that if Pantani were found to have used prohibited substances that he might be stripped of his 1998 Tour title. He has since retracted that statement.

Anything else is speculation or circumstantial.

I'm not saying there isn't overwhelming evidence but to just say rider xxxxx is guilty, seemingly randomly and often because someone isn't a fan, is a stretch.

LA never tested positive either. But there was so much evidence against him, including testimony from eye witnesses, that he went down.

The evidence against Pantani is less strong and the feel is more of a witch hunt than a search for truth and justice. Bring them all down or none of them. We can't be selective. When will Indurain be brought to task? Chiappucci? Argentin? Tonkov? Simoni? Fignon? Why is Lemond given a totally clean bill? Just because he says so vehemently that he's clean?

Where does it start and where does it end? Rhetorical question....

I don't think there is a witch hunt or that Pantani is being singled out. What we know is that the French Senate will be releasing a report into the 1998TdF, which of course Pantani won. There have been leaks in relation to what this report might say and these leaks have been limited to Jalabert and Pantani. Given what happened in 1998 it will be likely that any such report will be broad in scope. As the winner of that race, there will be focus on Pantani.

[ultraman6970]

Why does Pantani get a pass? <-- because he is dead, because his god image would be really affected (like if it made a difference) and because the only thing his parents reason to live maybe is that he won all those races clean??

[1centaur]

Well if Mom is part of the equation.....

[binxnyrwarrsoul]

He was fun to watch, not like the robots glued to their power meters of today.

He wasn't a D-bag.

He rocked pink (and yellow) like no other.

He rode an XL EV2, with Campy. :rolleyes:

[Black Dog]

Let me S P E L L it out for you. People wax poetically about the guy. He's Ricardo Ricco IMO. Others will completely disagree. I want to know why folks give him a pass. If you think the question is past the statute of limitations on a bike forum, then feel free to move on to another post.

He was no Ricco. He was way more modest and far less of a douche. I get your point about him but as others have said he was part of many an epic battle and never was afraid to take huge risks and lay it all out on the line. That was his style and I think that is why he was and still is revered. All doping aside.

Can we all stop calling professional cycling a sport now. It is a business, as are all professional sports.

[cfox]

Pantani? doped amongst dopers. Ricco? doped like it was 1994 vs a microdosed 2008 peleton. Popped for Cera in 2008 = doped beyond belief and on another level vs. his rivals. Oh, and Pantani actually won big races while Ricco was a piss-ant stage hunter by comparison. Not saying what Pantani did was right, but just refuting the Ricco comparison. Oh, and Ricco was an insufferable turd hated within the peleton.

[cachagua]

"Can we all stop calling professional cycling a sport now. It is a business, as are all professional sports."

Ahhh. . . Yes. Yes, and yet.

Art, or should we say "art", is a business too. And yet, those who practice art, or sport, are called upon to have a foot in each of two worlds: they've got to do things they're sure of, because they've got to eat, same as any of us. But they've got to bet on their abilities in situations they're unsure of -- they've got to take risks; that's the nature of the endeavor. And the ones who embrace that aspect, who risk without being debilitated by fear -- those are the ones we admire.

It's no wonder we see schizoid behavior in a lot of these people. We force them to live in two worlds. Check out Lewis Hyde's discussion of this question in his book "The Gift".