Frank Vandenbroucke on doping

[fiamme red]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2009/feb09/feb24news2

Frank Vandenbroucke said that he won Liège-Bastogne-Liège in 1999 "honestly", because he and all the other top riders were all using the same doping preparations.

In an interview with the Belgian men's magazine Che, he said, he won the race "in an honest manner. Because I am 100 percent certain that I had taken nothing differently that day than the second, the third, the fourth and the fifth place finishers. Everyone rode with the same thing in himself, we fought with equal weapons.

"Therefore it was an honest race, with an honest result. That day, or rather that year, I was the best of all. Everybody in the peloton knew it."

The 34-year-old said that new drugs were introduced into the peloton by "pioneers". According to HLN.be, which reported the interview, he said that the Italian team Gewiss "was the EPO pioneer, everyone knew that. Furlan, Berzin, Argentin ... there is a reason why at a certain moment some men are riding 10 kilometre per hour faster than the others."

Vandenbroucke, who will ride this season for the Belgian-Australian Continental team Fuga-Down Under, regretted never having "had the chance to be a pioneer, to try out new doping products first." He said that if he had had the chance, he "would have done it without doubt. .... Everyone would have seized that chance. Nobody should be hypocritical about that!"

Some of his major victories did come while he was not doped, Vandenbroucke insisted. In 1994 he won the Queen Stage of the Tour Méditerranéen, ahead of riders "with a hematocrit of 60. Mine was 42!"

Vandenbroucke ranked that mountaintop finish as greater than his later win in L-B-L. "Because I fought them with unequal resource. They had been prepared by their doping doctors Michele Ferrari and Luigi Cecchini. Whereas I ... I rode, so to speak, on bread and water."(SW)

[Hardlyrob]

At least he's honest about it.

And he does have a point that if the entire field is using the same, or a similar doping regimen, then it is an effectively level playing field.

Cheers!

Rob

[fiamme red]

And he does have a point that if the entire field is using the same, or a similar doping regimen, then it is an effectively level playing field.But are all teams really on the same level? Some have bigger budgets and more to spend on the best "doctors" (e.g., Ferrari and Mazzoni at Gewiss), and the latest and most effective drugs and anti-detection measures.

[csm]

unless you make it a "spec" series with all teams having identical bikes, etc it will never fair.
besides, Lance won on Shimano which had to be a HUGE disadvantage over the Campy riders. in fact, he could argue that he HAD to dope because of it.

[Viper]

The hematocrit has spoken. It went away and now the hematocrit has returned.

Hematocrisy: Vandenbroucke, who will ride this season for the Belgian-Australian Continental team Fuga-Down Under, regretted never having "had the chance to be a pioneer, to try out new doping products first." He said that if he had had the chance, he "would have done it without doubt. .... Everyone would have seized that chance. Nobody should be hypocritical about that!"

[paczki]

But are all teams really on the same level? Some have bigger budgets and more to spend on the best "doctors" (e.g., Ferrari and Mazzoni at Gewiss), and the latest and most effective drugs and anti-detection measures.

That's the truth! But they never are on the same level, even when drugs are taken out of the picture. Drugs just make the differences of $ that much more pronounced.

[rustychisel]

At least he's honest about it.

And he does have a point that if the entire field is using the same, or a similar doping regimen, then it is an effectively level playing field.

Cheers!

Rob



F**k Me!

No Rob, I'm not making this a personal attack, just responding to the sentiment. In what way could this possibly be a level playing field? He cheated, but now he thinks he knows everyone else cheated. He says.

Access to technology, and drugs, is to some extent dictated by budget constraints, then supply, then eyes being blind (directeurs sportif, doctors, soigneurs etc)... and so it goes. There's nothing level about this.

If he won 'on bread and water' and all other contenders doped, does that make it a fair race? Or just as chronically imbalanced where the 'right' result was achieved?

FVB is a cheat, a liar, and to judge from at least one of his reported statements, an unrepentant one. To think that he's telling the truth (for once) requires a leap of faith which no-one should be expected to make. He may be telling us and the rest of the cycling community what he thinks they want to hear [at this time], but that in no way makes it the truth.

[tv_vt]

I have to say that VDB's statements ring true. I remember the first year Gewiss came on the scene- they won everything there was to win up to Milan-San Remo, which Furlan won. I can't remember his first name, but he came out of no-where that spring and won MSR going away. I did not know about all the doping, but something really didn't seem right about it. That may have been the same spring they went 1-2-3 at Ghent. Sick times. Must've been hard trying to race against that crap.

Note- this is not to condone anything about VDB. Can't say I respect him much either.

T

[rustychisel]

I have to say that VDB's statements ring true.

Note- this is not to condone anything about VDB. Can't say I respect him much either.

T


See previous points re 'the ring of truth'. I too recall seeing Berzin and thinking 'My God, he's playing with the field'... a bit like several riders in last years TDF mountain stages.

In that sense FVB is guilty is speaking the blindingly obvious.

[Sandy]

Interesting perspective. He won the race in "..an honest manner.." because they all cheated an equal amount. Interestingly , he made no comments on how the "honest manner" reflected on the integrity of cycling, nor if what he did was even wrong.


Sandy

[Viper]

Interesting perspective. He won the race in "..an honest manner.." because they all cheated an equal amount. Interestingly , he made no comments on how the "honest manner" reflected on the integrity of cycling, nor if what he did was even wrong.


Sandy

+1

It's known as moral relativism.

King never cheats! :)

[Marcusaurelius]

It's just wrong and cheating is cheating. If you can't win honestly it's not a win. I doubt everyone was cheating, I suspect there might have been a few honest souls who didn't want to take drugs to win. I just think it's wrong and there's no excuse.

As a side note, I always thought shimano cranks felt better than campagnolo so I would say Lance had a huge advantage using shimano gears so all the others campagnolo users really needed to cheat.